"Sounds like you're still in the "idea" phase with little real research done. I think the buy existing farms and turn them around has little merit in the investing world. ROI's just don't pan out statistically and the ultimate return of 15 – 20% definitely won't interest angel or seed investors. If you had a history of turning around loss making farms into profitable farms you might be able to sell that idea as a management company but not as a buy fix and sell proposition."

I suppose we are coming at it from 2 different angles. Your from an angel investor high risk high return outside the dairy industry view and I'm from a within the dairy industry and what I've seen work and not work real world. I would much prefer to have a target which is easy to obtain and over shoot the %15 than simply say what I think will sell an proposition then under deliver. The dairy industry has been established for years and isn't a new fangled make people hyper rich in minutes rather perhaps a medium risk medium return industry similar to other agricultural industries. A group which is currently running farms for super funds aims for 5% return plus %5 capital appreciation per year. As i understand it they perhaps don't always hit that target. At no stage is this and is dairy farming a buy fix and sell type of proposition but rather a long term investment of returns  of 10% plus for people with the right management in place. Given the recent volatility in financial  and property markets that would be an attractive investment for people who would like to do better than long term bank deposits. Within the above frame work this "idea" is ready to go. However if the need is to reshape the proposition to make it appealing then more work is needed.

"These points are what any business would expect as minimums. They are not points of difference (PODs). You need PODs as attractants for investors.

100% controlled environment that enhances animal welfare, productivity and waste management

superior genetics that provide volumes that exceed industry standards by 30%

scientifically advanced dietary program with computer managed feeding to control quality and output

partnered with a leading company in automated shed handling systems

IP development through technology innovation and genetic selection will add value going forward

This is the way you should be thinking."

So long as the above points meet the business objectives then why not? some of those points are already part of the business plan. I don't believe in putting money at risk on unproven ideas and concepts. As someone who is within the dairy industry we are bombarded with commercialized ideas which are in the best interest of the people selling the product rather than person purchasing. With out clear and concise research with trials and objective information how can i safely incorporate a concept in to  the business plan with out knowing how it will effect that farm business. The priority should be safe returns to the investor not chasing high risk high returns. 

Now having said all of that, by remarketing the business plan to be appealing to investors without changing the business plan to increase risk then that is ok. Their is plenty in the current business that could be dressed up to appeal along the thinking of the above.

"Most entrepreneurs rate risk lower than what it actually is. As it stands the risk is relatively high from an investor viewpoint.

I would be looking at the likes of Fonterra and how they are setting up with business models, genetics and herd development, technology, automation, enclosed shed systems etc."

absolutely let Fronterra spend money on those concepts of closed shed etc, as they have the money to do that. However here in Northern Victoria your plan should be to utilize the concept of using irrigation to grow the feed when the herd requires it and then utilize the cows to then harvest and convert the feed to milk. It's a simple system that can be and is proven to work. Closed shed feedlot systems in victoria simply add layers of complexity which in term adds cost to the system which has been proven NOT to work year in year out in victoria. Some years yes but other years the business falls over. Its about knowing your system. Perhaps in other environments like china that is the best system with the given resources. Don't get me wrong I'm open new ideas and technology but with proper analysis.

My business plans include plenty of technology perhaps its about making the business plan sexy to investors. To do this I perhaps need to know who the investors are I'm going to target? About working out who and what type of investors would be best to target? which is why I'm posing the questions on here.

"There's massive demand building in SE Asia and especially China. Get your business modeling right and your investor base could look asian or Chinese. Plenty of money there. You might also want to look at offshore opportunities to partner with new dairy companies there looking to tap into expertise.

Something else to consider is setting up a consultancy. You can tie that into the plan as well"

That's a start. What does the business modeling need to look like to attract investors from Asia? How do I make contact with those investors?

I have managed farms for years and know the difference management formula makes to profitability, however I don't have from those farms comprehensive financial data over many years to prove the difference to those business's. 

Their are plenty of consultancy business's in the dairy industry already, trust me.

I'm asking what is possible? what are the options? in terms of financing? I was thinking the other day I advertise agricultural dairy business for sale $1,800,000 WIWO %15 return, full management in place. Available to purchase smaller share if necessary etc.

Great to throw around thoughts and to gain an understanding of how people think outside of the dairy industry and my world.

regards

Grant

Ok I found this http://www.apimagazine.com.au/api-online/web-specials/2010/diy-syndicates

from that article

Small-scale offerings. Small-scale offerings are where there are 20 or fewer investors in the property fund, with no more than $2 million being raised in any rolling 12-month period. Under this exemption, the 20 investors don't need to be 'wholesale clients'. This exemption is sometimes referred to as the "20/12/2 rule" and Ivers warns that a lot people trip up on this rule because while it seems simple, it can be deceptive because of the various elements involved, the interaction of those elements and ASIC's very broad aggregation and anti-avoidance powers. He also explains that all offers made under the small-scale offerings exemptions need to be "personal offers", which means you can't advertise or mass market the property fund under this exemption.

I guess finding the people would be hard given your not suppose to advertise. One way would be advertise something different (but still based on) to attract attention….then have a "although we can't advertise for private investors we can't stop you from contacting us" type of thing. For example a advertising push explaining what we are doing and looking for support with no offer of financial return. Perhaps the enterprise could be focused on a certain outcome as well as making money. environment, animal welfare, low carbon farming, etc.

Perhaps it could be structured with a "parent unit trust" and other entities/trusts could hold the units. i.e. investors under the "20/12/2" rule , then another outside the square funding from crowd sourcing etc who's profits could go to charity, etc.

regards

Grant