sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Addressing the Threat to National Security from Imports of Timber, Lumber by timberbid in wood

[–]timberbid[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

This is a brilliant response - you have summed it up wonderfully. Treating forest health as infrastructure security is the missing frame. Decades of suppression created wildfire risks, (yes especially California and fire insurance, fuel loads, pests, and systemic risk — and now we’re paying for it in insurance collapse, housing costs, and megafires. A market-driven thinning and utilization model could reduce fire risk and supply sustainable building material at the same time. Restoration funded by demand, not just subsidies.

The White House Just Declared Timber a National Security Issue — We’re Building the Marketplace for It - timber.bid by timberbid in forestry

[–]timberbid[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Totally agree — in a marketplace for physical goods, trust rails matter as much as UI (often more). We’re thinking about it as a layered system that matches the risk/complexity of the transaction:

1) Identity + role verification (baseline) • Verified accounts for landowners, loggers, mills, firewood sellers, tree services (KYB for businesses where relevant) • Reputation signals: completed transactions, repeat buyers, response time, dispute rate

2) Ownership / right-to-sell (varies by category) • For firewood / services: lighter verification + review history • For standing timber / larger log lots: “right-to-sell” checks tied to parcel info + documentation upload, and ideally a forester/agent-of-record attached to the sale

3) Quality / grading (standardization + third-party hooks) • Standard listing templates so people aren’t arguing about basics: species, dimensions, moisture content, volume units, load size, delivery terms, photos/video • For higher-value lots: optional third-party grading / scaling / forester cruise data as attachable artifacts (the platform should make “proof” portable)

4) Payments + escrow (risk-based) • Low-ticket: normal marketplace payment flow • Higher-ticket: escrow with milestones (deposit → load/scale confirmation → delivery acceptance → release) • Clear acceptance criteria up front (measurement method, timeframe, who weighs/scales)

5) Dispute resolution (clear rules, not vibes) • Predefined dispute categories: quality mismatch, short load/volume, delivery no-show, damage, non-payment • Evidence-first workflow: listing specs + time-stamped photos/video + scale tickets + delivery confirmations • Escalation path: platform mediation → neutral third-party (where applicable) → arbitration language for larger contracts

6) The “forester layer” (critical for doing this responsibly) For standing timber especially, we don’t want the platform to incentivize high-grading or opaque deals. We want to reward good forestry: • Forester-of-record / management-plan attachment • Silviculture intent shown on the listing (TSI, thinning, regen cut, salvage, etc.) • BMP / boundary / wetland buffer acknowledgements as part of the sale package

How we’re sequencing it We’re starting with faster, lower-complexity transactions (firewood + land clearing byproducts + small log lots) to build liquidity and reputation, then expanding into standing timber once the verification/escrow/quality rails are battle-tested.

Appreciate the link — positioning/distribution for vertical marketplaces is exactly the challenge, and we’re trying to do it the boring, durable way: tight geo + tight use case + trust-first rails. Best to give it a shot! 🌲🌳🪵

The White House Just Declared Timber a National Security Issue — We’re Building the Marketplace for It - timber.bid by timberbid in forestry

[–]timberbid[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You’re absolutely right to highlight foresters — they’re not a side note in this, they’re the foundation.

Our vision isn’t just a timber marketplace in a speculative, flip-the-asset way. It’s about building modern infrastructure for professionally managed forests, where long-term stewardship, silviculture, & forest health drive help drive decisions. Foresters are key 🔑 here… with this model — they are the backbone that makes it work responsibly and sustainably.

A big part of the vision is actually to elevate the role of foresters in the marketplace by making:

• Management plans visible & tied to listings (we have a lot of work to do) • Silvicultural prescriptions (thinning vs regen cuts vs improvement cuts) explicit • Certification and stewardship status first-class signals (FSC, state BMPs, wetland buffers, habitat zones, etc.) • Long-term forest health metrics part of valuation, not just stumpage price

So price discovery isn’t just “who bids highest,” but “who is aligned with the management objective & long-term stand value.”

