MASTER 
 NEGATIVE 
 
 NO. 95-82363 
 
COPYRIGHT STATEMENT 
 
 The copyright law of the United States (Title 17, United States Code) 
 governs the making of photocopies or other reproductions of copyrighted 
 materials including foreign works under certain conditions. In addition, 
 the United States extends protection to foreign works by means of 
 various international conventions, bilateral agreements, and 
 proclamations. 
 
 Under certain conditions specified in the law, libraries and archives are 
 authorized to furnish a photocopy or other reproduction. One of these 
 specified conditions is that the photocopy or reproduction is not to be 
 "used for any purpose other than private study, scholarship, or research." 
 If a user makes a request for, or later uses, a photocopy or reproduction 
 for purposes in excess of "fair use," that user may be liable for copyright 
 infringement. 
 
 The Columbia University Libraries reserve the right to refuse to accept a 
 copying order if, in its judgement, fulfillment of the order would involve 
 violation of the copyright law. 
 
Author: 
 
 New York (State). 
 
 Title: 
 
 Retail grocery stores 
 
 Place: 
 
 Albany 
 
 Date: 
 
 1922 
 
MASTER NEGATIVE « 
 
 COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES 
 PRESERVATION DIVISION 
 
 BIBLIOGRAPHIC MICROFORM TARGET 
 
 ORIGINAL MATERIAL AS FILMED - EXISTING BIBLIOGRAPHIC RECORD 
 
 tBusI 
 
 mmm 
 
 Ines5 
 N4d 
 
 ^ 
 
 Now York (State) Department of fa rms and mii'rkets. 
 
 Retail grocery stores i a study of certain pro- 
 blems of the retail grocer in New York City, in- 
 cluding the results of investigations conducted 
 during the war period by the New York federal food 
 board and the New York State food commission, .• 
 Albany, New York State department of farms and 
 markets, 1922 • 
 
 30 p. illus,, tables. 24S- cm. 
 
 
 
 RESTRICTIONS ON USE: 
 
 TECHNICAL MICROFORM DATA 
 
 FILM SIZE: ^htfY^m 
 
 REDUCTION RATIO: | »C^ 
 
 IMAGE PLACEMENT: lA (HA IB MB 
 
 DATE RLMED: ^^.-IS -R5" 
 
 INITIALS 
 
 = _& 
 
 TRACKING # : 
 
 in<,n t>uiU 
 
 FILMED BY PRESERVATION RESOURCES. BETHLEHEM. PA. 
 
•v; 
 
 
 CJI 
 
 3 
 3 
 
 cr 
 o >> 
 
 lOQ Q 
 
 «— »" ^ 
 ^O 
 
 <o 
 
 N (/) 
 
 cn 
 
 \(J)X 
 COM 
 
 ko 
 O 
 
 ^: 
 
 r^^ 
 
 4^ 
 
 3 
 
 > 
 
 Q) O 
 
 o m 
 
 CD O 
 OQ 
 
 ^3 
 
 cn 
 
 00^ 
 
 C>(^ 
 
 o 
 o 
 
 C/5 
 
 
 N 
 
 M 
 
 
 .-y* 
 
 -A 
 
 **;5s' 
 
 'g 
 
 '^. 
 
 
 a 
 
 e^ 
 
 ^A 
 
 
 ^^ 
 
 /S^: 
 
 >^ 
 
 ^^^ 
 
 3 
 3 
 
 m 
 
 o 
 
 3 
 3 
 
 J^/ 
 
 > 
 
 A^.^ 
 
 
 
 ^ 
 
 8 
 
 3 
 3 
 
 cn 
 
 O 
 
 .- r'^'^'^PEi^i?!? 
 
 nw 
 
 CO 
 
 c> 
 
 cx> 
 
 o 
 
 
 N3 
 
 00 
 
 N3 
 
 1.0 mm 
 
 1.5 mm 
 
 2.0 mm 
 
 ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ 
 abcdefghiidlmnopqrstuvwxyz 1234667890 
 
 ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ 
 abcdefghiiklmnopqrstuvwxyzl234567890 
 
 ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ 
 
 abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz 
 
 1234567890 
 
 ^^ 
 
 2.5 mm 
 
 ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ 
 
 abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz 
 
 1234567890 
 
 
 
 ip 
 
 ^f^ 
 
 ^^ 
 
 
 ^<" 
 
 «> '^ 
 
 fs 
 
 \&> 
 
 V 
 
 
 ^ 
 
 Ik 
 
 i<r 
 
 ^ 
 
 ^o 
 
 f^ 
 
 'Sr 
 
 m 
 
 H 
 O 
 
 "o m "o 
 
 0"i ' 
 H^S 
 
 > C CO 
 I Tl ^ 
 
 m 
 
 i! 
 
 3D 
 O 
 
 m 
 
 A. 
 
 "' *«■. 
 
 
 
 "4^1^ 
 
 '^^ 
 
 '^^ 
 
 'i^ 
 
 1— » 
 
 ro 
 
 01 
 
 O 
 
 3 
 3 
 
 3 
 3 
 
 IS 
 
 ODKl 
 
 
 3r- 
 
 § 
 
 ►* OS 
 
 s 
 
 A-. 
 
 
 
,k«W- 
 
 RETAIL GROCERY STORES 
 
 r" 
 
 
 A Study of Certain Problems of the 
 Retail Grocer in New York City 
 
 / 
 
 INCXUDING THB 
 
 / 
 
 Results of Investigations Conducted During the 
 
 War Period by the New York Federal 
 
 Food Board and the New York 
 
 State Food Commission 
 
 LIBRARY 
 SCHOOL OF BUSINESS 
 
 PUBLISHED BY THE 
 NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF FARMS AND MARKETS 
 
 t. 
 
 1^ 
 
 ALBANY 
 
 J. B. LYON COMPANY. PRINTERS 
 
 1922 
 
LIBRARY 
 
 Columbia ?Hmbersiap 
 
 intbtCitpof^etotorb 
 
 School of Business 
 
^1^ 
 
 RETAIL GROCERY STORES 
 
 A Study of Certain Problems of the 
 Retail Grocer in New York City 
 
 INCLUDING THE 
 
 Results of Investigations Conducted During the 
 
 War Period by the New York Federal 
 
 Food Board and the New York 
 
 State Food Commission 
 
 PUBLISHED BY THE 
 NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF FARMS AND MARKETS 
 
 ALBANY 
 
 J. B. LYON COMPANY, PRINTERS 
 
 1922 
 
 K 
 
 h 
 
I 
 
 
 
 INTRODUCTORY NOTE 
 
 During the \\ar the Xew York Federal Food Board, which was a consolida- 
 tion of federal and state food administration agencies carried on extensive 
 investigations as to the costs of operating retail stores in New York City, 
 these investigations were undertaken primarily to furnish a reliable basis for 
 determining the fair margins of profit issued by the Board. A larcre force of 
 inspectors and accountants were put on the work over a period of several 
 months and all results were verified repeatedly so that the Board might be 
 able to say accurately just what were the proportionate volume of business 
 m different commodity groups and the elements of cost in operation of retail 
 grocery and meat shops. ^ ic^ai* 
 
 .1 J^^f" ^^^ ^'"™lxr^r^ ^^""^ *^® government price regulating work came sud- 
 denly to an end. With far-seeing appreciation of the scientific permanent value 
 of these research studies, however, Mr. John Mitchell the Chairman of the 
 Board and President of the New York State Food Commission, arranged for 
 salvaging the results of the investigations in three reports on retail 
 grocery stores, Gentile butcher shops and Kosher butcher shops. With tne 
 termination of the existence of the temporary war-time food administrative 
 agencies, tliese reports were turned over to the permanent State Department 
 of Farms and Markets for publication. i' no 
 
 The Retail Grocery Report is here presented. The two other reports on 
 co^s of operation of butcher shops are still in manuscript form 
 
 rhese studies were planned and initiated by George L. Bennett, Assistant 
 pirector of Transportation and Distribution, and were carried out under his 
 leadership. The investigational work and compilation was performed under 
 the supervision of Mr. John J. Pollock, who, in the latter davs of the Board's 
 "^^ri '^^\ succeeded Mr. Bennett as Assistant Director. The computations 
 and tabulations were under direct charge of Mr. I. Finkelstein. Acknowledg- 
 ment IS due these gentlemen for the great assistance which thev have rendered 
 m the preparation of this data for publication. 
 
