Skip Navigation

Contract Comparison in Specialty Soybeans

Roger Ginder, Amol Naik, and Darren Jarboe*


Introduction

A major portion of the current U.S. soybean crop moves through the undifferentiated bulk commodity channel. Bulk commodity handling reduces the cost of assembly, storage, transportation, and distribution. The ability to commingle grain with widely varying physical and intrinsic properties allows the substitution of inventory in one location for another and permits the use of infinite variations in size of storage and transportation lots. With commingling of these grains, much of the differentiated value of the soybeans is lost. Until now customers have found the cost trade-offs between a bulk commodity approach and accepting a larger level of variation in specific traits economical. However with improved genetics and smaller (or insignificant) reductions in yields when producing specialty soybeans, the benefits from identity preservation may exceed the cost savings from the bulk commodity system for some end uses. Although this commodity system is efficient from a cost per bushel standpoint, it will not persist unless it meets the ultimate users wants and needs as defined by quality, availability, and price.

As a result, there is growing demand for soybeans produced from varieties that are bred and grown to better meet the specific needs of individual groups of customers rather than the general needs of all customers. This new concept in marketing is to identify the specific quality needs of individual users and produce soybeans that have those characteristics. In this way soybean supplies are allocated to their most valuable use more effectively, users are more satisfied, and the total economic value of U.S. grain increases.

Producing and marketing identity preserved crops generally requires greater coordination throughout the entire grain production and distribution system. The existing and less formal open market now performs the coordinating function with commodity soybeans. However it is not expected to be as effective in helping to realize the benefits of the differentiated grain market system. Smaller volumes of product with more specialized traits cannot be commingled for transport and storage. A more formal mode is required to obtain the needed coordination among producer, handler, processor, and end-user. The traditional impersonal channel relationships in the bulk commodity system are not as well adapted to smaller quantities of more narrowly defined product. In most cases it will be supplemented with some type of a contract system.

Alternative contractual arrangements are available for value added grains. However, the use of contracts will cause changes in the traditional market channel relationships. Depending on the type of contract used, extensive changes in the legal and institutional responsibilities of firms in the channel will result. Four general types of contracts may be used for value-added grain production, viz., marketing or sales contracts, bailment production contracts, fee for service contracts, and pool contracts with a closed value-added coop.


Project Background

This project was undertaken by the Iowa Grain Quality Initiative in an effort to increase understanding of alternative contractual arrangements that growers of specialty soybeans may need to consider as the trend toward identity preservation continues. The analyses focused on comparisons of returns from different contracts in the production of specialty beans over a range of prices and yields. Three contracts compared in this analyses were selected to represent general types of marketing contract arrangements the producer may be offered. These are, (1) commodity price plus a premium, (2) a flat price per bushel, (3) a flat payment per acre.

  • Commodity price plus a premium: Where the price paid to the farmer has a fixed premium over the local commodity cash price at the time of sale. It was assumed that, the premium was set prior to planting at $0.50 per bushel. In actual practice, the premium may be smaller or larger.

  • Flat price per bushel: Where the flat price per bushel was fixed prior to planting and is paid on all bushels produced under the contract. For purposes of the analysis, $6.75 per bushel was the assumed as the flat price. The flat price may be higher or lower in actual practice.

  • Flat payment per acre of production: Where the premium paid to the farmer is added to the per acre return under an expected price and yield for commodity beans. For this analysis, the premium was added to the returns generated by an expected price for commodity beans of $6.50 per bushel and an expected yield of 45 bushels of commodity beans per acre. This arrangement was assumed to be established prior to planting. Hence, no matter what variations occur in the price and/or yield after planting, the amount paid to the producer remains constant. For the purpose of this analysis, the flat payment was assumed to be $15.00 per acre above the base return at $6.50 per bushel on a yield of 45 bushels per acre. In actual practice, the premium may be higher or lower and dependent on the specific requirements of the contract.

While the producer may not be able to specify the type of contract offered, it is helpful to be able to evaluate returns from individual contracts against returns from the production of commodity beans or returns from other contracting opportunities.

Models were developed to perform the contract analyses using Microsoft Excel® spreadsheets. The spreadsheet models were used to compute the budgets for production of both commodity beans and specialty beans under the assumed contract relationships. Based on these budgets, the net returns were computed for growers of commodity and specialty beans. Both tabular and graphical outputs were developed to compare the results and draw conclusions.

