io6 COOPERATIVE MARKETING 



him by the manager would be a short sighted policy and 

 one not likely to occur, and indeed one very difficult of 

 accomplishment even if the manager should have malignant 

 intentions. So the chastening suspicion enters his mind 

 that after all maybe his fruit is not the equal of his neigh- 

 bor's, and then it is a short step to the determination to im- 

 prove his cultural methods until his percentages in the 

 higher grades are the equivalent of anybody's. In fact, 

 the policy of publicity adopted by the California cooperative 

 associations allows each grower to know how his results 

 compare with those obtained by others, and there is often 

 keen rivalry within an association to see who can secure 

 the highest percentages in the best grades — a situation 

 wholesome both for the membership and for the associa- 

 tion as a whole. 



But an opportunity for endless bickering is presented 

 unless the manager's power over grading is absolute and 

 incontrovertible. After the number of grades and the gen- 

 eral characteristics of each have been determined by the 

 membership as a whole at the annual meeting or by the 

 directors, the decision of the manager in any specific case 

 must be final, if internal dissensions are to be minimized. 

 Yet even with grading completely controlled by the man-, 

 ager there remains some possible basis of controversy. 

 Within a given grade there is always more or less diversity 

 of quality: some oranges graded fancy will inevitably be 

 superior to others included within the same grade. And 

 one grower's fancy fruit may on the whole excel that of 

 another. For differences in soil, humidity of the atmos- 

 phere, altitude and cultural methods all exert their varying 

 degrees of influence on quality. 



Moreover, the prices obtained for any grade depend on 

 the average quality of all the fruit included, so if one or two 

 members habitually excel all their fellows in quality they 



