I worked for FNA for 2 years starting in 2000. Back then we did not have a lot to offer. I was in sales and I told people straight out that if they were going to purchase a membership it needed to be based on principle, not on how much money they were going to save. Thankfully there were enough people that did. IN THEORY this organization makes absolute perfect sense. The whole idea is to organize farmers from a business perspective (not political) in order to create competiton amongst input suppliers, at the manufacturers level (not the local dealer level). In practice, when I left it was starting to come through on some of its ideas and programs to save farmers substantial amounts of money. My boss (who is no longer with the organization) was not as honest and upfront with me as I trusted him to be and thus there is a bit of a sour taste in my mouth. In my opinion, if you are a grain farmer then a FNA membership is well worth the money. If you are a rancher I don't know how much they can save you simply because the main input for ranchers is feed. We as ranchers do not use nearly as much chemical, and fertilizer as farmers do. Those are the big inputs. We were members for a few years and definately saved our membership fees in those years. One year we got a dewormer under the OUI program that in our opinion worked just as well as ivomec at a substantially reduced price. The next year Ivomec was a lot cheaper. Go figure :wink: I don't know what the membership costs these days as I have not kept in touch with the organization, and I don't know how many inputs for ranchers that are available through FNA. Thus whether or not it would be worth it finacially is somthing that I can't comment on. But you can always join based strictly on principle if you want to.