Data were restricted to cost and returns estimates for the State of Iowa. Three sets of budget data were computed for beans, under the assumption that the crop was produced on low yield potential land (40 bushels per acre), average yield potential land (45 bushels per acre), and, high yield potential land (50 bushels per acre). The estimates for production costs were obtained from ‘Estimated Costs of Crop Production in Iowa - 1997’, an Iowa State University - University Extension Publication. The base data and assumptions entered to perform the analyses are shown below in Table 1. It should be noted that the base data include some costs that do not apply to commodity production such as cleaning the combine or planter, and identity preserved (IP) storage and handling. Other differences include land charges and prices specific to individual production contracts.


Table 1 (Base Data and Assumptions for Budgets)

 

40 Bushels per acre Yield Potential

 

45 Bushels per acre Yield Potential

 

50 Bushels per acre Yield Potential

 

COMMODITY BEANS

 

Yield with commodity in bushels per acre

 

40

 

45

 

50

 

Commodity seed cost in dollars per 50 pound unit

 

14.5

 

14.5

 

14.5

 

SPECIALTY BEANS

 

Yield with Specialty in bushels per acre

 

Expectation 1

 

40

 

45

 

50

 

Expectation 2

 

30

 

35

 

40

 

Expectation 3

 

35

 

40

 

45

 

Expectation 4

 

45

 

50

 

55

 

Expectation 5

 

50

 

55

 

60

 

Storage and Handling Cost in dollars per bushel (extra for specialty grains only)

 

0.03

 

0.03

 

0.03

 

Seed cost in dollars per 50# unit

 

15.00

 

15.00

 

15.00

 

Additional Cost per acre for Cleaning Combine & Planter (extra for specialty grains only)

 

2.00

 

2.00

 

2.00

 

Cost of phosphate in dollars per pound

 

0.31

 

0.31

 

0.31

 

Cost of potash in dollars per pound

 

0.13

 

0.13

 

0.13

 

Labor rate in dollars per hour

 

7.00

 

7.00

 

7.0

 

Labor time per acre in hours

 

2.60

 

2.60

 

2.60

 

Lime, Yearly Cost in dollars

 

6.00

 

6.00

 

6.00

 

Herbicide cost in dollars

 

28.00

 

28.00

 

28.00

 

Crop Insurance in dollars

 

5.20

 

5.20

 

5.20

 

Miscellaneous costs in dollars

 

6.00

 

7.00

 

8.00

 

Interest on Preharvest Machinery in dollars

 

5.40

 

5.60

 

5.80

 

Harvest Machinery (all in dollars)

 

Fixed

 

Variable

 

Fixed

 

Variable

 

Fixed

 

Variable

 

Combine

 

11.54

 

6.45

 

11.54

 

6.45

 

11.54

 

6.45

 

Haul

 

0.80

 

0.80

 

0.90

 

0.90

 

1.00

 

1.00

 

Handle

 

0.45

 

0.20

 

0.55

 

0.25

 

0.65

 

0.30

 

Land Cash Rent Equivalent in dollars

 

100.00

 

120.00

 

145.00

 

Flat Payment dollars per bushel (Contract 2) $

 

6.75

 

6.75

 

6.75

 

Flat Payment in dollars per acre (Contract 3)$

 

15.00

 

15.00

 

15.00


Production Costs

Based on the assumptions and data in Table 1, the production costs were computed for commodity beans and specialty beans. Tables 2.1 and 2.2 indicate the production budgets for the 45 bushels per acre yield potential land (with no yield changes) for commodity and specialty beans respectively. Similar budgets were developed for the 40 bushels per acre and 50 bushels per acre yield potential land and are shown in Tables 2.3-2.4, and 2.5-2.6, respectively.


Table 2.1 (Budget for 45 Bushels per Acre Yield Potential Land for Commodity Beans)


Table 2.2 (Budget for 45 Bushels per Acre Yield Potential Land for Specialty Beans)


Table 2.3 (Budget for 40 Bushels per Acre Yield Potential Land for Commodity Beans)


Table 2.4 (Budget for 40 Bushels per Acre Yield Potential Land for Specialty Beans)


Table 2.5 (Budget for 50 Bushels per Acre Yield Potential Land for Commodity Beans)


Table 2.6 (Budget for 50 Bushels per Acre Yield Potential Land for Specialty Beans)


Procedures

In order to achieve the objectives of the project, the following specific procedures were used:

