Machinery rolls teamed with multi-unit discounts are a boon to farmers and manufacturers, but what’s in it for dealers? 

Asked for some perspective on how farm equipment rollover programs work, one dealer that Farm Equipment spoke with explained it this way: “What I’m seeing are some customers paying less than 10% of the value of a new piece of equipment to trade up.”

Adding some “color” to his explanation, he says, “Could you trade your $35,000 Chevy pickup on an annual basis for $3,000? Could your wife take back her one-year old refrigerator and pay $75 to get the new model delivered? Could you take back your one-year old iMac computer, ask for a new one and offer to pay $120 for that newest model?

“Of course not!” he says. “Unless there was a ‘dumb #@&’ machinery dealer selling those products!”

It’s a safe bet that this particular dealer doesn’t favor farm equipment rollover programs that seem to be in vogue these days, especially as they pertain to multi-unit discounts and fleet sales.

But one dealer from the south says that the impact of rollovers isn’t significant. “These programs are required to increase the acreage of producers and inflating the values of new machinery. It’s been in effect for years in the south on large sugar cane farms,” he says.

Other dealers insist these programs are getting to be the only way to get the new, high-priced machinery — especially high-horsepower tractors and combines — into the hands of many North American farmers.

In some cases, these programs have created a contentious environment between manufacturers and dealers. Evidence of the brewing tension between the major farm equipment suppliers and their retailers can be seen in the number of dealers who specifically requested that their names and dealerships not be used in this report. To quote one dealer directly, “I would like to keep my name out of this for fear of retribution from my manufacturer.”

In another instance, when asked to list the “pros” of rollover programs, one dealer replied, “Mostly it keeps Deere off our back.”

But it’s clear from other dealers, who are having success with such programs, that kept in check, these equipment rolls and multi-unit discounts can build machine population and market share in their sales territories. Theoretically, in the longer term, increasing the number of units in the field should improve dealer absorption rates through increased sales of parts and service.

Selling Volume

Fleet or multi-unit discounts (MUD) and equipment rollovers have become a significant part in the selling equation for many farm equipment dealers. In many, if not most cases, MUD and rolls work hand in hand, according to most of the dealers who responded to a Farm Equipment questionnaire on the pros and cons of such programs.

As one dealer explains, many manufacturers handle their fleet programs as an “all-at-once-deal.” In order for a farmer to get the best discounts, he must purchase all of his equipment at one time.

In the case of a new $300,000 row-crop tractor that he plans to own for only one year, when the customer applies 15% depreciation he can end up paying only $45,000 for that unit (i.e. $ 300,000 x 15%=$45,000).

“This may seem to be a reasonable difference on an annual or cost-per-hour basis,” the dealer explains. “However, if he buys a fleet of 7 or 8 tractors, he may get a 10% manufacturer fleet discount, meaning he only pays 5% out of pocket, or $15,000. In some cases, the fleet discount can be as much as 15%, so the customer pays next to nothing for use of that tractor over a year’s time.”

The dealer adds, “Customers love these deals, so they continue to demand that their dealer do them on an annual or seasonal basis. Yet, many markets can’t handle the amount of low-hour, late-model used equipment that builds up as the result of the trade-ins required to do the deals.”

These scenarios often include dealers who are afraid to say “no” because the customer threatens to take his business to another dealer that will do the fleet arrangement. Otherwise loyal customers will switch brands to secure top of the line, but low-cost new machinery.

Even when the price of equipment goes up, some dealers are fearful of tacking on the increase. “I’ve talked to other dealers who are so concerned that even as the Tier 4 interim price increases are hitting, they’re not asking customers to pay the price increase,” says one dealer. “Instead, they’re ‘flipping’ them for the same differences, hoping the second or third buyer will pay the price increase. With any slump in the market, the second and third buyers will not bail us out.”

“Frequently, these programs reward farmers who switch brands and gives the dealer involved bigger discounts, which has the effect of punishing loyal customers,” says Michael Laethem of Farm Depot in Caro, Mich. 

Summing up, another dealer says, “We’ve created a monster.”

On the other hand, an Iowa dealer points out that it makes a lot of sense if you’re a farmer and it’s an easy sell if you’re a salesman. “Think about it. The farmer has a fixed cost and he doesn’t have to worry about interest costs or maintenance. Just write the check. And it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to sell that,” he says.

