Growers of crossbred wool have only days left to decide whether to commit to Wool Partners Co-operative.
I urge all woolgrowers with any sense of commitment to the future of our industry, to read the prospectus and discuss the proposal with others, so you can make an informed decision.
There has been extensive media coverage, some of it not particularly accurate or constructive. Members of the wool exporters council and their associates have a strong vested interest in making the proposal fail. Analysts tend to rake over ashes of the past, but many have not shown much vision for the future.
Too much of the debate has focused on past actions and minor detail. If we woolgrowers are to improve our returns, we need to show a united vision for the future, and support it.
Much of our farm profitability is governed by decisions beyond the farm gate. This applies equally to incomes, costs and compliance issues.
To achieve a profitable industry, farmers simply must get involved beyond the farm gate. Farmers have done this with dairy, meat marketing, some horticulture and arable products, fertiliser and merchandise inputs, compliance costs (Federated Farmers).
But for some reason we have not done this for wool marketing. Why not?
Several reasons are given by farmers not to support the proposition. Some are due to a deeply held cynicism from previous consultants' reports not being implemented.
Most of their recommendations were along the principles of Wool Partners Co-operative, but most were not implemented, and those who did try lacked the critical mass to make a difference.
The most legitimate concern is that the venture may not succeed and farmers lose their investment.
I am confident that if farmers support Wool Partners Co-operative with both their wool and constructive support of staff and directors, then there is a high probability of success. If farmers fail to support Wool Partners Co-operative, there is a high probability of failure.
The future is in our hands.
Cash outlay is a legitimate concern for those hammered by climatic events.
But for most of us, the annual outlay is a fraction of our fertiliser inputs, or half our rates demand. The total outlay over five years is half the cost of a new car. I understand the major banks see this proposal as so important they are prepared to make special provision to support most clients.
Some see it as a bailout of PGGWrightson.
Wool Partners International is the largest handler of wool, so it makes sense to buy this as a starting point. Why would a group of respected farmers and professional directors go to this much effort simply to bail out PGGWrightson?
The prospectus would be strengthened by an independent valuation of assets. But even if the price of Wool Partners International is $2 million over or under fair valuation, this is only half the value of a typical farm - small in relation to the value of the wool industry.
Some are concerned at remuneration paid to the directors and staff. We need good people, and good people need to be paid accordingly. The prospectus provides $320,000 for directors' fees, which seems reasonable to me.
We invest in our future when we buy our farm, apply fertiliser, regrass pastures or buy breeding sires.
I see shares in Wool Partners Co-operative as an investment to secure a sustainable future for wool.
• John Aspinall is a Wanaka farmer.