Lost another AGCO dealership...

Sorry to say this , but that's Agco,s plan to delete the guys not in top farming , corn and beans farming , and they want to cater to the BIG TIME OPERATORS,, 

I thought Livingston was a pretty big dealer with several stores.  They advertise in the Rocky Mtn. Fastline mag. 
Just saw something online about Kubota having a big dealer meeting in Texas last week.  They claim to have 1,100 dealers in the US and Canada.  Seems like that may be more then even JD.  Plus they now have up to 170 HP tractors, bought into Great Plains, and have a haying line.  With their construction machines, they have most everything a farmer would want except articulated tractors, so far, at least.

A friend of mine just had his Kubota dealership terminated here in Michigan after more than 30 years. They want all big dealerships like JD and the rest of them. I have had several Kubotas over the years and liked them. Turned into an ugly situation, sounds like a few of the other Michigan small dealerships are worried about getting the ax too. My buddy is now Yanmar, as will be my next hydro type tractor. Thanks.

Bryan

Tcmtech wrote: Dan73 wrote: One of the neighbors bought a new kobota up around 100 hp. They have a dealership here in town. Saw it going by yesterday on the road it looked nice. Atleast it is the right color. I haven't looked at the modern ones but the old kobota tractors from the 70s look like they where built a little light to me. I like alot of heavy cast ion per hp. Then I know I have the mass to handle the load. A d15 or d17 is twice the tractor as those little kobota tractors with the same hp just put them or a scale and it will show you. Lol. Years ago they had a add which said buy a kobota we have the highest power to weight ratio. I was at a friends house when it came on. He just started laughing and said have they ever gone to a tractor plow day we all stack all the weight we can on them not make them lighter. It's a tractor not a race car. But if I had the money I would probably go there and look simply because there is a dealership here. Hunting for parts does get old. That's because Kubotas target market is not heavy field plowing work. Never has been  They target the utility tractor market where good power to weight ratios and high maneuverability are far more important to the operator than shear deadweight mass.  When you're making hay or doing heavy mower work or doing common farm loader tractor work a lighter more nimble but higher HP tractor is nice to have and that's their target market.

Think that's another way of saying they are cheap built that won't stand up to normal farm use.

I just looked on Livingstons website and appears they still have 4 locations.  I am sure there was a business reason for closing one.  I know in the early 90s dad had 3 dealerships with new equipment, then 2 and in 2003 we went to 1.  As the market and farming changed it no longer made sense to have stores every 50 mile.  Each time we closed a store it allowed us to get better at the service we could provide, we could stock a larger selection of parts and have better trained techs. 

my local AGCO dealer is about 10 minutes away and there owned by a John Deere dealer.

Tcmtech I have a NH 565 baler with a holster accumulator don't know the model number off the top of my head. As to the hills there are some good ones. My d17 with pie weights will just climb some of the hills here without slipping pulling it. The same d17 wouldn't pull a full hay wagon up them behind this baler. The IH 574 I used this summer was a little more power then my d17 and had loaded tires it had no problems with the hills. My point is the kobota tractors I have seen them market as highest hp to weight ratio is a joke here I don't need more hp then my 55 hp d17 has to bale my hay but it needs every bit of mass it has to pull it up the hill so the baler and accumulator or wagon doesn't just pull it back down or spin it out. Yes I understand target marketing. I think the question is does kobota understand it? This hilly country needs good traction to pull the load up the hill not light weight tractors but they played adds here marketing how light their tractors are. In flat land yes it could be better then a heavy tractor not as much ground compaction.   But not here. That is why it was funny they didn't know how to target their adds to the area where they played them.