How They Work

Along with volume discounts, equipment rollovers are becoming a bigger factor in the retailing of farm machinery, particularly to larger farm operators.

Dr. Jim Weber of Weber Consulting and a regular columnist for Farm Equipment, offers the following explanation.

The process starts when a dealership sells a new combine or other high-cost piece of equipment to “Farmer A,” who trades in his one-year old, high-dollar, low-hour combine for a minimal cash difference that will be financed with a balloon payment.

The dealership then sells the first trade to “Farmer B” who trades in his two-year old, high-dollar, low-hour combine for a minimal cash difference that will be financed with one-year interest free and one-year terms.

The dealership follows up that transaction by selling the second trade to “Farmer C” who trades in his three-year old, under 3,000 hour combine for a marginal cash difference.

“Farmer D” now purchases the third trade, “If the dealership is lucky, it generates some positive cash flow for the first time,” says Weber. “If the dealership is not so lucky, it may take a fourth trade and a fifth customer to ‘wash-out’ of the transaction.

“Up to this point, the dealership has been floor-planning the trade-in deficiency, paying salespersonnel a commission for selling the product, and investing cash into reconditioning the various trades. Exacerbating this precarious cash position is the fact that a wash out of three to four trades may, in fact, take upward of 18-24 months.”

In these times of plenty for agriculture, Weber says roll programs may make some sense, but dealers interested in long-term survival would be wise to “minimize the number of rollover transactions they accept.”

In his “The Business of Selling” column in the March 2011 issue of Farm Equipment, Weber doesn’t mince words in describing the perils of unchecked equipment rollover programs (“Record Farm Income and Impending Dealership Failure,” Farm Equipment, March 2011, p. 92).

“Rolling over a new combine or tractor every year for minimal cash difference only benefits the end user,” he says. “It’s not uncommon to hear stories where an end-user has traded in his one-year, low-hour, combine for $20,000-$24,000 cash difference. At 400 hours, this is only $50-$60 per hour. And in some cases, that’s before any multi-unit discounts or discretionary dollars. Why would anyone buy the used piece when the price differential between the new and used is so minimal?”

Weber says dealers need to look beyond their next roll.

  • What happens if commodity prices suddenly turn downward and ‘irrational exuberance’ is replaced by cautious pessimism?
  • What happens if the brand’s image is seriously damaged?
  • What happens if product failures arise? 
  • Where does the rollover expert go when some other market exigency impacts his ability to market the plethora of used equipment sitting on his lot?  If he’s lucky, only bankruptcy awaits.”

Increasing Market Share

No dealer participating in the survey will argue about the effectiveness equipment rolls have in increasing market share and all of the positives that go with higher machine populations in their sales area. Most point to the ability to meet the growing demand for good used equipment as another upside of rollover programs.

For some dealers, rolls add an element of certainty for their annual wholegoods revenues. “They give you a known amount of good used units that will be available the following spring,” says Les Hopkins of Great Bend Farm Equipment, Great Bend, Kan. “These units can be pre-sold because you know what you’ll have.”

“With roll programs, you’re usually dealing with a lot of dollars in equipment, which means good volume for the dealer,” says Troy Regula of Kuester Implement Co., New Philadelphia, Ohio. “They tend to offer us a reasonable amount of business each year that you can count on.”

According to several dealers, in addition to increasing good, low-hour machinery available to sell, in some cases, this equipment produces better margins than they’re getting on new wholegoods.

Dennis Guettinger of Columbia Tractor of Moscow, Idaho, has found these types of selling programs make enough late model units available on a timely basis to satisfy “impulse purchases.”

Some dealers believe these programs can enhance a dealer’s image. “Increasing machine population adds to a dealer’s status in a trade area,” says Douglas Grams, New Ulm Tractor & Equipment of New Ulm, Minn.

Along those same lines, Bruce Westerfield of Wright Implement, Owensboro, Ky., adds, “It can develop a little bit of advertising due to the fact that larger customers use your dealership and brand and other farmers notice that.”

But dealers’ opinions diverge when it comes to whether or not rollovers improve parts and service revenues. There’s no argument that a dealer needs significant machine population in his territory to grow his parts and service business and improve his absorption rate. But by “flipping” equipment on an annual basis, he can only hope to grow his backroom business after the second, third or possibly even fourth trade.

