Ventria Case Flashcards
Japanese Rice Retailers: ally, neutral, or adversary?
Adversary. Will stop buying rice if Ventria is allowed to produce in CA, tainting non-GM rice with GM rice. Result: $500 MILLION loss to CA farmers.
Traditional Rice CA: ally, neutral, or adversary?
Adversary. Doesn’t want Ventria to take their land or revenue. Protecting market share.
Coalition of Activists: ally, neutral, or adversary?
Adversary. Includes foodies, greenies, healthies, etc. Span reaches from a state to a global level because the coalition includes “Friends of the Earth.”
Federal Government: ally, neutral, or adversary?
Neutral. Includes EPA, FDA, USDA. Will wait on State government to take a side before stepping into the issue.
State Government: ally, neutral, or adversary?
BOTH. TRICK QUESTION. The CA secretary of agriculture is an adversary, but the CRC (California Rice Commission) advised the Secretary of Ag to accept Ventria. Vote: 6 yes, 5 no.
Potential Buyers (of GM rice): ally, neutral, or adversary?
Ally. Includes the military, Red Cross, WHO/Unicef, pharmaceutical companies.
Biotech companies: ally, neutral, or adversary?
Ally. If Ventria is approved, other biotech companies can cite it as a precedent case as they forge ahead with their own GM products.
UC Davis: ally, neutral, or adversary?
Ally. Founders of Ventria and all research originated there.
Investors/employees: allies, neutral, or adversaries?
Allies. All have a lot invested in the success of Ventria.
What is CRC (besides Caroline’s initials)?
California Rice Commission. Advises the CA Secretary of Agriculture. Comprised of millers, farmers, others who have interest/stake in the rice industry.
What type of political issue is represented in this case?
Interest Group
Which adversary is the biggest threat?
Japanese Rice Retailers. Can negatively affect the US rice industry by $500 million. HUGE deal because the US is the #2 rice exporter… only representing 2% of total rice production, but commanding 14% global rice exports.
Which ally is the greatest benefit?
Fellow biotech companies. Their future success relies on the precedence set by Ventria.
What are Ventria’s three options to proceed with production?
FIGHT for CA, COMPROMISE for CA, RUN from CA.
Describe Ventria’s option to FIGHT for CA.
Pro: they already have SO much invested in production in CA, it would be a waste to leave. There must be ways to evade the legal obstacles. Con: Ventria simply doesn’t have the relative strength to pursue CA. Summary: not a viable option.
Describe Ventria’s option to COMPROMISE for CA.
Pro: willing to move to southern CA, invest in trucks with special covers to ensure thorough containment, invest in nets to cover rice fields, invest in perfectly isolated facilities. Con: already expressed this willingness and it didn’t change the ruling by the Sec. of Agri. Summary: not a viable option because “cost prohibitive.”
Describe Ventria’s option to RUN from CA.
Pro: there are options that fit all aspects of the “ideal state.” Non-rice state w/ rice climate, pro GMO, low regulations, open agricultural regulations, open land, low transportation cost, government subsidies, fresh investors. Con: have to start over from scratch with facilities and relocation of team. Summary: MOST viable option (and eventually the path Ventria chose) because they already expressed the cost was no issue.
Case Update
2004: moved to partner with NW Missouri State. Anheuser-Busch blocked by saying they wouldn’t buy MO rice if Ventria produced. That slapped the sense into the state gov and they threatened to revoke all gov funding to NWMSU if the univ continued to support Ventria. NWMSU told Ventria to gtfo.
2006: Ventria moved to Kansas. Chorus of Hallelujahs PERFECT! Non-rice state, Geary County offered a 3200 acre site, city paid for most startup costs, USDA granted APHIS permits in 2007, and the first major crop was harvested.
2008+: Ventria has been profitable ever since.
