Over_ed said:

---

Kenneth_2003 said:

---

My understanding (not a farmer/Deere owner) is/was that it was even more draconian than EPA compliance.

Bolt on parts (think a replacement alternator) had to be digitally tied to the ECU via Deere specific and tightly controlled software. Anything that requires accessing the ECU was solely controlled by Deere. There was no such thing as a Deere authorized or trained mechanic or service tech. There were ONLY Deere owned service centers (at the dealer) and Deere mechanics (again at the dealer).

Annoying when your tractor breaks down while shredding a grazing pasture. Potentially catastrophic when you've got a harvest window and it now requires flatbedding or lowboying a permit load back to the dealership.

---

Exactly. In the end many owners resorted to trying to hack their own equipment. Then Deere wanted to recover damages for the owners hacking their own tractors/combines. It is a weird world we live in.

---

Kenneth_2003 said:

---

I could be wrong here.... I think the "monopoly" is somewhat regional. A lot of farmers (and to a lesser extent ranchers with smaller tractors) are logistically bound to the local dealer.

It's one thing to winch a 50hp unit onto your gooseneck trailer. It's quite another to get a combine or one of the modern units used in plowing/planting back to the mechanic (or a mobile mechanic to the field). If the guy in town or the next town over is a Deere shop vs 100 miles to the nearest CASE dealer... Good change your equipment will be green.

---

Kenneth_2003 said:

---

How much of that was top down from Deere and how much of it was kids that didn't want to take over the family tractor dealership when they moved off the city resulting in a sale and the only buyers are the mega-corps? I'm guessing is a healthy mix of both?

See similar happening as all of the car dealerships are giant mega-corps rather than the family owned arrangement.

---

Over_ed said:

---

"Because of the moat erected around Deere's repair services, Deere and its authorized dealers can charge supracompetitive prices for repair services and also reap the benefit of the unlawfully restrained repair market for the benefit of their lucrative repair-part business." (from the agreement)

Basically the same as your being forced to go to the car dealer for everything that goes wrong with your car as long as you own it.

Deere just settled, $99M to owners for the overcharges (refunding up to 50%) and Deere has to provide the digital tools for the diagnosis and repair of its machinery.

https://www.thedrive.com/news/john-deere-to-pay-99-million-in-monumental-right-to-repair-settlement

When we buy a product it should be our property. Great to see pushback against the "you will own nothing and be happy" crowd. World Economic Forum (2016)

---

rocky the dog said:

---

---

Kenneth_2003 said:

---

My understanding (not a farmer/Deere owner) is/was that it was even more draconian than EPA compliance.

Bolt on parts (think a replacement alternator) had to be digitally tied to the ECU via Deere specific and tightly controlled software. Anything that requires accessing the ECU was solely controlled by Deere. There was no such thing as a Deere authorized or trained mechanic or service tech. There were ONLY Deere owned service centers (at the dealer) and Deere mechanics (again at the dealer).

Annoying when your tractor breaks down while shredding a grazing pasture. Potentially catastrophic when you've got a harvest window and it now requires flatbedding or lowboying a permit load back to the dealership.

---

CDUB98 said:

---

Logos Stick said:

---

Not sure I agree. If Deere wants to lock down what they make, just don't buy Deere equipment.

---

Except, how things have played out, there is not a viable option for many farmers.

The very definition of monopoly.

---

Kenneth_2003 said:

---

How much of that was top down from Deere and how much of it was kids that didn't want to take over the family tractor dealership when they moved off the city resulting in a sale and the only buyers are the mega-corps? I'm guessing is a healthy mix of both?

See similar happening as all of the car dealerships are giant mega-corps rather than the family owned arrangement.

---

ttu_85 said:

---

To bad the Market was already a monopoly. The customers could have flipped off Deer and gone to a competor as true capitalism allows.

Rule by Monopoly and Ologopoly is as bad as socialim and communism, all 4 systems put all the power in the hands a a few people. Humans over time are incapable of doing the ethical thing when a great deal of power is given to so few.

---

Burdizzo said:

---

Kenneth_2003 said:

---

How much of that was top down from Deere and how much of it was kids that didn't want to take over the family tractor dealership when they moved off the city resulting in a sale and the only buyers are the mega-corps? I'm guessing is a healthy mix of both?

See similar happening as all of the car dealerships are giant mega-corps rather than the family owned arrangement.

---

I think a lot of it came down from Deere. My brother is a farm equipment dealer, not Deere. His suppliers/manufacturers started increasing their minimum sales volumes in order for him to maintain his agreements. He was a small dealer in a shrinking market (Caldwell County), and so his line dropped him. He said when all was said and done, it was actually a relief to get out from under them.

He still reps some small lines and does a lot horse trading with used equipment. Tires, batteries, and hydraulic hoses help keep the lights on, but the ag stuff is fading quickly. Not many farmers left. He is in his 60s now, and will probably cash out and sell the lot with highway frontage. His sons don't want to run what is left of it.

---