GIANTS Software - Forum

Well, after seeing the discussions going on now for a while I think it is time to do the math and show what some people are missing in their calculations. I'll make up an example which is rather easy to calculate but I will also show how you can check it for yourself or even proof me wrong.

Anyway, for this we will not include helper costs, fuel or repairs (and definitly not repainting ) and we will use our own equipment.

lets start:
Our farmer is broke, only has 1820 bucks on his account but has a tractor and a fertiliser spreader and there are contracts available. So he buys 1000l of fertilizer for 1820 bucks. Then he does the first contract and gets paid 500 bucks.
And now some people are making the point that we lost money and it is not worth it. I say we made 136 dollars of profit. Why?
Well, we only used 200 l of fertiliser, so we still have 800 l left. And when we calculate it we find out that 200 l only cost 364 dollar. (20 % of 1820, or 1,82 per liter)
let's do another contract, same conditions, so we get 500 dollar out of it, used again 200 l and have a profit of 136 dollars and 600 l still available.
After the fourth contract we would finally see an obvious profit because now our bank account shows 2000 dollar and we startet with just 1820, and we still have 200 l left.
=> one contract more and we are at 2500 dollar, zero fertiliser and made 680 dollar profit.

So the key to understanding the topic is basically to factor in that you are having some left over fertiliser which you can use for the next contract or on your own fields. it works the same for herbizide and seeds. Liquid fertilizer is less effective since you need more of it.


How to prove it:
There is the mod "Additional Field Info" on the Modhub. With this mod you see an additional tab in the ESC menu, showing you how much fertilizer/lime/herbizide etc. you need for all the fields on the map. So now you check the contracts, look for a fertilisation contract and run the math. How much does it pay, which field is it and then you check how much fertiliser you would need and then you can calculate your expenses.
And now you should (hopefully) see your profit.

I hope this helps a bit in clearing it up, feel free to challenge the numbers and make the calculation yourself.

have a nice day

Lots of credit to the forum members like you that calculate and crunch all of these numbers down. More time and patience than I have. Thank you!

Maths.

I'd say fertilization contracts are one of the best and safest incomes as it's typically a quick job.. Also worth it if you lease the gear, in which case fuel/maintenance usually isn't something you need to buy anyhow, so it's zero risk.

If you use your own gear, and you use way more expensive gear than needed, and don't repair very often, then you will get unnecessarily high repair costs though, which at some point might steal the profits.

BoxTunnel wrote: ↑Sun Jun 26, 2022 5:55 pmMaths.

I think it’s a British thing, that bothers me too.

I actually did these calculations myself and compared them to the amount of profit you make if you borrow the equipment. Being reimbursed for borrowed equipment gives the illusion of higher profits, but in the case of small jobs as the OP demonstrates I've found you can actually lose money on the job. If you have to borrow equipment for fertilization or spraying jobs, take the larger jobs.

jeremyj621 wrote: ↑Sun Jun 26, 2022 10:10 pm I actually did these calculations myself and compared them to the amount of profit you make if you borrow the equipment. Being reimbursed for borrowed equipment gives the illusion of higher profits, but in the case of small jobs as the OP demonstrates I've found you can actually lose money on the job. If you have to borrow equipment for fertilization or spraying jobs, take the larger jobs.

Perhaps given the number of different people and their various explanations across multiple threads, it is time to consider that the way you are performing the contract is what causes you to lose money rather than the contract itself.

Steel_Horse wrote: ↑Mon Jun 27, 2022 3:03 am

jeremyj621 wrote: ↑Sun Jun 26, 2022 10:10 pm I actually did these calculations myself and compared them to the amount of profit you make if you borrow the equipment. Being reimbursed for borrowed equipment gives the illusion of higher profits, but in the case of small jobs as the OP demonstrates I've found you can actually lose money on the job. If you have to borrow equipment for fertilization or spraying jobs, take the larger jobs.

Perhaps given the number of different people and their various explanations across multiple threads, it is time to consider that the way you are performing the contract is what causes you to lose money rather than the contract itself.

Not really. I tested small fertilization jobs on the Elm Creek map using borrowed equipment vs. owned equipment. When borrowing for a job, you need to buy a minimum of 1 bag of fertilizer ($1,920). Somehow the calculations for reimbursement for small jobs is off, because I found I often lose money when borrowing as opposed to using owned equipment. On one such job, I lost $295 even after reimbursement.

With PF enabled you have to be careful with the amount of fertilizer you put on the field.
Basegame usage per hectare for one fertilizing level is around 200-220 liters. But with PF, usage for 100kg/hectare is about 370 liters. Depending on crop and nitrogen level, you might be applying way more using automatic rate.

The fertiliser contracts are definitely some of the best ones to do.

If I have to borrow equipment, I usually wait until there are 3 of the same type of contract, then only borrow the equipment with the lowest borrow cost. That way, you can do 3 contracts, but only pay one "hire" rate.
For the fertiliser contracts, if you borrow equipment, you can always unload the extra fertiliser before returning the equipment. Thats what I do, then its there for the next contract or to use on your own fields.

They’re definitely profitable. Ferrilizer costs usually eat up about 35-50% of profits from my experience but still good money for how quick they are. Only way you lose money is if you overlap too much and waste it.

Rasping rabbit wrote: ↑Sun Jun 26, 2022 8:19 pm

BoxTunnel wrote: ↑Sun Jun 26, 2022 5:55 pmMaths.

I think it’s a British thing, that bothers me too.

I'm Dutch and it bothers me too.

JD410 wrote: ↑Fri Jul 01, 2022 2:52 am They’re definitely profitable. Ferrilizer costs usually eat up about 35-50% of profits from my experience but still good money for how quick they are. Only way you lose money is if you overlap too much and waste it.

This highly depends on which spreader you use. The difference in spreadrate between a standard Bretal and the WM XL for instance are astronomical.

If you are a finisher completer you have to fight the urge to keep spreading on the field after the contract reaches 100%, don't waste product on parts of the field that are not covered no mater how much it makes your brain itch