OKOIA DAIRY COMPANY

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume 84, Issue 191, 15 August 1940, Page 3

OKOIA DAIRY COMPANY

THE ANNUAL MEETING QUESTIONS ANSWERED BY THE CHAIRMAN ••By depreciating the assets of the company we are adopting a sound policy,” said the chairman of directors of the Okoia Co-operative Dairy Company, Ltd., Mr. T. E. Wilson, Waitotara, at the annual meeting of shareholders and suppliers, held in Wanganui yesterday morning. He said that the company was in a sound financial position. There was an attendance of more than 60. Questions were asked about the balance-sheet and statement of accounts, and regarding the working account of the company’s pig farm, which was described as having developed into a very profitable concern. Dealing with items in the balancesheet which he said called for full explanation, Mr. Wilson mentioned the increase in directors’ travelling expenses. These, he explained, had

risen because of the cheese drive, which had entailed more travelling to watch the interests of the Okoia company. the taking over of a carrying concern, and the breakdown of negotaitions regarding the purchase of a new churn, which necessitated having to start fresh negotiations. All these matters, Mr. Wilson stated, required the attendance of directors at special meetings. Travelling expenses, therefore. had risen. With reference to travelling expenses for the pig farm, Mr. Wilson explained that instead of having a director near at hand paid £5O, the directors had decided that such expense should be included in the chairman’s honorarium and he should .io the supervision, thus saving the £5O. The travelling expenses were for the mileage incurred by the chairman travelling on pig farm business. Marketing of Pigs “One matter which I must explain, 'and I hope will not be controversial, is the decision of the directors with regard to a recommendation from the last annual meeting that proportion of the pigs sold be sold through the Pig Marketing Association,” Mr. Wilson continued. “That was given full consideration by the directors, and, after we had all the facts placed before us, we decided to deal with a proprietary company the manager recommended to us. From the figures the manager put before us it appeared that the profit we would get by dealing with the proprietary concern would be £l2O to £l3O more than what the Pig Marketing Association was likely to return the company. We felt that we should not lose that profit and so decided that the pigs be marketed on the lines the manager recommended.” He said that the pig farm showed a working profit of £892. Of that £650 was placed to depreciation. The capital assets of the farm had been reduced from £7OOO to £4OOO odd in the short time the farm had been running. The farm was now in excellent order, had had a god season and, with an adequate buttermilk supply, would do even better. From the profit of the farm the directors had placed £650 to depreciation, £5O to office and administration expenses and £lOO to interest, leaving a balance for distribution through the appropriation account of £92. It was explained, in reply to Mr. J. Patterson (Fordell), that the method of setting out the accounts had been changed. Last year, in actual fact, the farm had made a profit of £530, but the depreciation had been taken out before that profit was shown. In answer to Mrs. Clifford, Mr. Wilson said that secretarial and office expenses of the company were £3OO less than another company which she mentioned. Mr. M. Winter (Maxwell) disagreed with the decision of the directors to disregard the recommendation of last year that a proportion of pigs be sold through the Pig Marketing Association. He said that co-operative trading was preferable to dealing with a proprietary concern. Mr. J. McKnight defended the action of the directors, and said that it was a good thing for the company that there was competition. It was wrong, he said, to sell to an association which would sell in turn to the people to whom the company sold direct. Freezing Charges and Storage. Mr. Patterson complained that too much money was being spent on freezing and such charges (storage). Mr. Wilson replied that the company had to pay the cost to f.ob. on butter held in store. It was got to store as quickly as possible, but, in recent times, there had been delays to shipping. Although there was a limit to the amount of storage the company was called upon by the Government to pay, it paid up to the limit most of the time. Mr. Patterson: Then we want an increase in the guaranteed price to cover these sort of expenses which are not incurred by the company itself.

Mr. Patterson also wanted to know what the £lB4 Dairy Board levy was. “That is a flat charge made on the company to support the Dairy Board, its London office and ramifications,” said the chairman. “We will all agree that the Dairy Board has done good work, but seeing that times have changed, and Empire produce is now all under the one brand, its efforts have been nullified.”

The balance-sheet, statement of accounts and the annual report were adopted. Mr. Wilson and Mr. L. K. Monk were elected to the directorate. A motion by Mr. O’Leary that the directorate be reduced from seven to five was lost by an overwhelming majority. The directors’ fees and the chairman’s honorarium (£125) were made the same for this year as last. Mr. F. J. Hill was reappointed auditor.

A vote of thanks was passed to the office, factory and pig farm staff. The chairman stressed that because of efficient factory management, £630 had been made available to suppliers for premium butter. The directors were thanked for their services during the year.