|
| Bob,
I'll admit it would be easier to argue against GRIP than for it. Bottom line, it (GRIP) will pay back more than traditional coverage over time. It is just another risk management tool, and if you desire/can tolerate the additional risk, GRIP will reward you more often.
In the last five years, GRIP (GRP in 2003) has paid over $150,000 more dollars than 80% cRC would have on my acres. Today, two producers, one in MN and one in SD, both told me they would have received much more with GRIP than 80% RA/CRC. The one in MN (large producer) said the total GRIP payment would have been over $870,000 more than his CRC/RA policy paid last fall. And the one in SD received about $60,000 from his RA policy last fall, and GRIP would have paid over $200,000 this year.
On the other hand, some friends of mine (hope they still are) in PA had GRIP, and it didn't pay them. They would have received indemnity with RA/CRC.
So, there is no "magic bullet". Agents need to identify the best three or four options for a producer (based on their knowledge and judgement), explain those options fully, and allow the farmer to decide.
My opinions, Rob | |
|
Crop Insurance agents & their new trucks
