growers' NATIOlsTAL MARKETTI^G AGENCY. 5 



7. The cost of marketing cranberries has been reduced until now 

 it is believed to be one of the lowest, if not the lowest, among the 

 fruits. In 1920 the grower received 54 per cent of the consumer's 

 dollar. 



THE EVOLUTION OF MARKETING METHODS. 



A national cooperative association was organized in 1907 for the 

 purpose of uniting the cranberry growers of the country on a single 

 method of disposing of their product. Cooperation among cran- 

 berry growers had its beginning prior to this time, however. Con- 

 certed action among growers in the sale of their berries had been 

 carried on in both New Jersey and Massachusetts for some years. 



EARLY COOPERATIVE SELLING ASSOCIATIONS. 



In 1895 a number of the larger growers of New Jersey and Mas- 

 sachusetts organized and incorporated the Growers' Cranberry 

 Co. This company employed the most expert cranberry sales- 

 man available at that time and opened an office in Philadelphia. 

 Five per cent of the gross receipts was retained by the treasurer to 

 cover all expenses, the remainder being returned each year to the 

 growers in proportion to the value of their individual shipments. 



Many of the growers had private brands, and the net receipts from 

 each grower's shipments were returned to him. There was no pool- 

 ing of returns. The advantage of having an efficient salesman who 

 was in touch with market conditions controlling the distribution of 

 even 25 per cent of the crop of the country became at once apparent. ' 



The Cape Cod Cranberry Sales Co., composed of Massachusetts 

 gi'owers, was also organized about 1895 along the same general lines 

 as the Growers' Cranberry Co. The Cape Cod growers were not so 

 fortunate in their choice of salesman as was the Growers' Cranberry 

 Co., and as a consequence their company was less successful. 



The plan of operation of these two companies was not wholly co- 

 operative as that term is defined today. The product of each 

 member was sold separately, and returns were made to each member 

 on the basis of the sale of his individual product. Berries were sold 

 under the private brands of the individual growers rather than under 

 a brand of the association. There was no coordination of sales 

 between the two districts. Imperfect as was this form of cooperation, 

 it was a great advance over no cooperation, and without question the 

 experience gained by growers during this earlier period had much to 

 do with their marketing successes of later years. 



At the time these two growers' companies were operating the 

 greater portion of the crop was sold by growers to cash buyers who 

 traveled through the cranberry districts conducting separate nego- 

 tiations with each grower. Some berries were marketed on a com- 



