Charlie Hall, professor and chairholder of the Ellison Chair in International Floriculture at Texas A&M University, says the consolidation that’s taken place in the industry to this point has been a positive thing. And Syngenta’s acquisition of Goldsmith is indeed a plus.
“If you try to measure the efficency within an industry, I would contend the industry is much more efficient now that there are some very streamlined distribution systems,” Hall says. “I don’t see, in the long run, that this is a bad thing, until you get to a monopoly situation. There’s still enough competition in the industry to keep folks playing straight. They don’t mess with the price too much.”
Goldsmith’s germplasm is a valuable asset for Syngenta, Hall says, and the acquisition does open up Syngenta’s portfolio. These types of mergers and acquisitions will continue in the future, but most growers won’t see too much difference in they way they conduct business with Goldsmith.
“I would envision in the future we’ll see more consolidation,” he says. “We’ve seen consolidation occur at this level already in our industry. Is it going to impact the grower? Only in terms of who they may be buying from–which name is on the door that they’re buying from.
“There are enough synergies that are going to occur that I don’t see that it’s going to be a net loss for the average grower. I don’t think it’s going to increase the price of the offerings that they’re now buying. I think all the products and services they’re accustomed to are going to be offered in roughly the same fashion.”