 The text was written and the illustrations were designed bv Miss Edith J 
 FaTmf anlr'Markets'^'*'''' ""^ publications, New York State ' Department of 
 Since 1918, when this investigation of retail grocery stores was made, costs 
 have increased considerably, but they are now lowering again. There are 
 reasons to expect that the more stabilized conditions of the near future will 
 approximate those of 1918. But irrespective of whether this is or is not the 
 case, there is presented herein so much information of a sort never before 
 made public and which can be so easily changed to fit to the conditions of 
 to-day and to-morrow that the New York State Department of Farms and 
 Markets believes this report will be of great service to the public and to the 
 grocers themselves. 
 
 •y 
 
 Lii 
 
 ^HWI.'^ 
 
^asm^ 
 
 A Study of 
 Certain Problems of the Retail Grocer 
 
 It is the aim of this bulletin, first, to present to the consumer 
 certain viewpoints on the pi-oblems of the retail grocer and their 
 reaction on the prices he pays for his food, and further to set 
 before the grocer himself the results of investigations made in 
 May, 1918, of a representative number of typical grocery stores in 
 Xew York City. Conditions or type and quantity of products 
 purchased may diifer for other cities, but with the data given for 
 guidance it is anticipated the grocer can compare the status of his 
 own business and perhaps discover one or two new angles from 
 which to approach his own problems. 
 
 VOLUME OF TRADING 
 
 In this study the sum total of the retail grocer's purchases is 
 designated as his volume of trading. In certain commodities his 
 volume of trading is large. In others it may be very small. These 
 facts are set forth clearly in Table 1, which presents a summary of 
 a detailed study of the purchases made by 58 grocery stores in 
 Greater New York for the year 1917, selected as being representa- 
 tive of all conditions of trade. 
 
 This study was made up by analyzing the purchase bills of the 
 58 stores for a period of one year. Purchase bills were analyzed 
 in preference to sales slips (purchases by customers) in order to 
 save the immense amount of labor that such procedure would have 
 involved. Had the sales slips been analyzed, the only differences 
 that should occur between purchases and sales would be those 
 ascribable to products that deteriorated to such an extent as to 
 be unfit for human consumption and to variations in profits. 
 Intelligent buying and handling make these differences, for staple 
 products, a comparatively negligible factor, or in other words, 
 analysis of purchase slips may be expected to give a fair indi- 
 cation of relative sales when relative profits are considered. 
 
 [5] 
 
i < 
 
 i 
 
 ''""aA-^sI^'^T^cIIT^^^ IX PEHCE.TAOE, ^ EVXOE.CE. PKOH .X 
 
 IN New Yobk Cot? '^'^ Representative Gbocery Stores 
 
 Dain/ Products and Eggs 
 
 Butter Per cent. 
 
 Butter substitutes ^^ . 8 
 
 Eg-s 1 
 
 Milk '.'.'.'.'.'.'.". 12-2 
 
 Cheese [ 8.2 
 
 Bread and Flour ^2 
 
 Bread 35 . 5 
 
 \Mieat flour ......* 9.5 
 
 Crackers and cake* .....[,, 2.3 
 
 Macaroni and g- a^lietti ^-^ 
 
 Other flc.ur ... ^. fl ... .]]'.',,]] -5 
 
 Vanned Ooods • ^ 
 
 Condensed and evar orated milk ~ ^^'^ 
 
 Fish 2.9 
 
 Tomatoes ..,', 1.0 
 
 "^Peas '.'.'.'.'.'.'.[ 1-3 
 
 Soup , .8 
 
 ^Boans • ^ 
 
 - Corn ... .7 
 
 Other ( anned ffoods -^ 
 
 Fruit-; . . : • • .4 
 
 Sugar, Syrups and Pi eserves « -r 
 
 Sunfar " 9-7 
 
 Molasses and i^yrups ^ -^ 
 
 Jams and preserves -^ 
 
 Fresh Vegetahles '^ 
 
 Potatoes ... ~~ ■ ^-9 
 
 Onions ." .' 2.9 
 
 Others • ^ 
 
 Miscellaneoits Foodstuffs ^'^ ' 
 
 Xut.^, spic s, condiments, relishes, etc 
 
 Coffers and Teas ** • ^ 
 
 Cofl-ee 
 
 Tea ■ * ■ ■ 2.6 
 
 Cocoa, Chocolate, etc ^-^ 
 
 .5 
 
 Soaps and Soap Powders ^^ 
 
 Miscellaneous Commodities ^ * ^ 
 
 Polish, brocm^, etc 
 
 Cereals 2.7 
 
 Cornm^al ... 
 
 Rice '.'.'.'.'.'.'.'..'. ^ 
 
 Barley [[ [ -9 
 
 Packag d cereals ^ 
 
 Other cereals ^ • 2 
 
 .1 
 
 Fresh Fruits 2 . 4 
 
 Dried Fruits 2.3 
 
 Prunes .... , . 
 
 i^i^ins ....;;;;:;;:: .8 
 
 others .3 
 
 Dried Vegetahles ^^ 
 
 Beans 1.6 
 
 Peas .7 
 
 Others . . .2 
 
 .1 
 
 Lard 1.0 
 
 Lard substitutes ^ 
 
 2 
 
 Total ^ ' 
 
 100.0 
 
 Allowing 100 per cent to stand for gross purchases, the account- 
 ants engaged in this study computed in percentages the relative 
 volume of trading for each commodity handled, arranging the 
 commodities in groups with subtotals for each. These percentages 
 are presented with some degree of assurance, since after forty 
 businesses had been analyzed there was practically no variation 
 when the further data were added, the results of the analyses for 
 the first forty businesses being practically identical with those of 
 the fifty-eight businesses ultimately analyzed. 
 
 . •*'. • 
 
 ' • ' *''i-'i 
 
 lALL OTHERtiiE: 
 
 ii;:;^ PRODUCTS purchased! 
 
 .^•^•;/■. ■•;:•■ •^■•■.^•■;•^^^••:i•:•V.•••.^••*:-.v •.•:•;.•.■.■.•■ *^ /OK;;.;.-. v./. .•:•.•.•.••.:•.•.■; 
 . V]^y^^'^.^'■.v;■v.v^*'^J.^■ .'••;'■ s.'-'.f'V.^V' '•'''.''.•'.'• •. ' ' ' ■ ' ' "I ' -■ *"•':'••.•'.'':'.'•''•.'••'••"•'■•■•. 
 
 '■\' •'^^''•'••'yy.\\■'■'■'i•^7:^'•'•'y.'•\'■•''•.\\•.•■•!'^•:l''^\\ 
 • ..•;.•.;•••.■ -.•••r.- .•:••..•: .•.■•••.•..-•■•••-•■••••:•.•.••■•.•/.•••. v. ••.•••.••;• •.•\-'-; 
 :\•_.^;..^~::.:_^;V/.;V••.^..;.;.•..•_\^•.;.v.y.:;;^■:v.^•;^•■.:.;^,^••v:;^ •.^. ■.••■.- .■•.•.•::.••*;;: 
 
 .■•'•".^' •* ^^'•;'.^^•■*'V•; v"V;' •^.^V•■:;^^^^V^••r.•;•^^•'•V;'•^^^'•^:/.•V.■• vXv 
 
 , ;; .•..••. •■ •.•.•.••■.•:•'•■••.•••.• ■•..•• ••.••.■/'.•.•..•.^•.•.•.'•••••.••. •-:•v-• 
 
 ISUGAR. 
 17.9 
 
 BREAD 
 9.5 
 
 
 lEGOd 
 
 112.21 
 
 Fig. I. — The Accompanying Graph Shows What Merchandise the Grocer 
 
 Buys for Each Dollar Spent. 
 
 The first or dairy products groups of percentages, with a total 
 of 35.5 per cent, is the largest, constituting more than one-third 
 of the total volume of business. The bread and flour group is 
 second with a total of 16.3 per cent, canned goods third, its total 
 being 9.7 per cent. Arranged in order of descending percentages 
 of purchase for their respective totals, the remaining groups 
 are the following: sugar, molasses, and preserves; fresh vege- 
 tables; coffee; nuts and spices; soap and powders; polishes and 
 brooms ; cereals ; fresh fruits ; dried fruits ; dried vegetables ; and 
 
 II 
 
i 
 
 8 
 
 lard and lard substitutes. In Fig. 1, for which Table 1 is the 
 basis, the relative proportions of trading in each group are graphi- 
 cally set forth, indicating the contrasts in total gross sales for the 
 various groups of commodities handled. 
 