  •  Net returns to growers of specialty soybeans were computed on a dollars per acre and dollars per bushel basis for commodity beans, and specialty grains beans under three different contract types; (1) a commodity price plus premium contract, (2) a flat payment per bushel contract, and, (3) a flat payment per acre contract

  • Costs and returns for commodity production and sale (without a contract) were used as the standard for comparison. It was assumed that the producer has no special obligation to deliver to any buyer and could sell all that was produced at the price selected for commodity beans
     
  • Impact of price variations on net returns from commodity and identity preserved beans were evaluated under the three different contractual arrangements
     
  • Impact of yield variations on net returns from commodity and identity preserved beans were evaluated under the three different contractual arrangements
     
  • Results were compared for land with three different production potential capabilities.


Comparison of Cost and Returns on 45 Bushel per Acre Yield Potential Land

For commodity soybeans, the producer bears both the price risk and the production risk for the crop produced. As a consequence, returns per acre may be affected by changes in both price and yield levels. Returns per acre for commodity beans were evaluated at the three price levels for the purpose of computing costs and returns. A typical or expected price level of $6.50 per bushel was assumed as the base. A slightly higher price level of $7.00 per bushel and a much lower price level of $5.25 per bushel were also analyzed to provide an indication of how price variation might affect returns.

Returns per acre were also calculated at the alternative yield levels. It was assumed that the producer purchased and applied all the appropriate inputs required to produce 45 bushels per acre. However, variations in growing conditions and weather can result in lower or higher yields than the expected 45 bushels per acre. Therefore results were analyzed at a very low yield of 35 bushels per acre, a low yield of 40 bushels per acre, a high yield of 50 bushels per acre, and a very high yield of 55 bushels per acre.

Calculating the range of returns the producer might receive given the relative price and production variations which might occur can help the producer compare contracts more efficiently. This can serve as a basis for comparing the risks in contract opportunities with the risk associated with the alternative of producing commodity soybeans. A similar process was followed for the 40 bu/acre and 50 bu/acre potential yield land categories.


Returns per Bushel and per Acre

Under the assumptions that production inputs were applied to the 45 bushels per acre yield potential land, the results are as shown in Tables 3.1-3.4.


Benchmark Returns for Commodity Soybeans

Table 3.1 (Returns for Commodity Beans on 45 Bushel per Acre Yield Potential Land at Various Yield Levels)


Table 3.1 indicates that the production of commodity beans on 45 bushels per acre yield potential land at the assumed full production costs was profitable when price was $7.00 per bushel or $6.50 per bushel. However, a loss of approximately ($28.00) per acre occurred when the low price of $5.25 per bushel was received for the beans. At the very low yield level of 35 bushels per acre, losses were generated at all price levels. This occurred because the average production cost per bushel were $7.55 which was higher than any of the selling price levels used for the study.

At the lower than expected yield level of 40 bushels per acre, production cost was approximately $6.60 per bushel. At the $6.50 per bushel price level, a small loss of about ($4.25) per acre occurred. The higher $7.00 per bushel price level generated a profit of about $15.00 per acre. But the low price of $5.25 per bushel price level generated a loss of nearly ($55.00) per acre.

At the higher than expected 50 bushels per acre yield, the full production cost per bushel was $5.29. This generated profits of about $61.00 per acre at the $6.50 price level, about $86.00 per acre at the $7.00 price level, and a minor loss at the $5.25 price level. At the very high yield of 55 bu/acre, the full production cost per bushel was about $4.81 and profits were generated at all the three alternative market price levels.

These base relationships for commodity beans were used to benchmark returns for specialty soybeans. It should be noted that the added costs were reflected in the budgets for specialty beans so that direct comparisons could be made.


Returns Under Commodity Plus Premium Contract

Table 3.2 (Returns for Market Plus Premium Contract Produced on 45 Bushels per Acre Yield Potential Land at Various Yield Levels)


For the commodity market plus premium contract, the producer receives the commodity price plus a $0.50 premium per bushel. Therefore both the price risk and yield risk are assumed by the producer as they would be in production of commodity soybeans. However, the additional premiums resulted in improved returns even when the slightly higher production expenses associated with identity preserved handling were taken into account. The addition of the 50 cents per bushel premium created an important cushion for price and yield risk in this contract compared to the production of commodity beans.

