5/25/2011

NY cotton ends up sharply, weather threatens new crop

05/25/2011
* US drought, floods continue to boost December prices
* Dec posts steep gains for second day
* Planting days diminishing with no break in bad weather

NEW YORK, May 25 (Reuters) - Cotton finished Wednesday with steep gains for a second day in a row, as two fronts of bad crop weather jeopardized the new planting season, leading participants to bet on a diminished crop in the United States. Cotton's new-crop, December, ended up 5.59 cents, or 4.44 percent, at $1.3135 per lb on ICE Futures US. Earlier, it reached a high last seen on April 26, a day after the contract posted its biggest gain since March 31, when it rose nearly 6 percent. ICE'S benchmark July cotton futures also settled with strong gains of 2.15 cents at $1.5603 per lb, a 1.40 percent rise. Trading volume in the December contract stood at around 8,418 lots, not far behind July's 9,052 lots. Overall volume on ICE cotton for Tuesday came to 20,112 lots and was above the 30-day average, after falling 70 percent below the norm on Monday, Thomson Reuters' data showed. "On the December cotton, I think it's the same fears about weather, whether it's the West Texas drought, that's now moving into South Georgia or the floods up and down the Mississippi (River)," said "We can afford to have a problem in one region, but not in two and certainly not three, during prime planting season," said Sharon Johnson, senior cotton analyst at Penson Futures. Weather woes in the United States have been wrecking havoc on crops. Farmers along the swollen Mississippi River have had to contend with severe floods lately that have drowned thousands of acres of cotton. The actual number of acres lost in both Texas and the U.S. Delta states will not be known until the middle of June, analysts said. December and the back months in the cotton market are being supported by a severe drought savaging cotton crops in Texas, the biggest cotton growing state in the country.

5/20/2011

Hedge Funders take to farming it face of doomsday

Hedge fund managers (thanks to steep performance fees) tend to be known for zooming around in Ferraris and buying multimillion-dollar paintings. Not for tilling the soil on farms.

But in today’s economy, where the dollar is considered fragile at its best, and worthless at its worst – hedge funders are taking to buying up farmland and doing it the good old fashioned American way. They’re planting crops.

A big time hedge funder told The Observer about his fund’s investments, which he said have made him the fifteenth largest farmer in the country. Hedge fund hotshots are farm-happy, and if they can swing it, they’ll start buying up land and beginning to profit an industry that’s currently hugely dominated by old-fashioned family-run businesses, not high-risk, high-return funds that most people outside of the financial sector don’t really understand.

So why now? Well, according to the Observer, hedge funders “envision a doomsday scenario catalyzed by a weak dollar, higher-than-you-think inflation and an uncertain political climate here and abroad.” And we thought the May 21st believers were the only ones worried about such things.

In the current climate, hedge funders believe money does grow on trees. While the dollar is weak and the population surges, food prices are up globally, which means farmland prices are up. So it’s actually a good investment.

Even off Wall Street (or Greenwich or San Francisco or whatever), the hedge funder interviewed for the article displays that typical confident market neutral hedge fund mentality: “If you farm it like we do, you can generate a yield. We think the farmland will be worth 5 to 10 percent more every year, and on top of that, you get the commodities yield.”

But unlike the financial services industry, you can’t just create what you’re selling out of thin air (oh, just kidding) when you’re growing crops. Farmland, especially good farmland, is, believe it or not, in limited supply.

This, after all, is not Farmville. It’s the real thing.

5/05/2011

Agriculture - can it be a cash cow for investors?

By Ellen Kelleher

Might the era of the yeoman farmer be upon us? A clutch of investment advisers say so, claiming that buying arable land is a sounder idea than taking out futures contracts if you are hoping to profit from rising food prices.

Investing in land remains risky and approaches to its ownership and management vary, as do returns. But John Paul Thwaytes, manager of JPT Capital’s Agrifund, which is seeking £50m ($79m) next month in a Dublin listing to support the development of Australian wheat farms, talks it up as a long-term gamble.

Provided a stake is held for eight years for the purpose of hedging exposure to poor years, he expects the fund to throw up a yearly yield of as much as 9.25 per cent from profits generated by farming activities. Investors also gain from any increase in the value of the land. Another fringe benefit is that commercial land offers a hedge against inflation and is not correlated to equities.

