+67% Sales: Why Ukraine Became BEDNAR’s No.1 Market
Photo by: Latifundist.com
In recent years, Czech agricultural machinery manufacturer BEDNAR has firmly established itself among the largest equipment importers to Ukraine. This market has become the company’s main one, while before the full-scale war, the competition for the No.1 spot was with russia.
Today, the company’s top managers are increasingly seen in Ukraine. We caught the moment and spoke with Jan Bednar, Business Director of the corporation, and Mykhailo Kryshko, Director of BEDNAR FMT in Ukraine.
To Sell More — You Have to Pre-Order More
Latifundist.com: Mr. Jan, in 2024 Ukraine became the key market in BEDNAR’s structure. Has it kept this position this season?
Jan Bednar: We calculate by marketing years, from November 1 to October 31. So the 2024/25 season is almost over — we are taking the last orders of the season. At the moment, we already have over €25 million worth of orders, which is a 67% increase compared to the 2023/24 season.
Latifundist.com: Which other countries are in the top three?
Jan Bednar: Poland, Romania, and France. In Poland, about €8 million; in Romania, around €6 million.
Latifundist.com: Why are sales higher in Ukraine? Was it deferred demand?
Jan Bednar: Because we have a good team and good products (laughs — ed.). The point is, we develop products specifically for the Ukrainian market, tailored to countries with large fields. In France, for example, they prefer small three-meter implements. In Ukraine, the focus is on large, wide units — up to 18 meters.
Changes in demand are more about Europe. There, in 2022, agricultural machinery sales skyrocketed due to expensive grain, but now, for the second year in a row, demand is weak.
Latifundist.com: Meanwhile, in Ukraine, the situation is the opposite?
Mykhailo Kryshko: That also played a role, but it’s a complex matter. On one hand, our marketing strategy worked — we strengthened brand awareness and so on. But more importantly, we planned this season more optimistically. We ordered a large number of implements, because today you sell the machines you ordered into production six months ago.
Had we moved inertially this season and worked only on orders from specific clients, we wouldn’t have sold even half of what we already had. We entered the season with a plan to sell €25 million (+67%) and built our strategy around achieving this goal. If we had relied only on deferred demand, we would have gotten +€2 million, not +€10 million compared to the previous season.
I talk with colleagues from other manufacturing companies. Many of them set sales growth plans at around 20% for this season, so our +67% is really outstanding.
Latifundist.com: Before the full-scale invasion, BEDNAR was hardly noticeable compared to other brands. Now it appears among the first in the associative row. Did this happen because other manufacturers cut their marketing budgets after the invasion?
Mykhailo Kryshko: We also reduced our budget in 2022 compared to what it could have been. But some of our competitors practically zeroed out marketing spending, disappeared from the media. We, even with a smaller budget, tried to keep promoting ourselves and stayed as active as possible. We simply negotiated compromises and kept working. A year later, the situation stabilized somewhat.
I deliberately chose the tactic of boosting BEDNAR’s brand awareness in Ukraine, because before 2022 it was very low. The easiest time to do this was precisely in the 2022–23 seasons, when the overall market was less active. Awareness is very important — how can you sell to someone who knows nothing about you?
Fertilizer Application with a Hopper — A Modern Technical Revolution
Latifundist.com: Are you still number one in Ukraine in tillage equipment?
Jan Bednar: Yes, but we don’t count plows here. Including plows, we are in first place for the first six months. But traditionally I don’t count them, because it’s a large, independent segment in which we are barely represented. In the second half of the year, plows will show significant figures, and then we’ll see whether we remain first even without them.
Latifundist.com: In the fertilizer application segment, have you managed to grow your market share?
Mykhailo Kryshko: For compactors, during the first six months we had 75%; by the end of the season we expect to sell 200 units. That will be an absolute record since Ukraine’s independence. Subsoilers also had record sales this year. Combined systems — again, record sales.
Last year we had good sales in fertilizer application. We don’t produce spreaders, only hoppers. We were surprised when we ranked second in fertilizer application machinery after Amazone. But last year we were second with 20 units, while in 2025 we have already sold 40. So I expect us to be number one by year-end.
In a sense, this is a technological revolution. For many years we’ve promoted the idea that applying fertilizer directly into the soil means 20–30% savings and efficiency, because you do everything in a single pass. Before, we imported one hopper a year just for demonstration. Now we see the results: some holdings have already ordered as many as 12 units.
Latifundist.com: Are you talking about TAS Agro?
Jan Bednar: TAS is producing grain this year, not buying equipment. Last year they purchased a lot, and now they are working on returns. As far as I understand from conversations with them, this year they need to recoup previous investments, and then they will discuss new ones. First it has to pay back, and then they’ll place more orders.
If we count all machinery, this year Kernel bought about 28 units from us, Astarta — 18, Elita Reshetylivka group — 18, VITAGRO — more than 10, Ukrlandfarming purchased 17 compactors, Agroprosperis — more than 10 different implements, and many others. Right now, about 30% of our sales go to holdings, in batches.
Mykhailo Kryshko: As for seeders, we are already close to the market leaders. Our goal is to compete for top positions. Our current range allows us to meet practically all technological needs of Ukrainian farmers. We have grain seeding complexes for conventional, minimum, strip-till, and no-till technologies, with working widths from 3 to 12 meters.