At the base 45 bushels per acre yield, the returns were positive at the expected price level of $6.50 per bushel (plus premium) and under the higher $7.00 (plus premium) per bushel price. However, returns were still negative, ($9.38 per acre) at the low $5.25 (plus premium) price. If it is assumed that only 40 bushels per acre yield were obtained, and the commodity market price of $5.25 plus premium was received, a negative net return of approx. ($38.00) would occur. At the very low yield of 35 bushels per acre, returns per acre were negative at all price levels even after a 50 cents per bushel premium was added. However at the $7.00 per bushel price, the return per acre was only slightly negative - approximately ($5.30) per acre. It is nevertheless attractive when benchmarked against the returns for commodity soybeans under the 35 bushel scenario of ($19.28).

While the producer still retains a significant level of risk under this arrangement, the added price premium tends to moderate the size of the downside losses due to the lower prices and yields. At the same time, the upside gains are significantly enhanced when better than expected prices and yields occur. To the degree that the costs of specialty grains handling do not exhaust or exceed the premium, this type of contract can reduce the impact of price risk. The importance of carefully identifying the specialty grains costs cannot be overstated. Where specialty grains costs exceed the premium, the opposite result occurs. The impact of price risk is magnified rather than reduced.


Returns Under Flat Price per Bushel Contract

Table 3.3 (Returns for Flat Price per Bushel Contract Produced on 45 Bushels per Acre Yield Potential Land at Various Yield Levels)


Under the flat price per bushel contract, the producer receives a flat payment of $6.75 for each bushel produced and must absorb any additional costs for specialty grains production. The arrangement shifts part of the risk to the contractor. The producer bears no price risk in such a contract since the price is fixed prior to planting. However full yield risk is assumed and the upside potential for the producer is totally dependent on high yields.

Positive net returns were generated at all yields greater than 40 bushels per acre. However at yields less than 40 bushels per acre, this contract was not profitable. At the 35 bushels per acre yield level, a loss of about ($32.00) per acre resulted. Although this result was slightly better than the commodity return at $6.50/bu, it was well below the commodity return at the $7.00 price.

At the higher than expected yields, the contract performed very well. The contract generated about $70.00 per acre net return at the 50 bushels per acre yield level, and a about $100.00 per acre net return at the 55 bushels per acre yield level. While these higher yields are possible, it should be noted that they are above the rated potential for the land, which was 45 bushels per acre. Such yields above rated potential may be somewhat less likely to occur than lower than potential yields resulting from growing conditions.

The elimination of price risk in this contract makes it ideal for a situation where the yield penalties are likely to be small and/or the risk from adverse growing conditions is modest. However, where there is a possibility of large yield penalties or where there are significant weather or production risks (which are beyond the producer’s control), this contract may not be as profitable as expected or may actually result in significant losses.


Returns under the Flat Payment Per Acre Contract

Table 3.4 (Returns for Flat Payment per Acre Contract Produced on 45 Bushels per Acre Yield Potential Land at Various Yield Levels)


Under the flat payment per acre contract, the producer assumes no production or price risk. While the net returns may vary slightly due to changes in handling and storage costs as the yield (i.e., the number of bushels handled) changes, they are quite stable, the returns generated reflect the expected price of $6.50 and expected yield of 45 bushels per acre no matter what prices and yields actually result.

This type of contract may be most useful where significant yield penalties are possible or even likely. It may also be useful where the end-use market and the price for the specialized beans produced is not closely related to market for commodity beans. In such markets, the end-user may be in a better position to manage price risk than the producer. The net effect is to transfer both production and price risk from the producer to the contractor. Assumption of production risk by the contractor may make sense when specialized production practices are needed to produce the crop. However, there may be specific performance standards required of the farmer and outlined in the contract to protect the contractor from losses.


Price Sensitivity Analysis

A price sensitivity analysis was conducted by varying prices between the expected local cash commodity price per bushel ($6.50), and higher than expected ($7.00) and lower than expected ($5.25) prices per bushel. Based on these assumptions, the net returns in dollars per bushel and dollars per acre for varying prices depicted below in Figures 1.1 and 1.2 for the commodity beans and the contract alternatives.


