Marketing/Rebate Programs

The crop protection industry has long made a practice of employing marketing programs to sell products through the channel. These programs, which include discounts and rebates from manufacturers to the distribution channel, are not without a measure of effectiveness. However, as they’ve evolved, marketing programs have become highly inefficient.

Since they were first introduced around 1980, marketing programs have increased in size each year. Marketing programs now constitutes an average 25% of the manufacturer selling price, and the range goes north of 50% for some products. Channel margins obtained from the marketplace and also from retention of discounts/rebates from manufacturers on average total only 11% to 12%. This means, on average, there is a 13% to 14% negative up-front margin.

Despite the obvious inefficiency in the system, no manufacturer has found a better way to achieve their objectives through the channel, or even to recalibrate the system to increase efficiency and efficacy. Retail networks enjoy the luxury of high payments and feel that continuation of the status quo is in their best interest, so they have not put energy into promoting change.

As we consider “the big ideas” of the year or years ahead, we ask: Can these marketing programs continue to increase without either precipitating change or preventing a normal and necessary market evolution?

The goal is that the whole system — the grower, the retail networks/distribution channel, and manufacturers — contribute to the ever greater productivity needed from agriculture in the future. Accepting inefficiency, and worse, propping up inefficient players (even if unintentional), doesn’t contribute.

Why These Programs?

Marketing programs help differentiate a manufacturer’s offering. The most effective marketing programs define objective criteria of clear value to the manufacturer and the market, are doable by the channel partner, and the criteria are adhered to/correlated to payments. They differentiate the manufacturer in a way that is valuable to the channel companies, and difficult or impossible for competitors of the manufacturer to match directly. Changed periodically, programs become neither predictable nor taken for granted. In turn, they have value and cost in balance and are an opportunity for all parties to benefit.

Today, however, with a few exceptions, marketing programs from manufacturers primarily enable channel companies protection from their own weakness with upfront margin procurement in return for some commitment on priority.

Use, Dollar Values Increase

Since their introduction with pyrethroids three decades ago, crop protection marketing programs have increased (as a percentage of gross sales) more than tenfold. However, profitability retained by the distribution channel/retail networks has grown only slightly.

The portion of the industry represented by unique products — those which had no generic or in-kind competition — declined. And as it did, the importance of the distribution channel/retail networks and the need to differentiate in non-product ways increased.

By 2007, the average had grown to represent over 25% of the selling price.

As the rebates have grown, they’ve come to represent an astoundingly large dollar figure — more than $1.5 billion dollars paid annually. Marketing programs are second only to cost of goods in size of expenditure by manufacturers. That percentage has continued to increase 4% to 5% per year in recent years. Still, they are only partially effective.

We’ve Always Done It That Way

A “because we’ve always done it that way” mentality often, over time, precludes efficiency.

As the industry has matured, we’ve seen an increasing portion of products with expired patents (generic options) and/or in-kind options. That shifted the power from research-based manufacturers to the owner of the retail interface, the retailer/retail network. Retailers have the primary influence on the grower and can shift brand choice on equivalent/nearly equivalent products. Further, we’ve seen the consolidation of generics companies to be larger, stronger, and more service-oriented, which further shifted power from the basics to the distribution channel.

Ultimately, we have witnessed sweeping industry system changes that were driven by marketing programs and now sustain them, e.g., a shift by basic manufacturers to net sales from gross sales where marketing programs were an expense. Now they are off the P&L by making them an off-revenue accrual. In essence, rebates have become part of pricing.

What Can Be Done?

The current state of crop protection marketing programs seems to defy common sense and would certainly benefit from a recalibration. But how?

We know that no single manufacturer has any chance for successfully replacing marketing programs with a net pricing model. Collaborative activity isn’t an option. If any two or three manufacturers made changes with any similarity, they would likely receive Security and Exchange Commission/Justice Department scrutiny.

The distribution channel and retail networks certainly want marketing programs to continue, so we don’t expect change from there. In summary, no single company, manufacturer, or distributor/retailer has energy at this time to change the game, alter the model, or lead the change.