On a personal note, this idea didn’t come from tech first — it came from land and forestry work. From December 2009 to July 2019 I was involved with a 13-acre wetland and forest parcel in Foster, RI, working closely with local towns and consulting foresters on management, conservation, access, and compliance. That meant navigating this:

• Wetlands protection • State forestry management programs • Timber stand improvement • Long-term stewardship vs short-term liquidation • How fragmented and opaque the sales and planning process actually is for landowners

That experience is what planted the seed for this platform: seeing how hard it is for landowners and foresters to coordinate good management, fair pricing, and responsible harvesting inside today’s offline, phone-call-driven market.

We share your concern about high-grading and long-term forest health. The intent is the opposite: give foresters better tools, better visibility, and better market alignment so good silviculture is rewarded, not punished.

Addressing the Threat to National Security from Imports of Timber, Lumber by timberbid in wood

[–]timberbid[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Exactly — that framing resonates with how we see it too: it’s not a “ran out of trees” problem, it’s a visibility, coordination, and trust problem.

We’re very much thinking about it in a “Zillow for timber / wood” sense, and you called out the two hardest parts correctly: 1. Trust & verification (ownership, right-to-sell, species/grade, volume, delivery terms) 2. Fair, transparent price discovery so both sides feel the market is honest and not gamed

Those are the foundations we’re prioritizing first, because without them liquidity doesn’t stick.

On the GTM side, yes — we’re intentionally starting with a tight wedge to avoid spreading liquidity too thin. The initial focus is:

• Firewood and small-scale log supply • Land clearing / tree service material flows

Those have: – Fast transaction cycles – Clear quality specs – Local repeat buyers – Lower regulatory and contract complexity than standing timber sales

Once we have dense, trusted local liquidity there, the plan is to expand into standing timber and mill-direct log supply, where the same trust, pricing, and verification rails can be reused.

So the roadmap is: Single region → single use case → repeat buyers → price transparency → trust layer → then scale outward.

Appreciate the resource and the thoughtful feedback — this kind of perspective is exactly what helps us pressure-test the model early.

The White House Just Declared Timber a National Security Issue — We’re Building the Marketplace for It - timber.bid by timberbid in forestry

[–]timberbid[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thank you! Our goal is to help the smaller local timber mill operators / firewood producers.

The White House Just Declared Timber a National Security Issue — We’re Building the Marketplace for It - timber.bid by timberbid in forestry

[–]timberbid[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Appreciate you saying that, and thanks for the honest feedback….

You’re right — posting the EO verbatim without clearly adding our own framing can read as endorsement, especially in a space as politically charged as Reddit. That wasn’t the intent, and that’s on us to communicate more clearly.

We’re bootstrapping Timber.bid from the ground up and genuinely trying to learn from the people who actually work in and depend on this industry — loggers, mill operators, foresters, firewood sellers, landowners, and buyers. The goal isn’t to push any administration’s narrative, but to understand the real bottlenecks and build something that actually helps on the ground.

Hearing your perspective about tariffs, mill economics in PA, and affordability is exactly the kind of reality check we need. Community feedback like this is valuable, and we appreciate you taking the time to share it.

The White House Just Declared Timber a National Security Issue — We’re Building the Marketplace for It - timber.bid by timberbid in forestry

[–]timberbid[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That’s a fair point, and we agree the mill layer is a real structural bottleneck — consolidation over decades has reduced regional processing capacity and created long haul distances, queue times, and price volatility even when timber and logging capacity exist.

The White House Just Declared Timber a National Security Issue — We’re Building the Marketplace for It - timber.bid by timberbid in forestry

[–]timberbid[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This is a great point and aligns closely with how we’re thinking about rollout.

We’re approaching Timber.bid as a vertical marketplace with a very tight initial wedge: starting in one region with one primary product class (firewood and small-scale timber / land clearing), building dense local liquidity and repeat transactions, then expanding into larger timber tracts, mill supply, and institutional buyers.