 ^ Proceeding from the consideration of the percentages of trading 
 m Table 1 by groups to that of volume of trading in individual 
 products, it is interesting to find that the largest group — that of 
 dairy products — contains the two largest single items of businej^s 
 — butter with a volume of 13.8 per cent and eggs with a volume of 
 12.£' per cent. Butter and eggs alone it would appear from the 
 compilation constitute one-fourth the average grocer's trade, while 
 milk from the same group with a volume of sales of 8.2 per cent, 
 bread from the second gi-oup at 9.5 per cent, and sugar from the 
 fourth group at 7.9 per cent total a second quarter, or 25.6 per 
 cent. Obviously then, more than 50 per cent of the business done 
 m fifty-eight stores in Kew York City in 1917, was done in the 
 five staple commodities ~ butter, eggs, milk, bread, and sugar. 
 
 In Table 1 the precise number of products handled is not shown. 
 Certain gioup products, such as " crackers and cake," " other 
 vegetables," " nuts and spices," " jams and preserves," suggestinij 
 substantial lists in themselves would lengthen the fifty entries 
 already set forth indefinitely. Yet this unnumbered variety of 
 products constituting the stock in trade of the retail gi-ocery store 
 aside from the five items already mentioned — butter, e^gs, milk, 
 bread, and sugar — constitute but 48.4 per cent of the whole vol- 
 ume of purchases, or the difference between 100 per cent and 51.6 
 per cent as shown in Fig. 2. 
 
 In the foregoing it has been shown that approximately 50 per 
 cent of the money paid out by the gi-ocer for his stock 'in trade 
 goes for butter, eggs, milk, bread, and sugar. It is of interest to 
 follow the accumulated data somewhat further and to note for 
 certain products how percentage of gross profit hosed on soiling 
 price compares with the percentages of total trading just analyzed. 
 In Table 2, 65 per cent of the total volume of trading has been 
 itemized and the items arranged descendingly in order of their 
 respective volumes, which have been taken from Table 1. In each 
 case column 2 shows the purchase price per unit (pound, dozen. 
 
 
 o 
 
 
 ^ 
 
 a 
 
 ^ 
 ^ 
 
 ^ 
 
 
 9 
 
 o 
 3 
 o 
 O 
 d 
 a 
 
 < 
 o 
 
 z 
 
 d 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 z 
 < 
 
 d 
 
 CD 
 
 i 
 
 > 
 
 40 
 
 o 
 o 
 o 
 o 
 
 G 
 uJ 
 
 z 
 z 
 < 
 
 ^ 
 
 i 
 
 I 
 
 I 
 
 
 -J "- 
 
 s = 
 
 ti o en 
 
 > O UJ 
 
 2 U. lU 
 
 to o *^ 
 
 '^ s It 
 
 0^ — o 
 
 u. S O 
 
 § 
 
 02 
 
 o 
 < 
 
 O 
 
 bJ 
 
 2 
 O 
 O 
 
 <n oL 
 
 in 
 
 
 <n 
 
 
 UJ 
 
 
 H- 
 
 
 3 
 
 
 H 
 
 
 m^ 
 
 
 f- 
 
 
 <o 
 
 UJ 
 
 eo 
 
 —I 
 
 «o 
 
 . (O <o q: 
 
 c4 - _j a. 
 
 <^ ^ "^ X 
 
 Q. ^ i^ S 
 
 -< -J a dj 
 
 o o »*i q: 
 
 <o a u u. 
 
 to 
 a: 
 
 on 
 o 
 
 CO 
 
 ^6 
 
 
 CO 
 
 en 
 
 m 
 
 eO 
 
 O CO 
 Z CL 
 
 (0 
 < 
 
 r 
 o 
 cc 
 
 UJ 
 
 2 
 
 D 
 -J 
 O 
 > 
 
 cc 
 
 u 
 
 u 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 O 
 
 I- 
 
 o 
 
 •D 
 
 a 
 O 
 
 CC 
 
 a 
 
 y 
 
 Ml 
 
 o 
 
 < 
 
 Z 
 UJ 
 O 
 
 Qc: 
 
 X z 
 I 
 
 CD 
 
 o 
 
 -I 
 
 u- > «<5 
 
 < 
 
 -J 
 
 VO - ° 
 
 > 
 
 UJ 
 O 
 
 i 
 
 PS 
 
 C 
 
 P 
 00 
 
 a. 
 
 o 
 O 
 
 o 
 
 < 
 
 o 
 o 
 
 p: 
 
 o 
 
 •-4 
 
 2 
 
 . «i 
 
 ^1 
 
[ 
 
 k 
 
 10 
 
 quart, or can, as the case may be) ; column 3, the selling price per 
 unit; column 4, the gross profit per unit; and column 5, the per- 
 centage of gross profit based on selling price, or the datum in 
 column 4 divided by the corresponding datum in colunm 3. Des- 
 pite the fact that the five products previously referred to have the 
 largest relative volumes of trading, an examination of column five 
 will show that their respective percentages of gross profit based on 
 selling price per unit are in each case less than the respective per- 
 centages of gross profit for any of the other products listed in 66 
 per cent of the total volume of trading. 
 
 Table 2. — Relati\t: Volibie of Trading and Percentage of Gross Profit 
 FOR Certain Commodities, Totaling 65 Per Cent of the Grocer's 
 Volume of Pltichasing.* 
 
 COMMODITY 
 
 Percentage 
 of total 
 trading 
 
 (per cent) 
 
 Average 
 cost per 
 
 unit 
 purchase 
 
 (cents) 
 
 Butter 
 
 Eggs 
 
 Bread 
 
 Milk 
 
 Sugar 
 
 Potatoes 
 
 Flour 
 
 Canned fish 
 
 Canned tomatoes . 
 
 Cheese 
 
 Rice 
 
 Onions 
 
 Canned peas 
 
 Beans 
 
 Canned corn 
 
 Raisins 
 
 Cornmeal 
 
 Subtotal . . , 
 Other products . 
 
 Total. 
 
 13.80 
 12.20 
 9.50 
 8.20 
 7.90 
 2.90 
 2.30 
 1.60 
 1.30 
 1.20 
 .90 
 .90 
 .80 
 .70 
 .40 
 .30 
 .10 
 
 Average 
 
 seUing price 
 
 per unit 
 
 (cents) 
 
 65.00 
 35.00 
 
 100.00 
 
 70.50 
 65.50 
 7.50 
 12.46 
 9.35 
 3.25 
 6.37 
 18.25 
 12.75 
 39.50 
 11.50 
 2.25 
 14.75 
 13.33 
 15.50 
 13.00 
 5.00 
 
 Average 
 
 gross profit 
 
 per unit 
 
 (cents) 
 
 Percentage 
 
 of gross 
 
 profit based 
 
 on selling 
 
 price 
 
 76.50 
 72.50 
 8.62 
 14.23 
 10.35 
 
 25 
 37 
 
 22.75 
 16.00 
 46.50 
 13.50 
 
 3.75 
 18.25 
 16.33 
 19.00 
 15.50 
 
 6.62 
 
 6.00 
 
 7.84 
 
 7.00 
 
 9.65 
 
 1.12 
 
 12.99 
 
 1.77 
 
 12.44 
 
 1.00 
 
 9.66 
 
 1.00 
 
 23.53 
 
 1.00 
 
 13.56 
 
 4.50 
 
 19.78 
 
 3.25 
 
 20.31 
 
 7.00 
 
 15.05 
 
 2.00 
 
 14.81 
 
 1.50 
 
 40.00 
 
 3.50 
 
 19.18 
 
 3.00 
 
 18.37 
 
 3.50 
 
 18.42 
 
 2.50 
 
 16.16 
 
 1.62 
 
 24.16 
 
 ♦ Prices prevailing in April, 1918. 
 