However, recalibration, while not urgent, could be very effective. To start, manufacturers should set measurable, value-adding, objective criteria. They should work out win/win objectives with the channel using the criteria and metrics — and then adhere to the objective criteria religiously to determine the level of marketing program payment. Since this new breed of marketing approach would not include a guaranteed payment, they would be less likely to be passed through. Recalibration should/would also keep value in use for growers paramount — so growers would not be penalized.

Retailers and retail networks are eager to effectively compete for their grower customers’ business. They can help by expressing a desire and support for win/win arrangements that strengthen their business, add value for their grower-customers, and deliver value for the dollar to their partner manufacturer. Retailers and retail networks should also cease creating and maintaining systems to estimate net, net pricing, and putting these in the hands of their sales team! They win when they continue to sell service and value.

Everyone in the industry should accept that some companies (especially in the channel) won’t survive. Ideally, that would be the weakest entities. Tweaking marketing programs helps assure that evolution favors the smart, the strong, and well-managed — and yields greater productivity of the entire system.

Other solutions might come from new technologies that capture point-of-sale information, provide more objective metrics, and tie more closely with performance. Some such systems, as employed in the consumer sector, may provide still another means to better capture value and positively evolve our industry toward greater productivity.

New mindsets will be required. But rather than doing it for the sake of “we’ve always done it that way,” it’s definitely time to consider every means possible to operate more efficiently and to grow productivity.

