English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Investing in farmland is fraught with conflicting signals. While investing in land may generally be profitable it is seldom, if ever, feasible on a cash f low basis. The non-depreciable nature of land and longterm capital gains are incompatible with the capital recovery terms sought by investors and lenders. The literature on this subject tends to focus on either the returns (profitability) or the cash flow (feasibility) but not on both simultaneously. Too frequently rural professionals use the terms profitability and cashflow (liquidity) interchangeably. This paper presents a range of profitability measures and distinguishes between them and commonly used liquidity measures. The profitability measures include activity based costing which involves full economic costing and the entrepreneur's profit/loss is the difference between cost of production and market price. It is concluded that a number of measures are relevant to farm businesses but these should not be used in isolation. The critical importance of liquidity measures is reinforced but their use as profitability measures is criticised. Keywords: business success, farming business, liquidity, profitability, pr operty business

Measures of farm business success: liquidity versus profitability