There are just a handful of institutions with agriculture divisions (Macquarie, Prudential, Rabobank and UBS are well-placed in the area) and even fewer funds on offer. But interest in land holdings across Brazil, Canada, Africa, Australia and New Zealand is growing, particularly among pension funds as well as private equity and sovereign wealth funds.

Tim Hornibrook, a director with Macquarie Agricultural Funds Management, which runs dairy, sheep, cattle, horticulture, forestry and wine estates, mainly in Australia, and oversees more than $1bn in investments, says: “We’re coming from a low base, but agriculture is starting to gain attention. Investors are looking for alternatives and buying agricultural equities can be a challenge as there’s not a huge range of listed companies to invest in. And while futures contracts are highly liquid, they are also highly volatile and their outlook is quite short term.”

The investment vehicles available include: AgCapita, a Calgary-based private equity firm with a focus on farmland in Saskatchewan; Agrifirma Brazil , a privately-held Jersey company backed by Lord Rothschild and Jim Slater, which owns more than 50,000 hectares of Brazilian farmland; and Agro-Ecological Investment Management, an Anglo-Kiwi partnership that takes stakes in organic farms in New Zealand on behalf of institutional clients and family offices. Funds with a focus on Africa, which boasts a quarter of the world’s arable land, are scarce. But the Emergent African AgriLand fund, a private-equity style fund based in London that aims to invest in 14 sub-Saharan countries and employs 3,500 farm workers, is said to be the largest.

While its managers aim to pay a coupon of 8-10 per cent and provide a target risk-adjusted return of at least 25 per cent, its fees are high. It charges 2.5 per cent a year and a 20 per cent performance fee, and institutional investors must cough up at least €5m.

The pick-up in desire for land holdings comes as global food prices hit nominal all-time highs, according to the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organisation, after a string of bad harvests and amid robust demand in Asia, surpassing the levels seen during the 2007-08 food crisis.

A recent study from the property group Savills concludes that soaring food prices will push up land values in several countries – though growth may be stunted in mature markets like Ireland, Denmark and the Netherlands where land is expensive. Agricultural investment funds, which own land around the world, are forecasting cash-on-cash returns of 3-8 per cent and internal rates of return of 10-18 per cent after fees, according to Savills’ research.

Jonathan Davis, FTfm columnist and a founding shareholder of Agrifirma Brazil, estimates it requires at least four years for managers to see a return on Brazilian land. By his estimates, it costs as much as $1,500 per hectare to purchase it; $1,500 a hectare to develop; and $6,000 per hectare is gained from its sale. “It’s a very difficult business to make money out of. There are so many things that could go wrong. Weather can be a big problem. Crop failure. Land is also a relatively illiquid asset. Then there’s the farming side of it,” he admits. “But it is possible to see an internal rate of return of 20 to 25 per cent. You can see real returns over a long period and see the benefits of an operating yield and capital appreciation.”

Some fund managers are less than enthusiastic about the sector’s prospects, however. Political risks are one concern. Last year, for example, the Brazilian government placed further restrictions on land ownership by foreigners, sparking fears among investors. More generally, farming can be hard work.

Henry Boucher, manager of Sarasin’s ₤£152m Agrisar fund, which invests mainly in agricultural equities and gained 15.5 per cent in the past year, looked into taking a direct land holding in 2005, but later abandoned all efforts. “I really explored it. I tried very hard and came to the conclusion that it wasn’t an accessible area.” Mr Boucher also points out that to woo investors, some vehicles such as Agrifirma were forced to restructure themselves and scrap their hedge-fund style fees (2 per cent fee a year plus 20 per cent of profits).

George Lee, manager of the Eclectica Agriculture fund, meanwhile, is just as cynical about the possible complications and claims equities are an easier bet. He is focusing on fertiliser stocks as he thinks farmers will spend more on soil nutrients as food prices rise.

“That’s one of the themes I’m playing. Farmers will look for a chance to improve their crop yields after the events of 2008 and 2009,” he concludes. “As for trying to farm land yourself, it’s trickier than just getting out your plough. It turns into a five, 10 or 15-year project. There are big issues with logistics and weather conditions.”