 Butter, which has the largest volume of trading of any product 
 sold, shows the least percentage of profit per y/nit (pound) ; eggs, 
 which stand second in volume, show the next least percentage of 
 profit per unit (dozen), being almost tied with sugar, which in the 
 volume-of-trading column ranks fifth. Bread and milk, the third 
 and fourth items in Table 2, make relatively larger percentages of 
 profit per unit (loaf) and per unit (quart) respectively; yet not 
 
 11 
 
 one of these ^\e, which constitute better than 50 per cent of the 
 volume of trading, made as large a per unit profit as did any one 
 of the other twelve items, which constitute the remaining 15 per 
 cent in the 65 per cent of the volume of trading itemized. To 
 make this point clear the percentages of gross profit based on 
 selling price have been arranged in descending order in Table 3, 
 bread, milk, sugar, eggs, and butter being found at the foot of the 
 list. These statistics are also set forth graphically in Fig. 3. 
 
 Table 3. — Percentages of Gross Profit Based on Sexling Price, Arranged 
 
 IN Descending Order for 65 Per Cent of the Grocer's Total Volume 
 
 of Trading, Accompanied by Percentages of Volume of Purchase. 
 
 Percentage 
 of gross 
 Percentage profit based 
 of total on selling 
 Commodity trading price 
 
 Onions .90 40 . 00 
 
 Cornmeal .10 24 . 16 
 
 Potatoes 2 . 90 23.53 
 
 Tomatoes 1.30 20.31 
 
 Canned fish 1.60 19.78 
 
 Canned peas .80 19.18 
 
 Canned corn .40 18.42 
 
 Beans 70 18.37 
 
 Raisins .30 16.16 
 
 Cheese 1.20 15.05 
 
 Rice 90 14.81 
 
 Flour 2.30 13.56 
 
 Bread 9.50 12.99 
 
 Milk 8.20 12.44 
 
 Sugar 7.90 9.66 
 
 Eggs 12.90 9.65 
 
 Butter 13.80 7.84 
 
 Merely as an indicator, we might here make reference to the 
 percentage of average gross expense, appearing in column 4 of 
 Table 4, page 14, which the reader will find to be 14.1 per cent. 
 He will be interested in noting that this figure is larger than the 
 average gross profit for any one of the five items making up the 
 larger half of the total volume of trading. By featuring the per- 
 centage in this connection we do not mean to imply that butter, 
 eggs, bread, milk, and sugar are necessarily sold at a loss. These 
 commodities are in many instances used as leaders to attract 
 trade and to help sell other articles in which the main profits 
 
 
12 
 
 if) 
 z 
 o 
 
 z 
 o 
 
 < 
 
 uJ 
 
 Z 
 tiL 
 O 
 O 
 
 O 
 
 H 
 
 H 
 O 
 a 
 
 M 
 
 z 
 
 «o 
 
 z 
 
 m 
 
 bl 
 
 
 
 < 
 
 e 
 
 Z 
 
 
 
 2 
 
 2 
 
 UJ 
 
 
 
 o 
 
 4 
 
 UJ 
 
 o 
 
 
 
 
 
 h 
 
 
 
 
 
 Z ui 
 
 hi 
 
 
 < 
 
 uJ 
 
 e 
 
 00 
 
 J < 
 
 to 
 o 
 
 111 
 
 h 
 
 o 
 
 t-i 
 
 13 
 
 are made. To answer, therefore, the question of whether or 
 not the sale of these products constitutes a real loss to the business, 
 one must first apply not the average cost of doing business for all 
 commodities, but the actual cost of doing business for each particu- 
 lar commodity, and secondly, the economic criterion whether the 
 net profits of the business as a whole would increase or diminish if 
 the volume of trading in these items were respectively increased or 
 diminished at the expense of the volume of trading in other 
 items. The significance of the percentage 14.1, therefore, lies only 
 in its wai-ning to the grocer of the importance of analyzing his 
 profits and his costs and in its appeal to the consumer for a fair 
 understanding of the grocer's problems before preferring blind 
 charges of increasingly high prices and wilful profiteering. 
 
 If the percentages of gross profit based on selling price are con- 
 sidered fui-ther, it will be observed that certain percentages of 
 profit seem relatively high. Onions, for example, show a per- 
 unit-quart profit of 40 per cent, yet their 0.9 per cent volume of 
 trading entr}% shown in column 1, Table 1, must be considered in 
 estimating their relative importance as an item of business. Pota- 
 toes show a profit of 23.53, while their volume of purchase is 2.9 
 per cent — less than one-thirtieth of the total volume of business. 
 Cornmeal, the last item listed and the least by volume (0.1 per 
 cent, or 1/1000 of the total volume of trading), gives what con- 
 sidered independently would seem to be a substantial gross profit — 
 24.16 per cent per unit pound, but a gain of only li/o cents for 
 each pound weighed and wrapped. 
 
 Referring to Table 2 and comparing one product with another,, 
 it will be observed that butter makes about one-half the percentage 
 of gross profit that is made on cheese and involves the expenditure 
 of somewhat less than twice the capital per unit pound. On the- 
 othej hand, it is apparent that more than ten times the quantity^ 
 of butter was sold as compared with cheese, and butter proves a 
 leader to attract trade. 
 
 Again, sugar seems to make about half the percentage of gross 
 profit as compared with that made on canned goods. Moreover, 
 each pound of sugar has in most cases to be weighed and wrapped 
 and tied. On the other hand, rather less capital is required for an 
 investment in sugar, and seven to ten times the quantity is sold as 
 compared with canned goods of various kinds. 
 
14 
 
 Rice and onions, which show the same j^ercentage of volume of 
 trading exhibit a rather spectacular contrast in profit — 14.81 per 
 cent and 40 per cent respectively. Each would seem to require an 
 approximately equivalent degree of labor in the way of weighing 
 or measuring and wrapping. 
 
 Investigation has shown that the greatest difficulty of retailers 
 has in the past been ignorance of their own businesses, and that 
 Buccess has ultimately been won, if won at all, after expensive 
 trials and errors. In these days of keen competition vague 
 conceptions of the laws governing business are not conducive 
 to success, and on the contrary are often the cause of failure. 
 The grocer should gain much by an intimate and analytical 
 acquaintance with his stock in trade, such as has been briefly sug- 
 gested in the foregoing pages. In fact he should thus be able to 
 accumulate in a few months of concentrated and systematic study 
 an experience that otherwise might require a period of years to 
 gain by observation. 
 
 It will prove worth while for the retailer to compute his volume 
 of trading for each commodity handled, but he should not stop 
 there. He should know also his average gross profit per commod- 
 ity unit, his percentages of gross profit based on selling prices, and 
 the comparative labor involved in handling a given product. He 
 should know his service costs. He would then be in a position to 
 make comparisons between stocks that pay and those that do not. 
 He could also determine which were worth featuring as leaders to 
 attract trade and which could be discarded as a source of profit 
 leakage. 
 
 To the consumer who has followed the exposition here set forth, 
 it should be apparent that a business, in which 50 per cent of the 
 trading is done in products that make a per unit profit consider- 
 ably below the average percentage for expenses, is necessarily 
 somewhat hazardous. This is especially true since many of the 
 products handled are perishable and constant vigilance is necessary 
 in order to prevent waste. Moreover, the profits themselves are 
 small and the labor connected with handling some of the smallest 
 profit commodities, large. Added to these considerations are the 
 often unreasonable demands of consumers for elaborate service, a 
 subject on which the succeeding article, " Cash-and-Carry Versus 
 Credit-and-Delivery Systems " should throw some light. 
 
 CASH-AND-CARRY VERSUS CREDIT-AND-DELIVERY 
 SYSTEMS IN THE RETAIL GROCERY STORE 
 
 The study here presented has been deduced from data obtained 
 through the questionnaire* circulated by agents of the Federal 
 Food Board and covering the fiscal year ending September 30, 
 1918. The analysis was made of the records of 128 representative 
 grocery stores located in various parts of New York City, and the 
 classification of these stores as serving poor, middle, or wealthy 
 class neighborhoods was based on the proprietor's own estimate of 
 the type of trade served. For example, if, in reply to the agent's 
 question, " What type of customers give you their patronage ? " 
 the grocer replied, "Average," the grocery was recorded in the 
 middle class. If the grocer said, " Our patrons are mostly well-to- 
 do,'' his grocery was recorded in the wealthy class. 
 