Edited by Dan73 - 28 Oct 2016 at 11:36am

Dan73 wrote: Tcmtech I have a NH 565 baler with a holster accumulator don't know the model number off the top of my head. As to the hills there are some good ones. My d17 with pie weights will just climb some of the hills here without slipping pulling it. The same d17 wouldn't pull a full hay wagon up them behind this baler. The IH 574 I used this summer was a little more power then my d17 and had loaded tires it had no problems with the hills. My point is the kobota tractors I have seen them market as highest hp to weight ratio is a joke here I don't need more hp then my 55 hp d17 has to bale my hay but it needs every bit of mass it has to pull it up the hill so the baler and accumulator or wagon doesn't just pull it back down or spin it out. Yes I understand target marketing. I think the question is does kobota understand it? This hilly country needs good traction to pull the load up the hill not light weight tractors but they played adds here marketing how light their tractors are. In flat land yes it could be better then a heavy tractor not as much ground compaction.   But not here. That is why it was funny they didn't know how to target their adds to the area where they played them.

What?   


A Kubota MZ605 has 59.2 engine HP and has a shipping weight of 5313 pounds


A D17 has 63 engine hp and has a shipping weight of 4674 pounds.

Well these are the kobota tractors I see around here all the time in fact this one looks big.http://nh.craigslist.org/hvo/5815550728.html?lang=en&cc=gb
Those subcompact tractors might be 40hp but a d15 will mop the floor with them when it comes to pulling and controlling a load. As I said my neighbor just bought something up around 100 hp which looks nice. But to me bragging about power to weight with these subcompact tractors is funny to me.

Part of the problem with tractor HP and gross weight is how the operator uses each.  

That was kind of my point for what we do here that 40 hp tractor isn't very useful but the old 40 hp tractor was. Bragging about the hp in the subcompact made me laugh.      so like you said I end up with the 92 hp to do the job my d17 is now. Just funny how it works out. But you don't see much but the subcompact tractors and the construction equipment here everything else I think is probably shipped in per order. Most of the farms are gone here and what is left is smaller places making small square bales for horses. Some other stuff but not the way it was 30 years ago. Alot more trees and houses now.

I guess it is a case of growing up where we had different brands and we judged them all in hp. Tractors of the 50s 60s 70s and 80s it was sort of a safe bet to say if a tractor was x hp it would handle about the same equipment maybe one was a little easier or faster but about the same. Now a new one doesn't seem to fit that scale.

Edited by Dan73 - 28 Oct 2016 at 4:57pm

Maybe shameless can setup some testing grounds....

Dave you hit the nail on the head though because those tests gave you engine pto and drawbar ratings

Edited by Dan73 - 28 Oct 2016 at 5:27pm

Dan73 wrote: That was kind of my point for what we do here that 40 hp tractor isn't very useful but the old 40 hp tractor was. Bragging about the hp in the subcompact made me laugh.      so like you said I end up with the 92 hp to do the job my d17 is now. Just funny how it works out. But you don't see much but the subcompact tractors and the construction equipment here everything else I think is probably shipped in per order. Most of the farms are gone here and what is left is smaller places making small square bales for horses. Some other stuff but not the way it was 30 years ago. Alot more trees and houses now. I guess it is a case of growing up where we had different brands and we judged them all in hp. Tractors of the 50s 60s 70s and 80s it was sort of a safe bet to say if a tractor was x hp it would handle about the same equipment maybe one was a little easier or faster but about the same. Now a new one doesn't seem to fit that scale.

Livingston in Altus, ok. also closed, my grandson worked for them, he had started a new job the day before the store closed.
Dave

Brian you are right that they sure don't give you the sense that some tractors won't hold up to different jobs. The pay loader example is extra funny to me. My grandfather bought a Same Tiger 105 back in the 80s because the dealer told him it was perfect for the farmer with a bunker silo. It could be used in place of a bulldozer in the silo and if the field tractor running the chopper broke down it was a full backup there as well. They convinced him he would be a fool to buy a pay loader that would be able to run the chopper. So we had a 4wd tractor to do the work of a pay loader and the sad part was it was also a crap tractor. But for the cost of the 75hp IH or Case he got a 105 hp Same.
Yup sure would have been nice if the dealership told him the loader frame would probably break in a few years with all that pushing or that the standard transmission wasn't designed to be shifted every few minutes.   But they are sales guys whatever they have to sell si clearly what you need.