For example, Doug Matulka of Benes Service Co., David City, Neb., says, “Companies are now pushing for more sales and farmers are able to keep their machines under warranty at all times.” This would negate the argument that equipment rolls help dealers improve their absorption rates.

Keeping manufacturers happy rated almost as many responses from dealers who are aren’t totally convinced that equipment rollovers are as helpful to them as they are to their customers.

Glen Dieckmann, LaFayette County Truck & Tractor, Higginsville, Mo., says they warrant “an atta boy from manufacturers because they increase market share.”

G. Thompson, Moker & Thompson Implement, Prince Albert, Sask., keeps it simple. “Roll programs make your manufacturer happy!”

Risky Business for Dealers?

But do selling programs like rollovers keep dealers happy?

Asked what roll programs accomplish for the dealer, Ben Wright of Wright Implement, Hardinsburg, Ky., says, “It depends. Is the dealer able to move the trade-in equipment with at least a break even situation and a 2-3% margin on the new? If so, there’s some financial benefit.”

Despite the advantages some dealers believe rolls bring to wholegoods sales, more of them see increased risk. They believe only the farmer and manufacturer make out when equipment is flipped.

“The dealer assumes all of the risk in a volatile market. You better focus on moving all of the used equipment,” says a Wisconsin dealer. “Stakes are higher because the average new large ag product nets for better than $200,000. You’re handling a lot of dollars and assuming more risk for a similar return. It’s a great deal for manufacturers to move large volumes of equipment.”

On the same note, Dieckmann adds, “It ties up large sums of dealers’ money in delivery, service, freight and reconditioning costs until they’re all washed out — however many trades that may take.”

Another dealer adds that the success of roll programs is heavily dependent on pre-selling, which can be risky if, for whatever reason, the factory can’t supply the new units on time. He adds that he’s also seeing reluctance on the part of dealers to pass along price hikes.

“Too often, price increases are not passed along. Customers pay the same dollars per year or per hour, and the increase ends up on the used units.”

Matthew Fleet, Rappahannock Tractor in Mechanicsville, Va., sees the downside of equipment rolls as “No parts. No service. Higher inventory dollars.”

Several dealers see absolutely nothing positive about this type of selling. Herman T. Wilson, Jr. of Pioneer Equipment in Houston, Texas, doesn’t mince words in discussing how he feels about it.

“Rolls do nothing good for the dealer,” he says. “They just inflate used inventory and costs. Whether a roll is profitable will not be known until we get to the end of the chain.”

He doesn’t stop there. “The roll loads up inventory. Because the trade difference is often so skinny, new the next year may be equal or less in price if the supplier is under market share pressure,” he says.

Another dealer adds, “Roll programs have a negative impact on new margins as customers want to roll to a fleet of new equipment for very little difference. Because of their large purchases, all of the manufacturers want these customers, and they throw money at the deals to get them.  In some cases, the customers are paying very little difference, as the fleet discounts barely cover the depreciation.”

Jon Tjosvold of Tjosvold Equipment in Granite Falls, Minn., puts it plainly, “Rolling kills profit margins.”

Margins vs. Market Share

Dealers say they’re being pressured by the major suppliers to increase market share, more often than they’d like through volume discounts and roll programs. This frequently means giving up healthy profit margins — or being able to secure any margin at all.

“Manufacturers are always looking at market share,” says one dealer. “If there are 20 tractors sold in a county, they demand their dealer gets X percent of them. In many cases, the manufacturer encourages the customer to do large deals to get the volume discounts and market share.”

Another dealer who isn’t enamored with these programs adds, “All the manufacturers are worried about is market share and numbers, and it costs them big dollars to get them each month. They’re just trying to fool their stockholders.”

Glen Vetter of Vetter Equipment in Denison, Iowa, says the main impact of rollover sales is producing low margins on both new and used machinery. “Rollovers help new machine population and market share, but the used equipment [taken in trades] can kill a dealer,” he says.

A Florida dealer lays his feelings out on the impact of roll programs even more frankly. These programs produce “almost total destruction of margins. It helps market share, which is the only thing manufacturers care about,” he says.

Many dealers agree that the only beneficiaries of rollover deals are equipment suppliers and farmers. “They’re great for the manufacturer as it sells iron,” says Ivan Dorhout, Town & Country Implement, Rock Valley, Iowa. “They’re great for end users as it reduces their costs. They’re not so great for the dealer as it lowers profit margins. But the bigger issue is that the dealer has large exposure when the market dips.”