 Briefly summarized, certain outstanding data compiled from 
 the 128 questionnaires may be presented as follows: 
 
 Poor Middle Wealthy For all* 
 
 Number of stores 45 70 13 128 
 
 Total gross sales $1,079,103 $3,051,491 $758,057 $4,889,051 
 
 Average sales per grocery... 23,980 43,592 58,342 38,195 
 Rate of turnover on invest- 
 ment 9.2 8.7 6.6 8.3 
 
 Average amount of capital 
 
 invested 2,616 5,059 8,882 4,588 
 
 Average amount of credit 
 
 outstanding HO 596 3,125 682 
 
 Average amount of stock 
 
 carried 1J76 3,326 5,500 3,6S5 
 
 *In the fourth column, all averages are weighted. 
 
 A cursory examination of the statistics set forth indicates that 
 average sales and gross margins increase from the poor to the mid- 
 dle, and from the middle to the wealthy classes. Turnover on 
 investment, on the contrarv, varies in the reverse order. The viean 
 in each case is found in the so-called middle class. This is exactly 
 the situation one would expect, since the more elaborate the service 
 demanded, the greater the amount of capital needed and the larger 
 the quantity of stock to be carried. The just and logical conclu- 
 sion, in the light of these facts, therefore, would be that gTOss profit 
 
 • For the form of this questionnaire, see page 26. 
 
 [15] 
 
16 
 
 and net return should respectively increase for the successive 
 classes in the order of poor, middle, and wealthy. Let us see how 
 the facts in the case work themselves out. 
 
 In the remainder of the study all statistics are shown in per- 
 centages of gross sales; that is, in each case total gross sales is 
 regarded as 100 per cent, while all other items are expressed in 
 terms of percentage of total gi*oss sales. Thus, for Table 4 it may 
 be deduced that 100 per cent, or gross sales, in the poor neighbor- 
 hood has reference to the ''Average sales per grocery" entry 
 shown in column 1 of the foregoing data, or $23,980. Cost of 
 merchandise averaged 84.8 per cent of $23,980; gross profit, 15.2 
 per cent of the same figure. Again, 100 per cent, in the middle- 
 class neighborhood has reference to the $43,592 set forth in column 
 2 above; in the wealthy neighborhood, to $58,342 in column 3, and 
 for all classes to the weighted average, $38,195. 
 
 In Table 4 is shown in percentages according to each class of 
 trade served a summary of relative operating expenses and profits 
 for service as it was found actually existing, that is, cash-and-carry 
 and credit-and-delivery systems in combination. The percentage 
 relations set forth in this table were obtained as follows: 
 
 1. Told gross sales were allowed to equal 100 per cent. 
 
 2. The cost of merchandise percentage was secured by dividing 
 total annual purchases by total annual gi-oss sales. 
 
 3. Gross profit represents the difference between the percentage 
 cost of merchandise and total sales, which is considered 100 per 
 cent. 
 
 4. Each item included in Expenses was expressed in percentage 
 by dividing the sum expended for that item by gross sales, the sum 
 of items of expense being expressed collectively as expenses. 
 
 5. 'Net return percentage was found by subtracting the percent- 
 age for expenses from the percentage for gross profits. 
 
 Table 4. — Relative OPEaRATiNO Expenses and Profits for Actual Service. 
 Expressed in Percentages of Gross Sales 
 
 Poor Middle Wealthy For all* 
 
 (per (per (per (per 
 
 cent) cent) cent) cent) 
 
 Gross sales lOO 100 100 100 
 
 Cost of merchandise 84.8 83.8 81.1 83.6 
 
 Gross profit 15.2 16.2 18.9 16.4 
 
 Expenses 12.7 14.1 17.0 14.1 
 
 Net return 2.5 2.1 1.9 2.3 
 
 17 
 
 Poor Middle Wealthy For aU* 
 
 T» i. -1 £ (per (per (per (per 
 
 Details of expenses cent) cent) cent) cent) 
 
 Salaries and wages 6.6 6.6 6.6 6.6 
 
 Rent 2.2 2.3 2.8 2.4 
 
 Delivery cost inward .1 .4 .6 .3 
 
 Delivery cost outward .6 1.7 3.7 1.7 
 
 Wrapping supplies .9 .8 .7 .8 
 
 Light, heat, and power .3 .2 .2 .2 
 
 Ice 5 .4, .4 .4 
 
 Interest on investment .5 .6 .8 .6 
 
 Loss from bad debts .3 .3 .3 .3 
 
 Other expenses 7 .8 .9 .8 
 
 Total expenses 12.7 14.1 17.0 14.1 
 
 Analysis of salaries 
 
 Proprietors' salaries 4.5 3.9 2.8 3.7 
 
 Wages, members of family 1.5 .4 .4 .7 
 
 Office salaries 2 .8 .3 
 
 Selling wages 6 2.0 2.6 1.8 
 
 Wages other employees .1 .1 
 
 Total salaries and wages 6.6 6.6 6.6 6.6 
 
 * In the fourth column, all averages are weighted. 
 
 By eliminating from expenses the items of delivery cost and of 
 loss from credit and bad debts, the percentages shown in Table 4 
 have been adjusted in Table 5 to set forth expenses and profits as 
 
 based on a 100 per cent cash-and-carry basis, all other factors 
 remaining constant : 
 
 Table 5. — Relative Operating Expenses and Profits fob Service on a 
 Strictly Cash-and-Carry Basis, Expressed in Percentages of Gross 
 Sales. 
 
 Poor Middle Wealthy PoraU* 
 
 (per (per (oer (per 
 
 cent) cent) cent) cent) 
 
 Gross sales 100 100 100 100 
 
 Cost of merchandise 84.8 83.8 81.1 83.6 
 
 Gross profit 15.2 16.2 18.9 16.4 
 
 Expenses 11.8 12.0 12.7 12.0 
 
 Net return 3.4 4.2 6.2 4.4 
 
 Details of expenses 
 
 Salaries and wages 6.6 6.6 6.6 6.6 
 
 Rent 2.2 2.3 2.8 2.4 
 
 Delivery cost inward .1 .4 .6 .3 
 
 Delivery cost outward 
 
 Wrapping supplies .9 .8 .7 .8 
 
 Light, heat, and power .3 .2 .2 .2 
 
 Ice .5 .4 .4 .4 
 
18 
 
 19 
 
 Poor Middle Wealthy For all* 
 
 Details of expanses - continued : *S>f) X i^n^) cV'n?) 
 
 Interest on investment .5 .5 5 5 
 
 Loss from bad debts 
 
 Other expenses .7 3 g g 
 
 Total Expenses n.g 12.0 12.7 12.0 
 
 Analysis of salaries 
 
 Proprietors' salaries 4.5 39 28 37 
 
 Wages, members of faniily 1.5 .4 4 7 
 
 Office salaries 2 8 3 
 
 Sellingwages q 2.O 2.6 1.8 
 
 Wages other employees , j ^ ^ ^ ^ I 
 
 Total salaries and wages 6.6 6.6 6.6 6.6 
 
 *In the fourth column, all averages are weighted. 
 
 In the case of poor neighborhoo(is the net return on the cash- 
 and-carry basis would thus be greater than that found " in actual 
 service by 0.9 of one per cent of the total gi-oss sales, or the dif- 
 erence between 3.4 per cent (entry 5, column 1, Table 5) and 
 2.5 per cent (entry 5, column 1, Table 4) ; in middle-class neigh- 
 borhoods, by a difference of 2.1 per cent; in wealthy neighbor- 
 hoods, by a difference of 4.3 per cent; and a weighted average 
 difference for all classes of 2.1 per cent. 
 
 Having found the percentages that would result if the retail 
 grocery businesses were run on a strictly cash-and-carry basis, a 
 computation of expenses and profits on an assumed 100 per cent 
 credit-and-delivery basis was next undertaken. The percentages 
 resulting are shown in Table 6 : 
 
 Table 6.— Relative Operating Expenses and Profits for Service on a 
 100 PER cent Credit-and-Delivery Basis, Expressed in Percentages 
 OF Gross Sales. 
 