Figure 1.1


Because price is fixed in the flat price per bushel contract and is implicitly constant in the flat payment per acre contract, these contracts yield a constant return per bushel. Return per bushel was $0.79 for the flat price per bushel contract, and, $0.87 for the flat payment per acre contract at al price levels. On a per acre basis, a constant return of $35.62 was generated for the flat price per bushel contract, and, $39.27 for the flat payment per acre contract. At the higher price of $7.00/bu, the market plus premium contract yielded the highest return per bushel of about $1.50 or about $70.00/acre. However at the $5.25 price per bushel, a loss of about $10.00/acre resulted. The commodity beans generated a return per acre of $50.72 at the higher price, but were below the flat price per bushel and flat payment per acre in the other cases. At the $5.25/bu price, a loss of about $0.62/bu or $28.00/per acre occurred.


Figure 1.2


Figures 1.1 and 1.2 also show that, the flat payment per acre contract and flat payment per bushel contract outperformed the market plus contract at the lowest price of $5.25 per bushel. This result held until the price reached approximately $6.30 per bushel. However, for prices greater than $6.30 per bushel, the market plus premium contract outperformed all the other contracts as well as the commodity beans. At prices of approximately $6.60 per bushel and lower, the flat price per bushel and flat payment per acre contracts resulted in better returns than the commodity contract.

Since no one contract yields maximum returns at all price levels, producer’s price expectations become an important factor in evaluating and selecting among the types of contracts. It should also be noted that the flat price and flat payment levels are critical in these relationships. The results would differ if a lower flat price or a lower flat premium per acre were offered under these arrangements.


Yield Sensitivity Analysis

A yield sensitivity analysis was conducted for the 45 bushel per acre yield potential land. Yields were varied between 35 bushels per acre and 55 bushels per acre and net returns were then calculated under these assumed price levels with the expected local cash commodity price, as well as a higher than expected ($7.00 per bushel) and lower than expected cash commodity price ($5.25 per bushel). Although analyses were conducted on the three types of land, only the 45 bushels per acre yield potential land is shown in the analysis here. The graph obtained for $6.50 per bushel price was as follows in Figure 2.1:


Figure 2.1 (Expected Price of $6.50 per Bushel)


Net returns for the commodity, market plus, and the flat price per bushel, were very similar over the yield range at the expected price of $6.50 per bushel. The market plus contract generated slightly higher returns than the commodity or flat price per bushel contract, but all were approximately $110 per acre at 55 bushels per acre yield. The flat price per acre contract was superior to all other contracts at yields less than approximately 44 bushels per acre. At yields below 38 bushels per acre, only the flat payment per acre contract gave a positive net return. At higher yields the market plus and flat price per bushel performed better, generating nearly twice the net return at 55 bushels per acre.


High Expected Price Per Bushel - $7.00

Performance differences among the contracts were somewhat more exaggerated at the higher $7.00 per bushel price. The contracts generated more divergent results over the yield range examined. The graph for this higher $7.00 per bushel price is as shown in Figure 2.2.


Figure 2.2 (High Price of $7.00 per Bushel)


Figure 2.2 indicates that at higher yields, the market plus contract outperformed all other contracts. But at yields less than about 42 bushels per acre, the flat payment per acre contract gave the best results. Although the flat payment per acre contract eliminated the downside potential at yields less than 42 bushels per acre, it also eliminated the upside potential for yields greater than 46 bushels per acre. It should also be noted that the commodity contract gave better results than the flat payment per bushel contract for all yields. This occurred because the flat payment per bushel was established prior to planting at $6.75 per bushel and that price turned out to be lower than the actual market price after the beans were produced. Where opportunities to price commodity beans at higher levels than the flat price or specialty beans under a market plus.


Low Expected Price Per Bushel - $5.25

Performance differences among the contracts were greatest at the lower than expected price of $5.25 per bushel. This situation strongly favored the fixed price and fixed payment contracts. The graph for $5.25 per bushel price is as shown in Figure 2.3.


Figure 2.3 (Low Price of $5.25 per Bushel)


Figure 2.3 indicates that the flat payment per acre dominated at lower yields. At yields lower than approximately 45 bushels per acre, the flat payment per acre contract outperformed all the other contracts. The flat payment per acre contract limited the downside potential at the lower yields. But it also eliminated the upside potential at higher yields. For yields greater than 45 bushels per acre, the flat price per bushel contract outperformed the other contracts since it had established a $6.75 price prior to planting. The commodity soybean market sale was not profitable at yields less than 50 bushels per acre and was only marginally profitable at 55 bushels per acre. The market plus contract performed slightly better than the commodity contract but reached the flat payment per acre contract only when yields were very high. The flat payment per bushel contract eliminated much of the downside risk but permitted significant upside potential at higher yield levels.