Laethem of Farm Depot says rollover sales don’t produce an accurate picture of what’s really happening in a sales territory.

“Roll programs exaggerate margins, populations and market share,” he says. “High-margin dealers increase their margins. Low-margin dealers lower their margin to get the deal.  Populations can increase if the dealer sells more equipment to a buyer that may not have considered it initially, such as if he buys a self-propelled sprayer. Market share can swing as skilled farmers regularly switch brands to take advantage of manufacturers’ ‘bounty’ programs.”

Some dealers are caught in the middle and forced into rollover sales. Wilson of Pioneer Equipment is one of them. He also has some fundamental issues with how market share numbers are used.

“Rolls depress margins on both new and used and do nothing to change machine population,” he says. “If I don’t do a roll and the competitor does, my share decreases. Market share is so inaccurate that it doesn’t indicate the real hours of use, which is all that matters over the long term.”

While acknowledging that equipment rolls have a “big impact” on margins, Bruce Westerfield of Wright Implement, Owensboro, Ky., says they’re critical if you’re working with multi-unit discount.

“You can’t win a MUD customer with a normal margin on which the rest of your sales are based. It doesn’t affect the used margins as much on the regular row-crop items, but is a problem on equipment like small utility tractors. 

“It also affects the population of used farm equipment as it can load up a dealer’s lot with machinery that the market can’t support without moving it out of his territory,” says Westerfield.” It helps with market share as the dealer can keep the MUD customers in his AOR and produce big equipment numbers. It can also create the opposite effect if you can’t land the deal.”

Westerfield’s colleague, Brent Howell from Wright Implement’s Hardinsburg, Ky., store, sees the impact of rollovers as “very positive” on market share. He also believes used equipment is the bigger concern. “Used inventory can easily spiral out of control. The result is lower margins overall because much of the used equipment must be sold at a wholesale price,” Howell says.

Some dealers are seeing medium-sized farmers wanting in on the “roll business” because fleet discounts on new are not available on used.

The ‘Pros’ of Rollovers

While many farm equipment dealers are less than thrilled with MUD and roll programs, not all dealers see them as a bad thing. Those who find rolls beneficial cite the rising price of new equipment, manufacturer allocation programs and high demand for newer used machinery as legitimate reasons for employing this selling method.

This reasoning is in line with what dealers have reported the last few years in Farm Equipment’s annual “Dealer Business Outlook & Trends” survey. For the past two years, the increasing cost of new equipment was at the top of North American dealers’ list of major concerns. A year ago, 54.9% of survey respondents said they were “very concerned” and 42.2% were “concerned” about the rising price of new farm machinery. Only 2.9% didn’t see high machinery costs as something to worry about.

In the 2010 survey, the availability of new equipment ranked #15 of dealers’ top 18 concerns. In the 2011 survey, this issue jumped all the way to #8 on the list.

“If run properly, roll programs can increase margins. Population increase brings good, used, low-hour machines to market when new equipment is hard to get,” says Larry Hauber of LBR Performance Sports, Decorah, Iowa.

Doug Matulka of Benes Service Co., David City, Neb., says these selling programs opens the door to farmers who may not have the wherewithal to purchase increasingly higher priced machinery at normal terms. “Not only does it increase market share, but it buys down the price of the new machine so a guy can afford a new machine.” But he also concedes that “Margins are a bit lower.”

One dealer offered several benefits for dealers promoting roll programs. He says rolls can produce a steady flow of new business on a regular basis, which allows the dealer to pre-order equipment. They can also provide predictable flow of late model trades that can be pre-sold with confidence on the return date. Reconditioning costs are generally predictable, and market share is more predictable as well.

An Ontario New Holland dealer also sees an upside to rollover sales, though he qualifies his views. “When conditions are favorable,” he says, “a roll program promotes customer loyalty, a predictable supply of low-hour, and late model trades for resale.” He adds that it also allows for predictable demand for ordering new product when discounts are best and lead times sufficient to control delivery time frames, shop work flow and pre-selling the trade units.

While rolls are most often used to move higher horsepower tractors and combines, Hauber sees the concept spreading to other farm machinery. “It’s not just tractors and combines being traded often. Planters, tillage and grain handling equipment is also entering the picture with low-hour and multiple trades. Demand for this used equipment is also high and increasing,” he says.