 Poor Middle Wealthy For all* 
 
 , (per (per (per (per 
 
 ^ - cent) cent) cent) cent) 
 
 Gross sales 100 loo 100 100 
 
 Cost of merchandise 34.8 83.8 81.1 83.6 
 
 Gross profit 152 I6.2 18.9 16.4 
 
 ^^^"ses 19 2 18.6 17.8 18.4 
 
 Net return or loss 4 ^ 2 2 .4 -f 1 . 1 2 
 
 Details and expenses 
 
 Salaries and wages 6.6 6.6 6.6 6.6 
 
 ^^^^ 2.2 2.3 2.8 2.4 
 
 Delivery cost inward .1 ^4 g 3 
 
 Delivery cost outward 6.0 5.2 4.3 5.2 
 
 Poor 
 _ ^ „ - . _ (per 
 
 Details of expenses — continued: cent) 
 
 Wrapping supplies .9 
 
 Light, heat, and power .3 
 
 Ice .5 
 
 Interefet on investment .6 
 
 Loss from bad debts 1.3 
 
 Other expenses .7 
 
 Total expenses 19.2 
 
 Analysis of salaries 
 
 Proprietors' salaries 4.5 
 
 Wages, members of family 1.5 
 
 Office salaries 
 
 Selling wages .6 
 
 Wages other employees 
 
 Total salaries and wages 6.6 
 
 Middle 
 (per 
 cent) 
 
 .8 
 
 Wealthy 
 
 (per 
 
 cent) 
 
 .7 
 
 ForaU* 
 
 (per 
 
 cent) 
 
 .8 
 
 .2 
 
 .2 
 
 .2 
 
 .4 
 
 .4 
 
 .4 
 
 .8 
 
 .9 
 
 .9 
 
 1.1 
 
 .4 
 
 .9 
 
 .8 
 
 .9 
 
 .8 
 
 18.6 
 
 17.8 
 
 18.4 
 
 3.9 
 
 2.8 
 
 3.7 
 
 .4 
 
 .4 
 
 .7 
 
 .2 
 
 .8 
 
 .3 
 
 2.0 
 
 2.6 
 
 1.8 
 
 .1 
 
 
 .1 
 
 6.6 
 
 6.6 
 
 6.6 
 
 In the case of poor neighborhoods a net loss is shown on the 
 credit-and-delivery basis of 4.0 per cent (entry 5, column 1, Table 
 6), which would be less than the percentage of net return obtain- 
 ing in the case of actual service by 6.5 per cent, (4.0 plus 2.5, 
 entry 5, column 1, Table 4). In middle-class neighborhoods, a net 
 loss of 2.4 per cent is shown, less than the return in actual service 
 by a total of 4.5 per cent (2.4 plus 2.1 equals 4.5). In wealthy 
 neighborhoods, a gain of 1.1 is indicated for 100 per cent credit- 
 and-delivery instead of net loss — less than the net return of 
 actual service by 0.8 per cent (1.9 minus 1.1 equals 0.8). For all 
 classes credit-and-delivery service makes and average of 4.3 per 
 cent less than actual service obtains (2.3 plus 2.0). 
 
 In tables 7 and 8 is shown how the foregoing table was derived. 
 In order to compute the percentages in Table 6, it was necessary, 
 first, to segregate the percentage costs of delivery-and-credit service 
 respectively as they actually existed, and secondly, to divide into 
 the respective percentage costs the proportions of delivery-and- 
 credit service for each class as derived from the original data. 
 The percentages in Table 7 which have been segregated from the 
 column on expenses in Table 4, indicate the cost of credit-and- 
 delivery in actual service: 
 
 * In the fourth column all averages are weighted. 
 
20 
 
 Table 7. — Items ENTERI^'G into the Cost of Credit-and-Deliveey Service. 
 
 Poor 
 
 (per 
 
 cent) 
 
 Delivery outward .6 
 
 Loss from bad debts .3 
 
 Interest on outstanding debts* 
 
 Total 9 
 
 Middle Wealthy 
 (per (per 
 
 cent) cent) 
 
 1.7 3.7 
 
 .3 .3 
 
 .1 .3 
 
 2.1 
 
 4.3 
 
 For all 
 
 (per 
 
 cent) 
 
 1.7 
 .3 
 .1 
 
 2.1 
 
 The percentages here shown appear again under the first/ fourth, 
 and fifth entries of Table 8. The second and sixth entries of Table 
 8 show respectively the proportion of business delivered and of 
 credit extended as computed from the original data of the question- 
 naire. Entry 3 indicates the quotient obtained by dividing entry 
 1 — the cost of delivery outward — by entry 2 — the proportion 
 of business delivered — multiplied by 100. In other words if it 
 costs 0.6 per cent of the total gross sales to deliver 10 per cent of 
 th« total gross sales, it will cost .06 to deliver 1 per cent. On a 
 100 per cent delivery basis, therefore, it would cost 6 per cent 
 of the gross sales (100 times .06 equals 6). 
 
 The percentages under entries 4 and 5 added together, divided 
 by that indicated in entry 6, and multiplied by 100, give the per- 
 centage appearing under entry 7. Entry 8 represents the sum of 
 entries 3 and 7. These are the percentages which show the cost 
 oi credit-and-delivery on a 100 per cent basis, and which have been 
 added to the corresponding percentages of Table 4, showing actual 
 service, to obtain the percentages in Table 6. 
 
 Table 8. — Relative Expenses Involved in 100 Per Cent Cbedit-and- 
 
 Deli\^by Service 
 
 Poor Middle Wealthy For all 
 
 (per (per (per (per 
 
 cent) cent) cent) cent) 
 
 1 Delivery outward 6 1.7 3.7 1.7 
 
 2 Proportion of business delivered 10.0 32.7 86.6 37.3 
 
 3.De'ivery outward — 100 per cent basis... 6.0 5.2 4.3 5.2 
 
 4 Loss from bad debts .3 .3 .3 .3 
 
 5 Interest on outstanding debts * .1 .8 .1 
 
 6 Proportion of credit extended 19.4 27.0 75.1 33.3 
 
 7 Credit Serv:c2— 100 per cent la^s 1.3 1.5 .8 1.3 
 
 8 Total credit and delivery — 100 per cent 
 
 basis 7.3 6.7 5.1 6.5 
 
 * Subdivision of interest on investment item of table 6. 
 
 21 
 
 GRArHic Repeesentatiox for Various Systems 
 
 From Fig. 4 which pictures the net return percentages shown in 
 Tables 4 and 5, may be seen the relative gain for stores doing busi- 
 ness under a 100 per cent cash-and-carry system, together with an 
 indication of net percentage gain that exists under actual service 
 as shown in Table 4. 
 
 PERCENTAGE OF 
 NET LOSS NET RETURN 
 
 ■ 1 00% CASH-AND-CARRY SERVICE 
 ACTUAL SERVICE (MIXED, CASH-AND-CARRY, AND 
 
 CREDIT DELIVERY) 
 
 Fig. 4. — Graphic Repbesentation of Tables 4 axd 5, Showing a Grocers 
 Profits when Actual Service Rendered is Compared with a 100 Per Cent 
 Cash-and-Carey Service. 
 
 In the first projection of each group, showing the percentages of 
 o-ain for stores in wealthy nei«:hborhoods, it is at once evident that 
 more than three times the net return actually gained at present 
 could be secured under a system of cash-and-carry, while in the 
 second group showing percentages of gain for middle-class stores 
 it is apparent that about twice the net profit could be made if the 
 middle-class neighborhood were served under the cash-and-carry 
 system. Among stores operating in poor neighborhoods, on the 
 other hand, the gain under the cash-and-carry system would be 
 comparatively slight — less than one-third over that which is real- 
 ized in actual service. The reason for this variation is to be 
 sought in Table 8, from which it may be deduced that stores oper- 
 ating in a wealthy neighborhood deliver all but 13.4 per cent of 
 their merchandise and extend credit to all but 24.0 per cent of 
 their customers. In middle-class neighborhoods on an average 
 67.3 per cent of goods sold are carried home by customers and 73 
 
22 
 
 per cent of the customers pay cash. In poor neighborhoods the 
 great bulk of the sales — 90 per cent are carried and 80.6 per cent 
 of the business is for cash. 
 
