Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

market-farming - Re: [Market-farming] charging what the market will bear

market-farming AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Market Farming

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Willie McKemie <mckemie AT austinfarm.org>
  • To: market-farming AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: Re: [Market-farming] charging what the market will bear
  • Date: Thu, 6 Feb 2003 07:51:14 -0600

> How many markets do spot checks on growers? Are they done on all growers
> or just suspected pedders? This is something our market needs to address
> before it is a problem.

In some of our markets we have a pre-determined and advertised
procedure for dealing with market conflicts, which are almost
exclusively accusations of re-selling. In the past, we have done
pre-season inspections, but they are both burdensome and of little
value. Our procedure goes thusly:
1) a formal complaint is made to a market manager at the market
2) the manager recruits and appoints two members to serve as inspectors
3) the inspectors make the inspection within a few days and report the
results to the board of directors
4) the board acts on the report within a week or so. The penalty is
generally loss of membership (and market privileges) for a year or more.

Some points:
1) member/growers probably make better inspectors than market managers,
they are probably less likely to be fooled by false claims of
production capacity.
2) inspectors are un-paid volunteers; they are offered mileage, but
rarely accept.
3) it has not been a problem in our markets, but you should consider
some fee on the accuser to deter frivolous accusations.
4) commitment to honest markets by members and management is of
primary importance compared to written rules.

I find Phil's enforcement procedures and penalties most amusing.

--
Willie USS Harry S Truman: 97,000 tons of diplomacy
Are YOU an html abuser? http://www.expita.com/nomime.html
Linux system uptime 75 days 14 hours 46 minutes




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page