From the results in figures 1.1-1.2 and 2.1-2.3, we could conclude that no one contract yields the best outcome under all price and yield circumstances. The price and yield expectations built in to the decision prior to selecting a contract for specialty soybean production are extremely important. Although, it can be concluded that at lower than expected yields and prices, the flat payment per acre contract tends to be the most beneficial, at higher yields and prices the same contract would not yield the best returns compared to the others.

The increased diversity in results as price and yield move away from the expected levels is also of importance. Differences among the contracts at the $6.50 price per bushel were not great between the commodity, the market plus and the flat price (see fig. 2.1). However, as the actual price departs from the $6.50 level, the differences between these three contracts become much more exaggerated. Producers who can more effectively bear the results of low prices and yields may wish to select contracts with more upside potential. At the other end of the spectrum, producers who are in a financial position where the additional risk is unacceptable could benefit from the flat price per acre or bushel contracts.

Similarly, analyses were conducted for the 40 bushels per acre and 50 bushels per acre yield potential land. The tabular outputs for these are given in the Appendix in Tables A1.1-A1.4 and A2.1-A2.4, for the 40 bushels per acre and 50 bushels per acre yield potential land respectively.


Conclusions

Based on the above analyses, the following conclusions could be drawn:

At the lowest expected local cash commodity price, the flat payment per acre contract outperformed all other contracts. But at the higher end of prices, the market plus premium contract outperformed the other contracts. In summary, no one contract performs better than the others for the entire range of variations in price.

  • At lower yields (compared to the potential), the flat payment per acre contract outperformed all other contracts for all expected prices. However, at higher yields (compared to the potential of the land), market plus premium and flat payment per bushel contracts outperformed the others depending on the expected local cash commodity prices. In summary, all contracts need to be evaluated on a case-by-case basis, since no one contract results in highest returns for the entire range of yield and price variations.
     
  • The returns from all contracts except the flat payment per acre contract tend to increase with increases in the yield potential of the land used. This occurs for two reasons. First there is a slight difference in the returns per bushel on the higher potential land. But more importantly, more bushels are marketed and revenue rises faster than costs.
     
  • A high yield penalty under the market plus or flat payment per bushel contract may not give good results unless the premium is established at a high enough level to offset the penalty. Yield reductions have a significant impact on total revenues, and costs typically do not fall proportionately. A high cost structure for production of the specialty soybeans yields similar results for these two contracts. It is always important to evaluate contracts carefully, but it is doubly important where yield penalties or cost structures are high.
     
  • Where there is a close correspondence between actual prices and yields and the expected price and yields ($6.50 per bushel and 45 bushels per acre in this study), the returns among the contracts were very similar. (Note that the returns in figure 2.1 at 45 bu/acre are very similar for all contracts.)
     
  • Departure from the expected yield level results in increasing differences in the returns generated among the contract types. At the lower than expected price of $5.25 per bushel the differences among the contracts were significant. Similar conditions are observed at the higher than expected prices.(Note that for the 45 bu/acre yield in figure 2.3 there are large differences between the flat price per bu, the market plus and the commodity returns.) At these price extremes, producers must be most able to accept the associated risks.

Appendix

Table A1.1 (Returns from Commodity Beans Produced on 40 Bushel per Acre Yield Potential Land at Various Yield Levels)


Table A1.2 (Returns from Market Plus Premium Contract Produced on 40 Bushel per Acre Yield Potential Land at Various Yield Levels)


Table A1.3 (Returns from Flat Price per Bushel Contract Produced on 40 Bushel per Acre Yield Potential Land at Various Yield Levels)


Table A1.4 (Returns from Flat Payment per Acre Contract Produced on 40 Bushel per Acre Yield Potential Land at Various Yield Levels)


Table A2.1 (Returns from Commodity Beans Contract Produced on 50 Bushels per Acre Yield Potential Land at Various Yield Levels)


Table A2.2 (Returns from Market Plus Premium Contract Produced on 50 Bushel per Acre Yield Potential Land at Various Yield Levels)


Table A2.3 (Returns from Flat Price per Bushel Contract Produced on 50 Bushel per Acre Yield Potential Land at Various Yield Levels)


Table A2.4 (Returns from Flat Payment per Acre Contract Produced on 50 Bushel per Acre Yield Potential Land at Various Yield Levels)