Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

WORLD’S WHEAT

Received February 20, 2 p.m. LONDON, Feb. 19. -A valuable survey of the ~ world’s wheat position in 1931, issued by the Imperial Economic Committee, discounts the idea that the slump , in the price is entirely duo to over-production. It expresses the opinion that post-war impediments and the world’s economic life are equally important factors. The uncertainty regarding Russia constitutes a likely and important contributory cause of the instability in the prices. More exact intelligence on this subject is needed. Russia’s exports in the first ten weeks of the 1931-32 crop year totalled 21,000,000 bushels more than in 193031 but since then there had been less selling pressure. There had apparently been some effort to cancel forward contracts. The spring crops' apparently suffered considerably from drought. The committee considers that it would be unprofitable for Russia to continue selling below cost, as wheat is the chief export with which she pays for her extensive requirements. Its estimates that Russia’s exportable 1931-32 surplus is 33,000,000 bushels- below the previous year, while the world’s production is 180,000.000 bushels short of her needs. The deficit must be proprovided from the stocks, which by the end of 1931-32 will be reduced to 400,000,000 bushels. “On such figures it is impossible even approximately to forecast the prices. It would be a mistake to expect a rise solely on the restriction of production. The recovery of the world’s industrial life would go a long way toward improving the situation.

This article text was automatically generated and may include errors. View the full page to see article in its original form.
Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/MS19320220.2.18

Bibliographic details

Manawatu Standard, Volume LII, Issue 69, 20 February 1932, Page 2

Word Count
244

WORLD’S WHEAT Manawatu Standard, Volume LII, Issue 69, 20 February 1932, Page 2

WORLD’S WHEAT Manawatu Standard, Volume LII, Issue 69, 20 February 1932, Page 2