Producing Numbers

Several dealers who Farm Equipment spoke with admit that if the manufacturers’ aim is to produce numbers in terms of unit volume, it’s working. They offer examples to demonstrate that rollovers and MUD can increase the sheer volume of equipment in their territories.

“We recently had a county in our AOR go from historical annual industry sales of 12-14 new tractors to more than 50 per year,” reports one dealer.

In another case, a farmer was running eight tractors, most of which were less than 5 years old. According to the dealer, the farmer normally traded 1-2 units per year to keep his fleet up to date. Recently, he was encouraged to trade all 8 units for new equipment and flip them twice a year to get a multi-unit discount on 16 pieces of equipment. “When the competitive manufacturers saw the number of units sold, they demanded their share,” says the dealer.

In another instance, one dealer is now selling 75 new large pieces of equipment to just 10 customers.

Roger Newton of Southwest Equipment Co. of Twin Falls, Idaho, sums it up by saying, “Margins are less. Market share goes up. The supplier is happy and increases the volume discount.”

The Goal: No Rolls

Considering the prospects of earning skinny or no margins at all on new wholegoods, not all dealers care to offer equipment rolls. In other cases, dealers say rolling tends to be regional and they’re glad they’re not involved.

An Oregon Kubota dealer says he had no experience with these programs and “From what I read, I’m glad I’m not aware of them.”

Al Parolini of Coastal Tractor in Salinas, Calif., says he hasn’t experienced these types of programs to the degree that dealers in the Midwest have. “In specific cases, where a manufacturer under their ‘national account’ status dictated a sale and negotiated the deal, the gross margin dropped significantly.”

From his perspective Tjosvold of Tjosvold Equipment, would prefer to avoid rolling equipment.

“Rolling lowers margins to less than 4-5%. We usually want customers to run 3-5 years before trading, so we do very little rolling.”

He’s also found it challenging to move the used equipment. “The price is usually too close to that of new equipment and its not equipped exactly how the customer wants it, so they buy new instead.

For the most part, Tjosvold says customers aren’t interested in rolls and admits that he has done his best to talk them out of it.

As for the future of these programs, he believes the bigger dealer networks will continue to push them, and adds, “I will continue avoiding them.”

Are Rollovers Sustainable?

The most critical question that astute dealers need to confront is the sustainability of equipment roll programs, especially as they’re coupled with multi-unit and fleet discounts. Dealers’ views on the long-term viability of selling rollovers are as varied as their opinions on the pros and cons of these programs.

Those dealers who say, “Yes, roll programs are sustainable,” are easily outnumbered by those who believe their future use and feasibility is limited by the cyclical nature of agriculture and capability of dealers to find enough farmers to buy the used machinery.

One dealer suggests that the ag equipment industry needs to look no farther than the automobile industry to answer questions about the sustainability of rollover programs. “Japanese automakers didn’t participate in the fleet programs, while the Big 3 were pumping out fleet units and crazy lease deals. We know how that story ended,” he says.

In the long run, he doesn’t believe these programs are sustainable. “We’re creating an oversupply of used equipment. I can think of no other industry that does this type of business. High volume and low margins is risky business. Any negative swing in market conditions, such as higher interest rates, lower commodity prices, drought, excessive moisture, etc., will cause the used market to slam shut. Dealers sitting with 80 used combines or 60 used 4-wheel drive tractors will be doomed.”

Ben Wright of Wright Implement believes the volatility of crop prices will limit the use of rollovers when ag cycles turn downward. “I simply don’t believe the used market will be there in years to come. If dealers and farmers have learned anything in the last 30 years, it’s that the grain market will change. When grain prices go down, so will used equipment demand.”

Wright’s company cohort, Brent Howell, sees the possibility of maintaining roll programs depending on what price dealers want to pay. “The question is,” he says, “whether we can keep the used equipment moving and how much we lose to move it.”

Bruce Westerfield, the third Wright Implement manager who participated in the discussion, adds that rolls can be sustained if dealers are able to adjust the pricing that the roll customer pays. But he also sees the changing customer base limiting how many rolls dealers can sell.

“It will get much more difficult as time goes by,” he says, “as more part-time farmers leave the marketplace. As the other farmers get bigger, they don’t want to own older equipment.”

