particular rail route is likely to have repercussions upon the costs of dis- 

 tributing grain-feeds. If there are retail grain-feed distributing points lo- 

 cated on the line, the abandonment foreshadows one of the following if 

 no alternative method of transportation grain-feeds is available which will 

 be at least as cheap as by rail: 



(1) The local storage and/or receiving point can be served from 

 other points by truck, with local distribution by truck. 



(2) Other storage points can take over the local truck distribution 

 routes, with the local storage and/or receiving point eliminated. 



If the company (or companies) operating from the local storage and/or 

 receiving point allocates all of any additional distributing costs to the 

 local territory in question, the effect on prices in the local territory may be 

 quite noticeable. However, if any additional distributing costs are absorbed 

 into the overall company operations (in the event of multiple-outlet firms), 

 the effect on prices in the local territory will be less pronounced. But, to 

 return to an earlier premise, it is likely that feed costs in the local territory 

 will be increased, since under most conditions shipment to local storage 

 and/or receiving points is cheaper by rail than by truck. 



4. Company Policies, Pricing Practices, Terms 



THE INFLUENCE of the parent company or supplying mill upon retail 

 distribution is considerable. Directly or indirectly this influence is 

 asserted through vertical integration (company owned stores or authorized 

 dealerships), and/or by service or sales policies. Since about 65 percent 

 of the grain-feed sold in New Hampshire is of brands milled by out-of-state 

 companies, the situation in the State with respect to policies, pricing prac- 

 tices, and terms is probably not much different than in other Eastern areas. 

 In order to evaluate the preceding, questionnaires were sent to all of 

 the feed companies whose brands were known to be sold in New Hampshire 

 and a number of retail outlets were visited. 



Method of Distribution. 



Of 16 companies reporting, 5 made sales entirely through company- 

 owned retail facilities. Nine companies sold at least one-half the total volume 

 through company-owned retail outlets; 7 sold at least half the total volume 

 through agents. 



Ten companies reported 5 percent or less of total volume went directly 

 from mill to farmer; two companies each reported 8-25, 26-49, and 50 and 

 over percent of total volume going directly from mill to farmer. In some 

 of the preceding instances, retail facilities were physically located at the mill. 



All companies probably did some distributing from railroad cars; at 

 least four concentrated on this method as much as possible. Some stressed 

 pickup at the car by the producer. 



Division of Market Area. 



The question of dividing the State into market areas for individual 

 retail outlets concerned 10 companies out of 16. The 10 companies took 

 steps to minimize territorial conflicts through the main office, district offices, 

 or local fieldmen, depending on the particular company's assignment of re- 



17 