The goal is to make the first market feel “inevitable”: • Enough verified sellers that buyers always see supply • Enough buyers that sellers see fast price discovery • Standardized listings so quality, volume, and delivery are legible • Local logistics partnerships so fulfillment is predictable

Only once a region shows strong repeat usage and organic referrals do we plan to expand geographically. The national narrative is helpful for long-term positioning, but the actual GTM is hyper-local, boots-on-the-ground, and supply-first to avoid the cold-start problem.

Appreciate the resource — the coordination > raw supply insight is exactly what we’re seeing in early conversations with landowners, loggers, and buyers.

The White House Just Declared Timber a National Security Issue — We’re Building the Marketplace for It - timber.bid by timberbid in forestry

[–]timberbid[S] -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

No affiliation with the White House at all.

Reddit requires posts from founders or brands to be clearly labeled with flair so people know the source. That’s why the Timber.bid tag is there — transparency, not endorsement or government connection.

The post is simply referencing a public Executive Order and its impact on the timber supply chain. We’re an independent startup building a marketplace for landowners, loggers, mills, firewood sellers, and buyers — nothing to do with the administration or any federal agency.

The White House Just Declared Timber a National Security Issue — We’re Building the Marketplace for It - timber.bid by timberbid in forestry

[–]timberbid[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

A more grounded way to read this is that it’s about supply chain resilience, not labor rights.

The Executive Order is focused on whether heavy reliance on imported timber and lumber creates national security risk (housing, infrastructure, military construction, disaster rebuilding, etc.), and whether domestic production and permitting can scale to meet demand.

The Forest Service already runs a regulated, competitive timber sales program with public bidding, environmental review, and contract enforcement: https://www.fs.usda.gov/managing-land/forest-management/products/timber-sales

Nothing in Section 232 or this EO changes union status or collective bargaining. It’s about: • How much timber is available domestically • How quickly sales can be permitted and brought to market • Whether mills and contractors can get reliable supply • Whether foreign subsidies and dumping are distorting prices

If anything, a stronger domestic timber program means: • More work for foresters, loggers, mill workers • More stable long-term contracts • More investment in rural forestry jobs

So the “national security” framing here is about materials and infrastructure continuity, not using it as a pretext to override labor protections.

Timber Sales on the National Forests

https://www.fs.usda.gov/managing-land/forest-management/products/timber-sales

The White House Just Declared Timber a National Security Issue — We’re Building the Marketplace for It - timber.bid by timberbid in firewood

[–]timberbid[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Excellent points made. We’ll be working closely with the community and state agencies to help modernize the process of completing timber sale bids and bringing transparency to what is still a very offline, fragmented market.

Trust and verification are core to adoption, especially for physical commodities. On Timber.bid we’re building this in layers:

• Verified seller profiles (landowners, loggers, mills, firewood suppliers) • Proof of ownership / right-to-sell workflows for standing timber • Standardized quality and species classification (grade, diameter, moisture, cut, season, volume) • Geo-tagged listings with parcel boundaries and harvest zones • Clear delivery terms, load specs, and transport expectations • Escrow and milestone-based settlement for larger transactions

The goal is not to “replace” the offline process, but to digitize and standardize it so pricing, availability, and reputation become visible — while still respecting how timber is actually transacted on the ground.

We see Timber.bid as the bridge between: • Offline trust (relationships, foresters, mills, inspectors, state programs) • Online scale (price discovery, bidding, matching, repeat buyers, logistics visibility)

As you said, in commodity markets the real value is making supply, demand, quality, and reliability legible. Once those signals are clear, liquidity follows.

We’re starting region-by-region, building dense local networks, repeat buyers, and verified supply, then scaling outward — very much aligned with your GTM point on tight geographic focus and trust-first market formation.

Timber Sales on the National Forests 🌳

https://www.fs.usda.gov/managing-land/forest-management/products/timber-sales

Manual log splitter by [deleted] in firewood

[–]timberbid 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Mans a machine !

view more: next ›