Is there a reason that some Asian or even European competitors can't just come in and offer the same kind of features and services without all the lock-in, actively taking market share by being the anti-monopolist?
Maybe I'm missing something, but I can't see the brand loyalty to Deere lasting too much longer, especially if some of the Asian competitors can make offerings without all the shackling.
It's not a monopoly. There are plenty of manufacturers in the market. However JD has significant, if not leading, market share in many markets along with being regarded as a premium brand, and has significant loyalty among a demographic where memories are long and loyalty counts.
They do make really really good machines, and their top-end gear is very highly regarded. All the above has allowed them to get away with some dubious practices. However farmers are also very cost conscious and there is growing dissatisfaction at the blatant lock-in.
Because it's a heavily entrenched industry that's not easily disrupted, where each brand has carved it's on territory by geography and there's this silent gentlemen's agreement of "you stay out of my market, I stay out of yours and we all win" since even if the other competitor would attempt to come in the other market, it would face an uphill and insanely expensive battle just to enter the market, as in order to capture any market share it would need to undercut its competitor on cost while offering superior quality, while spending insane money on the supply chains and world class service and tech network which guarantees the up-time of your machinery, thereby weakening the profit margins not just for themselves but potentially the whole market.
So why would you want to do something as risky and foolish as that when you got a good thing going?
> Because it's a heavily entrenched industry that's not easily disrupted, where each brand has carved it's on territory by geography and there's this silent gentlemen's agreement of "you stay out of my market, I stay out of yours and we all win
Do you know that this is the case or are you speculating? It seems like there's an intense amount of competition, especially with imported farming equipment. (I have no idea if John Deere sells overseas or if it's mostly a domestic brand.)
Some other manufacturers that seem to have big branding in the U.S. are New Holland (just found out they're owned by Fiat.. small world), Mahindra, and Kubota. Are those all part of this cartel that you're alleging exists?
He's full of it. I do have a background in farming.
Case, and Deere go head to head in almost every market. New Holland and a couple others also play in the same markets depending on what KIND of machine you're looking to run. Tillage tractors are pretty much fendt/challenger, NH, deere, case. When you get into combines/coppers other brands also play. For the consumer and/or smaller tractor market there's all sorts of options.
Why people go deere or case is simple. It's the supply chains. You have N days to get your crop in the ground, and Y days to get your crop harvested. Deere and case have the best(and most expensive) field techs and dealer support. "A machine is only as good as your dealer support" is the phase almost everyone uses when shopping for equipment. Anyone with a significant investment of tractors(non-hobby farmers) can have a case or deere tech replace or fix damn near anything in hours or days, on site.
Farm equipment gets passed down from the big operators to the small operators through its depreciating lifetime.
The big operators running new couldn't care less. They keep stuff for a year, two at the most, and off it goes to the next farm. New equipment is least likely to break and when it does it is the manufacturer's problem to fix it. Also, the first generation operators are quite likely to lease the equipment, so it is not even theirs to worry about.
The slightly smaller second generation owners are still likely under warrantee and the machines are new enough that they shouldn't be breaking down in any meaningful capacity. Especially when it comes to the electronics. While they might have a mechanic on staff, it's just as easy to contract that out to the dealer.
It's the third, fourth, fifth generation owners that are more concerned. They start to buy the equipment when it has some age on it, starting to wear out, is more likely to break and isn't under warrantee. They also are more likely to want to fix it themselves.
It's easy to say don't buy Deere, but if that's all the bigger operators bought when they were new, there won't be anything else on the used market. The other manufacturers haven't been able to carve out a market of machines that can serve those smaller farmers with new equipment.
It is all very theoretical at the moment, though. This is not a problem today. There are plenty of options on the used market, with no signs of that changing, and even if you do end up with a Deere fixing it yourself hasn't been a problem to this point. But there is worry from some that things will change in the future.
Case/New Holland/International Harvester were all American companies with roots going back to the mid-19th century, so they're seen as very "American" despite being owned by Fiat.
>Do you know that this is the case or are you speculating?
I don't work in farming but I worked for an European HW manufacturer that's top in Europe in that niche and the CEO back then told us we're not aggressively pursuing expansion outside of Europe since US, China, Japan, Korea have their own local champions in this market and it's not profitable to go to war with them on their own turf, so he told us about this silent gentlemen's agreement where everyone keeps to his own market so we can all profit as "the pie is big enough for everyone, if we start fighting over it then we'd all lose". I assume the same business concept applies here.
I'm not sure which brands are owned by Deere, but there are quite a few available in the US, depending on scale. I specifically think that LS is foreign, but don't remember for sure.
I imagine it's a smaller version of the American cars vs Japanese cars attitude that really peaked during the 70s and 80s. It's still around to this day where you meet people who are Chevy or Ford die-hards and hate all cars Japanese. Considering that trucks are often farming equipment and Chevy and Ford make trucks it would make sense people would have similar attitude about their dedicated farm equipment coming from John Deere vs Yamaha (a joke example since they make things from pianos to motorcycles.)
What's their incentive to do that when they could come in with a different lock-in now that it's been proven to be profitable to do so by JD?
> I can't see the brand loyalty to Deere lasting too much longer
Here's an anecdote: if I go into Fleet Farm or Tractor Supply (farm supply stores), I see John Deere toy tractors, in fact my son has one: they're very well built. I don't think I've ever seen any other brand of toy tractor. That alone says a lot.
Because after you spend $N billion catching up to Deere's manufacturing and expertise, they'll suddenly realize that yes, it's essential that farmers be able to control and repair their own equipment, and will use their massive war chest built on unethical practices to undercut you.
And when you're out of business, they'll go back to their old ways.
Maybe I'm missing something, but I can't see the brand loyalty to Deere lasting too much longer, especially if some of the Asian competitors can make offerings without all the shackling.