MARKET MILK BUSINESS OF DETROIT, MICH., IN 1915. 23 
of goods and selling expenses” does not include overhead charges 
for taxes, administrative expenses, or losses occasioned by breakage 
or spoilage of goods on routes. The chart is designed to show the 
profit from business on different sales routes. Some routes show a 
good margin of profit, while others are run at an actual loss. The 
dealer who would expand his business under existing competition 
often finds it advisable to build up new routes at the expense of other 
routes which are profitable. Such expenses are the inevitable results 
of any competitive system of distribution. Figure 9, like Table XVI, 
suggests that considerable savings in delivery costs can be effected 
through a more centralized distributing organization. 
ROUTE 
WNWUMBERS— | V1 12 Sig ale 
er re 
pee TP 
a0 Be oO 
228 Eee 
1000 
co 
oO 
© 
Oo 
rs 700 70 
@ 600 60 
we 
° 500 50 
& 
® 400 4 
m 0 
Sie 
2 300 30 
200 20 
Gost oF Gooos ANO GROSS RECEIPTS FROM SALES 
—-_~—_NUMBER OF BOTTLES 
RECEIPTS OR VALUE OF Gooos 
Cost oF Gooos AND SELLING EXPENSES 
eee CosT of Gooos 
Fig. 9.—Average number of bottles delivered and value of sales in relation to cost of 
goods and expenses of. delivery on 14 selected routes. 
SUMMARY OF COMPARATIVE COSTS OF HANDLING AND DIS- 
TRIBUTING MILK. 
In the foregoing tables and figures only such expenses were in- 
cluded as might be definitely allocated or fairly apportioned to either 
the expenses of handling milk in plants or of delivering in the city. 
Miscellaneous expenses, insurance, taxes, and charges for advertising, 
administrative, and office expenses were not included in any tables 
or graphs. In order to bring out some of the comparative advantages 
and disadvantages of small and large businesses, these items of ex- 
pense are included in Table XVII, which shows the average per 
gallon investments and expenses of 28 dealers grouped according to 
the number of gallons handled daily. 
| 
i 
I 
te 
