|
| HinFarm:
My point being was that with the way rules are generally followed for test plots "here" it would be possible for one company (M) to flood the plot to make it appear they have the best. M lists 27 companies under ASI plus ASgrow and Dekalb. It is doubtful that they have 29-95 day hybrids but if they could get all or most of their brands in a plot then they could limit the competetion of the plot. Say the plot only had room to run 30 hybrids if they got 3/4 of their brands in they could limit the competetion to half. Therefore M would have a 50% chance of winning the plot. If the plot example above then had 15 other companies brands for the rest of the plot each company would have a 1/30 or 3% chance of that company winning. That is Company chances of winning, individual brands are a different game and winning percentages.
You would think that if they could pull this off then they would put lower class hybrids in the plot from ASI companies and the best they had with Dekalb or Asgrow since they treat them as premuim brands. So not only do they improve their chances of an M company of winning the plot but they eliminate the opportunites to see the other brands out there- like the small regional companies that aren't ASI owned or even the other big boys. Kind of like when companies do their own plots and only lists the others as "competetor" if they even put another brand in the plot. I think they call this "risk management" in the corporate world.
Did I just get myself confused or does this make any since? | |
|
Big M effects on test plots and trials