Leave a Reply

Management Stories

ManagementTrip Report, PSM R.I.P, and Ag’s Reaction to Federal Budget
May 25, 2017
Editors Paul Schrimpf and Eric Sfiligoj talk about their recent travels, the end for Process Safety Management (PSM), and how Read More
Corn soil
LegislationARA Member Testifies Before Senate Ag Committee
May 25, 2017
Agricultural retailers stand on the front-lines of the American economy. As trusted advisors to America’s farmers, ag retailers are uniquely Read More
ManagementFarm Market iD’s Agriculture Database Now Covers More Than One Billion Acres
May 25, 2017
Farm Market iD, farmmarketid.com, has announced the release of its 2017 Annual Update of its farm and land database. The Read More
ManagementPrecision Planting Deal, China Developments, and Environmental Respect
May 18, 2017
Editors Eric Sfiligoj and Dan Jacobs discuss the latest news on John Deere’s now dead deal for Precision Planting, China’s Read More
Trending Articles
Migrant farm workers
LegislationTrump: Immigration Crackdown Won’t Impact U.S. Agriculture
May 16, 2017
President Donald Trump said he would seek to keep his tough immigration enforcement policies from harming the U.S. farm industry Read More
AGCO Ratliff featured
Eric SfiligojRemembering Robert Ratliff
May 15, 2017
With all the fast-paced happenings in agriculture this spring, with multiple mergers in the works and planting season in full Read More
Case sprayer nozzle closeup
EquipmentSpray Application: A Nozzle Renaissance
May 2, 2017
If you had asked four-decade ag veteran Mark Bartel, President of Wilger Inc., just a few years ago what lay Read More
ManagementWashington Update, Dow-DuPont Earnings, and the Passing of an AGCO Legend
April 27, 2017
Editors Paul Schrimpf and Eric Sfiligoj talk about the latest Beltway news, crop protection company 1st quarter numbers, and the Read More
Crop InputsFlying Under the Radar No More, FMC Goes Big
April 13, 2017
Describing FMC as “under the radar,” admittedly, is probably a stretch. But in a snap of the fingers, FMC upped Read More
Young Corn Plants
Crop NutritionStill Hunting Yields
April 1, 2017
There’s no denying it — the agricultural marketplace today is undergoing a fundamental shift in fortunes. Not too many years Read More
Latest News
ManagementTrip Report, PSM R.I.P, and Ag’s Reaction to Federal Bu…
May 25, 2017
Editors Paul Schrimpf and Eric Sfiligoj talk about their recent travels, the end for Process Safety Management (PSM), and how Read More
Corn soil
LegislationARA Member Testifies Before Senate Ag Committee
May 25, 2017
Agricultural retailers stand on the front-lines of the American economy. As trusted advisors to America’s farmers, ag retailers are uniquely Read More
Young corn plants in soil
Crop InputsFortenza Insecticide Seed Treatment Receives EPA Regist…
May 25, 2017
Fortenza seed treatment insecticide from Syngenta has received registration approval from the U.S. EPA for use on corn and cotton Read More
ManagementFarm Market iD’s Agriculture Database Now Covers More T…
May 25, 2017
Farm Market iD, farmmarketid.com, has announced the release of its 2017 Annual Update of its farm and land database. The Read More
Food IT Fork-to-Farm
Precision AgThe Mixing Bowl Event Connects Technology, Food, and Ag…
May 24, 2017
For the fourth consecutive year, The Mixing Bowl presents FOOD IT, under the theme “Fork to Farm.” Action-oriented entrepreneurs, industry Read More
Photo credit: The United Soybean Board/The Soybean Checkoff.
Seed/BiotechKansas State University Researchers Find New Pathogens …
May 24, 2017
A single seed seems so simple. Put it in the ground, give it some care, and you’ve soon grown food. Read More
Soybean Field
HerbicidesNew Dicamba Herbicide Premix Coming Soon from Syngenta
May 24, 2017
Syngenta has announced the name of its new herbicide featuring the active ingredients of S-metolachlor and dicamba. Upon registration by Read More
Eric SfiligojMonsanto ‘Picks Its Battles’ by Nixing Deere Deal
May 23, 2017
Having been in the trade journalism game since the mid-1980s, I remember several watershed moments during my career. One of Read More
FungicidesSyngenta Launches New Seed Treatment Fungicide
May 22, 2017
Syngenta has announced the launch of PLENARIS seed treatment fungicide for the control of downy mildew in sunflower. PLENARIS contains Read More
Corn close up
Crop InputsMonsanto’s First HPPD Herbicide Garners EPA Appro…
May 19, 2017
Monsanto announced today that EPA has federally approved Harness MAX Herbicide, the first herbicide in the Monsanto portfolio to provide Read More
ManagementPrecision Planting Deal, China Developments, and Enviro…
May 18, 2017
Editors Eric Sfiligoj and Dan Jacobs discuss the latest news on John Deere’s now dead deal for Precision Planting, China’s Read More
Soybean aphid leaf
InsecticidesMulti-state Research Reveals IPM Best Option for Treatm…
May 17, 2017
About 89.5 million acres of soybeans will be planted across the U.S. in 2017 — a record high, according to Read More
GROWMARK-2017-Interns
CropLife 100GROWMARK Names 2017 Summer Interns
May 16, 2017
Forty-two college students are exploring agricultural career opportunities this summer as GROWMARK interns. They are working at FS member cooperatives Read More
Migrant farm workers
LegislationTrump: Immigration Crackdown Won’t Impact U.S. Ag…
May 16, 2017
President Donald Trump said he would seek to keep his tough immigration enforcement policies from harming the U.S. farm industry Read More
Flooded corn in Indiana
FertilizerBoth Wet and Dry Conditions Threaten Nitrogen Loss
May 15, 2017
The weather is notoriously unpredictable, leading to challenges for planting, harvesting and applying the nitrogen (N) your corn crop needs. Read More
farmer Kip Tom
Precision AgAg Tech: On the Cusp of Something Big?
May 15, 2017
The investment and ag-tech sectors’ continuing courtship of agriculture, smoldering for three or four years now, was well in evidence at Read More
AGCO Ratliff featured
Eric SfiligojRemembering Robert Ratliff
May 15, 2017
With all the fast-paced happenings in agriculture this spring, with multiple mergers in the works and planting season in full Read More
Greg Musson, Gar Tootelian
ManagementOpinion: Shaking Your Perspective in Ag Retail
May 12, 2017
Some of you I’m sure have encountered our recently retired salesman extraordinaire, Dan Bellanger. He worked in the industry for Read More