Latifundist.com: Which segments are you satisfied with, and which not?
Jan Bednar: Overall, in seeders and tillage we are doing quite well this year. We want to further grow in the heavy harrow segment, combined disc–chisel cultivators, and crushing rollers.
Latifundist.com: Mykhailo, three years ago you predicted the “death” of the plow. Have we reached that point?
Mykhailo Kryshko: Well, it’s dying, there are plenty of examples. More and more often our Terraland Profi subsoilers are purchased instead of traditional plows. This is a certain technological revolution.
Latifundist.com: And in the Czech Republic, is the plow already a rarity?
Jan Bednar: In the Czech Republic, Denmark, and many other EU countries, the plow is a dying tool — inefficient, uneconomical, and controversial from an environmental standpoint. There, farmers are massively switching to subsoilers, ideally combining them with fertilizer application from hoppers at the same time as deep loosening.
Ordering Parts from Contractors — The Key to Fast Modernizations
Latifundist.com: Since March 2024, Ukraine has reinstated the program of 25% reimbursement for the cost of domestically produced agricultural machinery. Does this “make you nervous” as an importer of Czech machinery?
Mykhailo Kryshko: I used to work in a Ukrainian dealership that sold, among other things, domestic machinery and equipment. I still believe the state has many constructive directions and support programs where this money could be spent more effectively.
When the program was created in 2017, the idea was to stimulate domestic machinery production: compensate part of farmers’ expenses, thereby encouraging Ukrainian manufacturers to develop new technologies and improve quality. In short — to increase competitiveness.
In practice, and I know this from the inside, almost none of the local producers actually launched a technical revolution thanks to this program. They didn’t start creating new equipment or technologies. Ukrainian manufacturers simply continued competing in their usual segments, but with lower prices due to compensation. As a result, the program never produced products capable of competing effectively with imports. No technological breakthrough happened — the range and quality did not change.
Latifundist.com: So basically all Ukrainian machinery just became 25% cheaper, but the market itself didn’t change?
Mykhailo Kryshko: It’s not that simple. The program has its budget. For 2025 it’s UAH 1 billion, the same as in pre-war 2021, although the hryvnia was stronger back then. When you buy equipment, there’s a big chance the budget will run out, and you won’t get any reimbursement. You buy the machine, collect documents, and then start running from office to office to claim your 25%. Practice shows they can return the money very slowly — or never at all.
I see that most of our farmers treat this compensation as a bonus: if they get it — great, if not — they weren’t really counting on it. In my opinion, the program is poorly designed, and its goals aren’t achieved. The government could come up with something more effective to spend this money on — not necessarily in machine-building. For example, fund cancer treatment or support birth rates, since Ukraine is in a deep demographic crisis.
Here’s an example: Jan couldn’t believe that in Ukraine parents receive just €20 per month per child. He first assumed that was the amount for a single day, not for the whole month.
Latifundist.com: Recently I watched a panel discussion with your colleagues, heads of machinery companies. The talk ended with the “eternal” topic: today agricultural machinery is designed by marketers, not engineers, and every five years its service life keeps shrinking.
Mykhailo Kryshko: Yes, probably an endless topic for debate. But in our company, marketers don’t create machines. Sometimes it happens that a machine has already gone into production and is available for orders, but marketers haven’t even finished the brochure yet. This just shows how it works with us: marketers don’t design or influence what the company develops.
Look, our Business Director Jan Bednar travels a lot and talks to farmers worldwide. He listens to their technological needs, takes notes on what should be created or changed, and then drives the development of new implements. For example, we just discussed with TAS Agro that they need an implement for vertical tillage. So we look at the real market demand, not at marketers’ hypotheses.
Latifundist.com: Over time, is the market moving toward shorter warranty periods for agricultural machinery?
Jan Bednar: Our machinery is designed to be as simple as possible, with minimal adjustments and easy maintenance — for example, fewer lubrication points.
As for warranty: last year Ukraine became the first market where Bednar launched a two-year warranty.
Latifundist.com: When you design the first model of a machine, you set, let’s say, a triple strength margin. Later you see you can make it lighter, reduce weight and metal consumption. Do you have to reconfigure production, or postpone updates because reconfiguration means extra costs?
Jan Bednar: Our business model is based on outsourcing most metal parts to specialized companies instead of producing them ourselves. That’s why design changes are introduced continuously. If we need to add a bracket or an eyelet, it’s enough to change the drawing and send it to the contractor. The next day the part is already modernized.
That’s why we don’t invest in our own metalworking machines or foundries. We can’t compete with powerful metalworking enterprises anyway, and for a small plant, retooling production could take a year — while for a large contractor, it takes a single day.
Latifundist.com: Which is more reasonable for production: cheap mass steel or expensive high-strength steel?
Jan Bednar: We try to offer both options. Some models are marked with the letter “L” for “Light.” These use more expensive structural steel, but the lighter machine can be pulled by any tractor, consumes less fuel, and works at higher speeds.
Take our bestseller, the Swifter seedbed compactor. Every year we add new options to its design. This year we started selling the second generation alongside the standard version. The second generation is more expensive but has major design changes to work in difficult conditions. Demanding customers are willing to buy the second generation to achieve perfect results in a single pass. That’s why both concepts should exist — there’s a buyer for each.
Kostiantyn Tkachenko, Oleksii Kozachenko, Latifundist.com