On that same note, Wilson of Pioneer Equipment, adds, “Rolls as currently structured should decrease significantly over the next 5 years. The shrinking numbers of smaller operators will close the market for the second and third trades.”

Dealer capitalization is also critical to maintaining these programs. As one Wisconsin dealer explained, “When the values of machines drop, the dealer will not be able to wash out of the deal and will eventually go broke unless he’s well capitalized.”

Fleet of Rappahannock Tractor adds that there is just too many dollars at stake. “When interest rates go up, these types of programs will stop.”

Reflecting on his past experience, Guettinger of Columbia Tractor, says, “One or two troubling years in a row and you’re done!”

Sustainable? A Qualified ‘Yes’

For dealers who see a long-term future for rollover programs, it’s a matter of matching how farm equipment is sold to the changing customer base. Even at that, the dealers who believe rolls will continue to be the way business is done, often include qualifiers to their statements.

One dealer who believes selling machine rollovers are viable and will continue to be effective in getting new, higher-priced equipment onto farms, says, “It’s the best tool to address the current scale of the modern farm.”

This goes hand-in-hand with Kuester Implement’s Regula’s thinking. “This type of business will grow as larger farmers continue to buy out smaller farmers. The future of small farms does not look good,” he says. “It will be more profitable for them to rent their ground to the larger farmer.”

Randy Woker of Peabudy North adds that rolls are sustainable only if the price of grain remains high.

Bill Sullivan, Martin & Sullivan, Carthage, Ill., is on board with that only if “we can draw enough difference to be able to sell the trades.”

Another dealer from Ontario agrees rolls will continue if “they’re tightly controlled and well managed.” This, he says, will require a much higher time commitment on the part of managers.

Douglas Grams of New Ulm Tractor & Equipment sees the changing demographics of farming as supporting the use of rollovers. “Older farmers are turning over purchase decisions to the next generation. Young farmers haven’t seen really bad times in farming, and they’re not afraid of accumulating a high debt load. As long as we continue to spiral upward, it will work. The biggest problem will be getting rid of trade-ins from the third and fourth rounds,” says Grams.

Other dealers seem to accept the inevitable when it comes to moving iron through roll programs. As one put it, “They will continue because manufacturers will demand it.”

What’s the Alternative?

Even dealers who are strongly opposed to equipment rollover programs, or how they’re currently constructed, believe they may be the best thing — for the farmer — at this point. Others have a wide-range of ideas on what may be more effective and serve the aims of everyone, including dealers.

Several dealers who responded to Farm Equipment’s survey are simply throwing up their hands and accepting the fact that as farms continue to grow in size, farmers have, in fact, become “fleet operators.” As such, they are in a position to demand multi-unit discounts and insist on trading their equipment on an annual or regularly scheduled basis. With this groundwork, they’re expecting dealers to design purchasing programs that meet their specific needs.

Considering these criteria, one dealer who is staunchly opposed to these selling programs, admits, “I don’t see an alternative in the current environment.”

At the same time, Dieckmann of LaFayette County Truck & Tractor says dealers must get a handle on the “under-the-table incentives” to salespeople who are getting paid by the factory to pump up volume sales.

When it comes to fleet operators, Wilson of Frontier Equipment doesn’t necessarily believe they’re only looking for low price, but a fixed cost that un-complicates pricing and financing.

He says, “Fleet operators only want to pay for the hours used and prefer a rate that includes service. This will eventually result in rentals that are realistically priced so the base cost of the machine can be amortized.”

He adds, “Hopefully we will also see the end of zero-financing, which is just an upfront overcharge to the stated price of the machine. The real cost of financing must be included somewhere.”

Another dealer paints a bleak picture of the industry if rollover programs get out of hand. “We got ourselves into this mess, so we probably won’t be able to stop it without a crash,” he says. “Just like the U.S. housing market or auto industry, everyone saw it coming, but no one did anything about it.”

Ben Wright of Wright Implement gets the last word on the subject of equipment rolls and says the dilemma of the farmer and dealer is the same, yet the end result is definitely in the farmer’s favor.

“Fleet operators may be caught in the same trap as equipment dealers. Many can afford the roll cost each year and would not want to change it. I don’t believe there is or will be a program as cost-effective for the farm customer as these programs are and will continue to be. As for the dealer — hmmmmm.”