'A- 





Through the Local Livestock Ship- 

 ping Asiocialion. 



From the Feed Lot. 



To the "Producers" is 100% Cooperation. 



*♦ 



LIVESTOCK MARK€TIMG 



» lay E. Miller, 



Director 

 , , tLivestock 

 Marketing 



iv«.L*.^%>'y;*''''"^-V"'"-'r."-'. V 



By Ray E. Millet 



ORDERLY marketing is probably the most used and the least 

 understood term extant today. The producer wonders what 

 it means, the middleman resents it, and the consumer thinks it has 

 nothing to do with him. 



Probably no two persons would agree as to exact definition but 

 merely for the purpose of understanding, orderly marketing might be 

 defined as that movement of any product from the producer to the 

 consumer in the most practical and economical manner for everyone 

 concerned. 



In 1928 a total of 49,795,000 hogs went to market, 21,496,000 head, or 43%, or almost 

 half were marketed during the months of January, February, November and December. 

 The consumption of fresh meat increased during these months only 9.6% over the average 

 monthly consumption for the rest of the year. Fortunately this is the normal packing 

 season so the surplus of fresh meat could be converted into cured products. Even so when 

 nearly half of a yearly crop is marketed over a short period of time the fresh meat channels 

 are clogged, the capacity of the packing plants is strained and the producer of the product 

 takes the brunt of the situation in the form of reduced prices. The processors are pbced at 

 a disadvantage, the distributors have to operate on a narrower margin, and as a result the 



consumer pays just about as much for his product as he does when supplies are scarce. 





» » 



4t 



This Is Not Orderly Marketing 



IN the old days before artificial refrigeration and modem machin- 

 ery came into vogue the winter months were necessarily the 

 packing months. As a result it is probably true that the producers 

 have fallen into the habit to a certain extent of raising hogs for 

 the fall and winter market. There are admittedly some advantages 

 and very important ones in producing hogs for the fall market 

 but it is very doubtful if the privilege of marketing in these months 

 is worth what it costs. In 1928 the statement is made by Mr. C. B. 

 Denman, member of the Federal Farm Board, that 80% of the hog 

 crop was marketed below the average price for the year. This is 

 certainly not orderly marketing. The success of sound coopera- 

 tives everywhere satisfactorily refutes the claims of the opposition. 



ORDERLY marketing cannot be achieved without orderly 

 production. The situation referred to above is aggravated 

 in any industry wherein the production is not closely related to 

 and regulated by the distribution machinery. In 192J the 53,000,' 

 000 hogs slaughtered under federal inspection had a farm value 

 of $855,000,000. In 1926 only about 40,000,000 hogs were 

 slaughtered but they returned to the farmer $1,078,000,000. 

 In the former year the consumer paid $73,000,000 more for the 

 crop but the farmers got $223,000,000 less than they did in 1926. 

 When the production of 13,000,000 hogs results in the loss of 

 $223,000,000 in the total return on the crop it certainly is not 

 orderly production. In this instance neither the producer nor the 

 consumer benefited. The farmer could have made more money by 

 working less. 



DURING the period from i9iO'i4 the hog raiser received an 

 average of $7.25 per cwt. for live hogs. The consumer paid 

 $14.16 for the products, distribution costs were $6.91. In 1928 

 the farmer received $8.75, the consumer paid $24.07 and the dis' 

 tribution cost was $15.32. The farmer's price increased $1.50 

 per cwt., the average retail price increased $9.91 and the distribu- 

 tion cost increased $8.41. In the 1910-14 period the farmer was 

 getting about 50c out of the consumer's dollar; in 1928 he received 

 about 36.3 cents. On a carload of hogs this decline in the pro- 

 ducer's share of the consumer dollar amounts to approximately 

 $520. On the hog crop for 1928 it amounted to approximately 

 $350,000,000. 



Increases Distribution Costs 



THE old marketing system by means of which meat products 

 were moved from the farm to the consumer's table does not 

 meet the definition of orderly marketing. It has permitted wide 

 cyclical swings; far too much one year, too little a few years later 

 It has permitted radical fluctuations in seasonal movements. It 

 has resulted in increasing distribution costs with higher prices to 

 the consumer and lower prices to the producer. The coop>erative 

 marketing program has as its major objective the substitution of 

 orderly marketing for the disorderly, expensive and uneconomic 

 system which has obtained in the past. Critics of cooperative 

 marketing say that it is idealistic and theoretical. Every step 

 of progress throughout all the ages has been branded in the same 

 manner by those whose interests were jeopardised by that very 

 progress. 



