SURPLUS PROFITS ON WOOL.

Gisborne Times, Volume LII, Issue 5462, 24 April 1920, Page 6

SURPLUS PROFITS ON WOOL.

» ' C/ J l I liV • ’ i HUI J.l •' v/ -• > " (To the Editor.) Sir, —Referring to your loading article on the wool question in your issue of the ■ 20th;' wherein you state that wo are to be allowed £OOO.OOO in respect, to the period up to March 31. 1019, I would like it made clear whether this includes one clirJ or two clips, as the first wool commandeered was the 1917-1918 clip. Does the £OOO,OOO refer to that clip only? If so, that will show a. profit of £t 5s per hale. Assuming that, we have had 500,000 bales, averaging llOOlbs (this is a low average both m bales and weights). Then you say the amount for the year ending March 31. 1920. will be a further sum of £1.200,000 —just double the amount of the first, clip. 1 presume this increase is on account, ot more wool being sold on the open market:. This will show a profit of £2 10s per bale, and I take it that the 1919-1920 clip, which is not yet shipped, will show at least another £2 10s per bale. This would be an average of £2 Is Sd per bale for the three clips. Do vou know whether this is the net amount we are to receive or have tlw expenses to be deducted trom it. Could you enlighten us on this point.' 1 am, ClC '’ AVOOL GROWER.

fit would seem that the cable message received in New Zealand on this subject is somewhat ambiguous. Our correspondent really wishes to know whether or not. (here were any surplus profits on the 1917-18 New Zealand clip. It is liardlv likely that such was the ease as most of that, clip was probably used for military requirements. Ihe £(100,000 of surplus profits for the year ended March 31. 1919, we should say, relates to the sale of the initial instalment of New Zealand wool for civ.Ban purposes in the Homeland. A much larger surplus would have accrued ;t the” Home Government had not sold a .Treat quantitv of the best quality New Zealand wool to the manufacturers during that period at fixed prices, which were ridiculously low as compared with the market rate. Hi the case of Now Zealand wool it is estimated that the surplus profits on sales made during the year ended March .11. 1 !)°O. will be £1.200.000. At the end of December last'the Imperial authorities had on hand only about GOO.OOO Gates of Colonial wool, but the quantity of Imperially-owned wool unshipped in Australia and New Zealand v.as estimated at alxv .. 3,000.000 bales. It shipments are to be reduced ns is now hinted at Britain will not be overstocked with wool because it is estimated that she requires 100.000 bales per mouth for re-export and 125.000 bales for domestic manufacturers. According to the Bradford correspondent of this journal there is no need for anxiety tin the part of Colonial growers as to ' whether or not the accumulations in the Colonies can be done with. Writing under date February 26. he says: "All the wool that Australia and New Zealand Yah send during 1920 will he welcome." \\ e consider that it is high time Colonial growers were made acquainted with the details of the position in regard of the sale of wool for civilian purposes at Home. —Ed.. GDI.]