 It is not surprising that stores serving wealthy neighborhoods 
 would be by fai- the largest gainers if delivery costs were to cease 
 on more than 86 per cent, and credit losses on 75 per cent, of their 
 total sales. In the same way it is apparent that a store in a poor 
 neighborhood, which in actual service is delivering only 10 per 
 cent of its merchandise and extending credit to only 20 per cent of 
 its trade, can make only a slight net gain by installing 100 per 
 cent cash-and-carry. 
 
 The differences in extension between the shaded projections of 
 each group in Fig. 4 may be regarded as showing what the mer- 
 chant might give back to his customers and still make his normal 
 profit if he were freed from credit-and-delivery expenditure. In 
 the wealthy neighborhood it will be seen that this would mean the 
 equivalent of 4.3 per cent or .043 cents on the dollar, in middle- 
 class neighborhoods 2.1 per cent or .021 cents, and in poor-class 
 neighborhoods 0.9 per cent or .009 cent on the dollar. If computed 
 from the "Average sales groceries " item on page 13, this would 
 amount to a return to consumers in wealthy neighborhoods of 
 $2,508.70 on average yearly sales amounting to $58,342 ; in mid- 
 dle-class neighborhoods $915.43 on sales amounting to $43,592; 
 and in poor neighborhoods $215, by eliminating credit-and-delivery 
 factors. 
 
 The same principle may be illustrated differently: The con- 
 sumer who trades in a well-to-do neighborhood and buys ten dol- 
 lars' worth of groceries a week — $520 worth a year — pays 
 $22.36 a year for having those goods delivered and for the con- 
 venience of credit extended. It may easily be worth this amount 
 to the housewife to have her supplies delivered, but it must be 
 pointed out that her rate of delivery is lower because of the fact 
 that some who trade at this store carry their own supplies and ask 
 no credit. The question for the customer who carries her food 
 and pays cash to decide is whether she is willing to pay at the 
 rate $22.36 a year to have her neighbor's groceries delivered. 
 
 From Fig. 5 it may be seen what would happen if all customers 
 availed themselves of credit-and-delivery. Stores serving wealthy 
 neighborhoods could continue to operate at a net profit margin of 
 
 23 
 
 1.1 per cent, because as has been observed in Table 5, they are 
 already giving credit to 75 per cent of their trade and delivering 
 86 per cent of their sales, so that a 100 per cent credit-and-delivery 
 service would mean comparatively little adjustment of their pres- 
 ent system. Grocers in middle-class neighborhoods could operate 
 only at 2.4 per cent net loss, while those serving poor neighbor- 
 hoods would lose 4.0 per cent. 
 
 In order to continue in business under the 100 per cent credit- 
 and-delivery system, and make his normal profit, the grocer in a 
 poor neighborhood would have to charge his customers $1,061/2 
 
 PERCENTAGE OF 
 D > NET LOSS NET RETURN 
 
 8 h ^ '1 1 '1 2 1 i 1 2 1 
 
 ACTUAL SERVICE (MIXED, 
 
 AND CREDIT DELIVERY) 
 10O% CREDIT-AND-DELIVERY 
 
 4 S 6 
 
 CASH-AND-CARRY, 
 
 Fig. 5. — Graphic Representation op Tables 4 and 6, Showing a Grocer's 
 Profits or Losses when Actual Service Rendered is Compared with a 100 
 Per Cent Credit-and-Delivery Service. 
 
 cents for every dollar's worth of goods they bought, and in the 
 middle-class neighborhood $1,041/2- In the 100 per cent credit 
 and delivery business in the wealthy neighborhood the grocer 
 would only have to charge about %ths cent more on the dollar 
 because he is practically doing a credit and delivery business at 
 present. 
 
 From this exposition it is apparent that consumers in a poor 
 neighborhood who are receiving credit and delivery accommoda- 
 tions are really receiving $1.06% cents worth of service for every 
 dollar expended and the extra 6% cents is being paid by fellow 
 consumers. To be sure, only 10 per cent demand delivery and 
 20 per cent credit, so that the 6% cents has to be paid for only a 
 small percentage of the total trade, and for this reason the burden 
 
24 
 
 of the credit-and-delivery is not more keenly felt bj those who 
 cash-and-carry in poor neighborhoods. In principle, however, it 
 IS none the less unfair. The customer demanding maximum serv- 
 ice is really forcing higher prices upon persons who would will- 
 ingly purchase the goods alone, or in other words taking an imfair 
 advantage of the woman who would economize. 
 
 It should be obvious to those who object to paying credit-and- 
 delivery expenses for fellow consumers that cash-and-carry busi- 
 nesses should be encouraged in thoir own neighborhoods and that 
 those who desire c red it-and-deli very accommodations should be 
 
 PERCENTAGE OF 
 NET LOSS NET RETURN 
 
 CASH-AND-CARRY 100% 
 ACTUAL SERVICE 
 
 CREDIT-AND-DE LIVERY 100% 
 
 6. — Graphic Represextation of Tables 4. 
 
 mm 
 
 Fig. 0.— uraphic Kepresextation of Tables 4. 5 and G, Showixg a 
 Grocer's Losses and Profits Comparatively for 100 Per Cent Cash-and- 
 Carry Service, Actual Service, and 100 Per Cent CREDiT-AND-DEuvTiRY 
 
 Service. 
 
 permitted to bear the entire percentage charge at stores which 
 cater especially to that type of patronage. Under the present 
 mingling of credit-and-delivery and cash-and-carry in actual serv- 
 ice, however, the average retailer is selling both goods and service. 
 Theoretically he should have two scales of prices — one for goods 
 and another for goods plus sei-vice. Practically, however, it is 
 obvious that he could scarcely maintain two scales of prices, since 
 such action would be impossible of adjustment among customers 
 requiring varied degrees of delivery and of credit service. 
 
 \i3 
 
 Conclusions : 
 
 1. Net return increases with Cash-and-carry service for each 
 class. 
 
 2. ^et return decreases with Credit-and-delivery service for 
 each class. 
 
 3. Wealthy class neighborhoods would gain most by Cash-and- 
 carry sei*vice. Poor class neighborhoods would gain least by Caslv- 
 and-carry service. 
 
 4. Wealthy class neighborhoods would lose least by Credit-and- 
 delivery service. Poor class neighborhood would lose most by 
 Credit-and-delivery service. 
 
 5. Middle-class neighborhood stores hold the mean in every case. 
 
 PERCENTA.GE OF 
 NET L055 NET GA\N 
 
 CASH-AND- 
 CARRY 
 
 SLRVICC 
 
 ACTUA.I. 
 SERVJCe 
 
 CREOlT-AHD" 
 
 DELiVERY 
 
 SERVICE 
 
 WEALTHY CLASS NEIGHBORHOOD 
 MIDDLE CLASS NEIGHBORHOOD 
 POOR CLASS NEIGHBORHOOD 
 
 Fig. 7. — Rearrangement of Figs. 4, 5 and 6 by Service Groups to Show 
 Contrasts Betwekn Casii-and-Cakry, Actual and Credit-and-Deliveky 
 Service. 
 
 The same percentages inustratcd in Figs. 4, 5, and 6 have been 
 rearranged in Fig. 7 by service groups to show contrasts between 
 cash-and-carry, actual, and credit-and-delivery systems. 
 
 It is interesting to note both in the case of the cash-and-carry 
 system and the credit-and-delivery that the percentage of profit 
 varies inversely in the different classes from what it does in 
 actual service. For example, both under cash-and-carry and credit- 
 and-delivery the store in the wealthy neighborhood makes the 
 largest rate of percentage, while in the poor neighborhood the 
 
 ¥ 
 
26 
 
 lowest percentage of profit and the greatest percentage of loss is 
 made. Under actual service on the contrary, the lowest net per- 
 centage of profit is made by the wealthy store and the highest in 
 the poor store. This bears out the facts set forth in the statistics 
 shown on page 13. 
 
