"As far as the added value and cost benefit , I think you are arguing over peanuts. I could take almost any data set for or against the use of conventional chemistry and make it look right. It's all a matter of perceived value. You don't see much if any value in glyphosate and that's fine. There are in fact issues with weed resistance and in this case I would rather be at the tip of the sword in preventing them rather than contributing to them. I think ISU has hit the nail on the head with a pre for his soybean rotation and changing up his chemistry rotation. Great idea, IMO. One pass systems if they are done right can work well, with round up for a " rescue"."

Do you farm----didn't think so.  So I should just not say anything about the $20/ A tech fee and just pay Monsanto?  The benefit for RR diminishes as you add chemistries and costs to limit resistance.  Is Monsanto willing to concede this and reduce the RR trait cost?