46 Nfav Hampshire Experiment Station [Bulletin 332 



other factors involved in making the shift are favorable. The "trigger" 

 which sets off the reaction, appears to be controlled often by the handler 

 who decides when he wants to add or drop producers. Provided there has 

 been built up a desire on the part of producers to shift from the lower to 

 the higher priced market, the handler offering the higher price may in- 

 fluence producers to shift on short notice. However, in the absence of this 

 underlying desire to shift, the handler's decision to add producers is likely 

 to have little effect. The decision to drop producers is, of course, entirely 

 in the hands of the handler and his decision to do so, results in a shift in 

 market outlet regardless of price relationships and the resultant desires of 

 producers. 



Occasionally, producers either through cooperative action or indi- 

 vidually retain the initiative in deciding where to sell. By finding alterna- 

 tive outlets either through existing channels or through erection or pur- 

 chase of cooperative plants, or through marketing direct to consumers as 

 producer distributors, producers may take the initiative in selecting their 

 markets. This course sometimes involves the calling of milk strikes and 

 sometimes results in duplication of plant and distribution facilities. 



This study, together with the three preceding it, has been confined 

 to the supply side of New Hampshire milk markets. Throughout this seg- 

 ment of the marketing of an agricultural commodity, the operation of 

 what are termed the forces of free competition has been hard to find, and 

 where discerned, has been so overshadowed by the influence of various 

 institutional and monopolistic factors as to be of only secondary impor- 

 tance. Unfortunately, the institutional and monopolistic factors have not 

 always worked in the direction of marketing efficiency. Over-capacity, 

 duplication of equipment and wasted effort are all too commonly found 

 in milk collection and assembly. Pricing mechanisms fail to reflect under- 

 lying conditions of supply and demand, not only of dairy products, but 

 such items as transportation for milk, weighing and testing of milk and 

 other cost items in milk assembly. 



In its present form, elements of monopoly are too numerous to per- 

 mit the free working of competitive factors, and monoply has not pro- 

 ceeded to the point where it can introduce many efficiencies of operation. 

 PubHc control of prices has adopted (with only minor modification) 

 price levels and differentials previously present in the market, and has not 

 succeeded in bringing about economies of assembly. The operation of 

 competitive forces has been overshadowed by these other two sets of 

 price making forces and at the time these studies A\'ere made, the effects 

 have not been happy. 