 Cash-and-Carry Wholesale Buying 
 
 Out of the cash-and-carry versus credit-and-delivery discussion 
 the retailer may well take a lesson to himself, for economic buy- 
 ing is as much a part of his business as is economic selling. If he 
 patronizes a wholesale house that is carrying numerous small mer- 
 chants on long-time credit, and parceling out goods to them in 
 small lots, he may expect to pay that wholesaler high percentages 
 of profit to make up his losses on others. On the other hand, if he 
 trades with wholesalers doing a thirty-day cash business, whole- 
 salers who sell merchandise in large unbroken lots, and who are 
 making quick turnover, he can expect benefits comparable to those 
 of the retail customer who patronizes the cash-and-carry grocer. 
 This is the way out for the grocer who is experiencing the difficul- 
 ties of chain-store competition. If the chain-store has undersold 
 him, it is because of its advantage of participating in purchasing 
 food in bulk. Instead of paying the purchase price on one case of 
 oranges for example, it stands only its pro rata share on the car- 
 load. The grocer who w^ould meet this competition, therefore, may 
 organize with other independent grocers who are feeling a similar 
 need and through the cooperative purchasing association meet the 
 chain store on its own ground, buying his oranges at carload rates 
 also. 
 
 Conclusion 
 
 A saving of four cents on the dollar under the cash-and-carry 
 system in a well-to-do neighborhood, or two cents in a middle- 
 class neighborhood, may or may not seem a substantial amount to 
 the consumer. " For two cents or four cents carry home a dollar's 
 worth of groceries in a market basket ! " a housewife may disdain- 
 fully exclaim, and in those words she expresses her standard of 
 living. For the woman who can afford servants, store delivery of 
 food may be far more economical than an expenditure of the serv- 
 ant's time in going to and from the grocery. For another woman, 
 
 27 
 
 country air and reasonable rent in the suburbs may more than com- 
 pensate the waste incurred in telephone orders and credit-and- 
 delivery service. The degree to which the purchaser values her 
 freedom is, therefore, another factor to be considered in choosing 
 between cash-and-carry and credit-and-delivery practices. It is 
 thus that social and economic demands tend to determine prices. 
 To those who express astonishment that the savings effected by 
 the cash-and-carry system are not greater, we would respond that 
 credit-and-delivery represents but one leak in the poor Ship of the 
 High Cost of Living and that it is not until we have the sum total 
 of the leaks that we find a large reason for high prices. It is not 
 within the scope of this article to analyze contributing leaks. 
 Sufiice it to say that the demand for goods put up in small fancy 
 packages — quarter-pound bricks of butter and six-ounce jugs of 
 olive oil — fastidious tastes for foods out of season, the customer's 
 indifference to receiving his just weight and measure, and uneco- 
 nomical buying practices on the part of the retail merchant — all 
 these are sources of increase in costs to the consumer worthy of 
 consideration and research. The sum total percentage of such 
 wastes would in all probability surprise the consumer who disre- 
 gards any one of them as being too trivial or too inapplicable to 
 affect her o^vn mode of purchasing. 
 
 f 
 
REPORT FOR RETAIL GROCERS 
 
 For fiscal year ending 
 
 1. Naine 
 
 2. Location of store JSt Borough 
 
 3. Form of organization Xo. of active partners 
 
 4. Date of establishment of business 
 
 5. Class of customers 
 
 G. Average number of customers served dailv 
 
 7. What percentages of total sales are the following: 
 
 Credit Cash Delivery Carry 
 
 8. Average amount of credit outstanding 
 
 9. Average amount of stock carried 
 
 10. Average length of time credit is extended 
 
 11. Did any members of the family assist you in the business dur- 
 
 ing 1917 without compensation? If so, fill in 
 
 the following: 
 
 Relationship 
 
 Capacity in which employed 
 
 IN'uniber of hours employed daily .< 
 
 !N'umber of months employed in 1917 
 
 Estimated value of services a week 
 
 12. Has this report been made from books kept by double entry ? 
 
 By single entry ? 
 
 13. If you have no regular set of books, please answer " yes " or 
 
 " no " to the following: 
 
 (a) Do you keep a record of daily receipts and expenditures ? 
 
 (b) Do you deposit all receipts in the bank and make all pay- 
 
 ments except petty cash payments by check ? 
 
 (c) Did you obtain the figures furnished by you in this report 
 
 from your cash records ? 
 
 (d) If not, state from what sources you obtained the figures 
 
 furnished ? 
 
 1917 
 
 14. Total volume of sales , 
 15 Cost of merchandise. . 
 
 16. Gross profit. 
 
 17. Expenses 
 
 1918 
 
 128] 
 
 29 
 
 1917 
 
 1918 
 
 18. Net profit 
 
 19. Merchandise inventory at be- 
 
 ginning 
 
 20. Purchases during year 
 
 21. Total 
 
 22. Less — Merchandise consumed for 
 
 own use 
 
 23. Inventory at end 
 
 24. Total deductions 
 
 25. Cost of merchandise 
 
 26. Breakage, shrinkage and spoilage 
 
 included in 24 
 
 27. Rent (exclusive of living quarters) 
 
 28. Delivery cost inward 
 
 29. DeHvery cost outward 
 
 30. Wrapping supplies 
 
 31. Light, heat and power 
 
 32. Ice 
 
 33. Officers' salaries. No 
 
 34. Branch managers' 
 
 salaries No. of emp 
 
 35. Office salaries No 
 
 36. SeUing wages No 
 
 37. Wages other employees 
 
 38. Loss from bad debts 
 
 39. Other expenses 
 
 40. Total expenses 
 
 41. Stable, rent and food 
 
 42. Horseshoeing 
 
 43. Veterinary service 
 
 44. Repairs to wagons and harness .... 
 
 45. Insurance 
 
 46. Depreciation 
 
 47. Other expenses 
 
 48. Total expenses, horses and 
 
 wagons 
 
 49. Garage rent 
 
 50. Gasoline and oil 
 
 51. Tires 
 
 52. Repairs 
 
 53. Accessories 
 
 54. Insurance 
 
 55. Depreciation 
 
 56. Other expenses 
 
 57. Total expenses, automobiles. . . 
 
 58. Wages (drivers, chauffeurs, de- 
 
 livery boys, etc.) 
 
 59. Total dehvery costs other than 
 
 cartage and expressage . . . 
 
 
30 
 
 60 
 
 61. 
 
 62. 
 63. 
 64. 
 65. 
 66. 
 67. 
 68, 
 69. 
 70. 
 71. 
 72. 
 73. 
 75. 
 76. 
 77. 
 
 78. 
 79. 
 80. 
 81. 
 82. 
 83. 
 
 84. 
 85. 
 86. 
 
 1917 1918 
 
 Percentage of item No. 59 appli- 
 cable to delivery cost inward — 
 per cent 
 
 Percentage of item No. 59 appli- 
 cable to delivery cost outward . . 
 
 Cartage and expressage 
 
 Stationery and office supplies 
 
 Telephone 
 
 Carfares and gratuities 
 
 Advertising 
 
 Donations, presents, etc 
 
 Coat and apron supply 
 
 Removal of rubbish 
 
 Window cleaning 
 
 Sawdust 
 
 Repairs to equipment and fixtures. 
 
 Insurance 
 
 Depreciation 
 
 Other expenses 
 
 Total other expenses 
 
 . . Originar Rate of 
 
 Depreciation on equipment cost Dep. Amount 
 
 Horses and wagons 
 
 Automobiles 
 
 Store equipment and fixtures 
 
 Personal cash withdrawals 
 
 Net capital investment at begin- 
 ning 
 
 Net capital investment at end 
 
 Average amount of total weekly sales $ 
 Average amount of weekly sales of the following: 
 Butter $ Sugar $ 
 
 |ggs> S MUk, fluid $ 
 
 Flo^r $ * Milk, condensed and 
 
 evaporated, $ 
 
 t 
 
COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES 
 
 This book is due on the date indicated below, or at the 
 j expiration of a definite period after the date of borrowing, as 
 ; provided by the library rules or by special arrangement with 
 1 the Librarian in charge. 
 
 OATK BONROWCD 
 
 1 
 
 DATE DUE 
 
 DATE BORROWEO 
 
 DATE DUE 
 
 flpp 9 
 
 \3W JL^-^ 
 
 
 
 W 1^ 
 
 IP^ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ' 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ( 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ! 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 C28(747; MlOO 
 
 
 
 j 
 i 
 
 
 CD 3^51 .ffSt 
 
 N't^f 
 
 ~ 1 
 
 PH 
 
 COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES 
 
 ^^'' ^mi. 
 
 NOV 2 11994 
 
 26 193V 
 
 vi>' 
 
 ,,^^ 
 
W0^ 
 
 sTi^iiis^iiar'-'*'^"'^ \ 
 
END OF 
 TITLE