IMARGINS, EXPENSES, AND PROFITS IN RETAILING MEAT 39 
delivery store groupings. (3). The 60 stores of the two previous 
groups, that is, those operated at a profit for both years and those 
operated at a loss for both years, were combined into a group which 
was subdivided according to carry! stores, limited-delivery, and 
unlimited-delivery stores. (4) Seventy-four stores from which data 
were obtained for both years were combined into groups for the years 
1923 and 1924, irrespective of whether the stores were operated at 
a profit during both years or at a loss for both years, or whether 
the stores incurred a profit for one year and a loss for the other 
year. 
In the group of 52 stores operated at a profit for both years, gross 
margin percentage increased from 23.99 to 24.53 per cent in the 
carry group and from 23.33 to 24.12 per cent in the limited-delivery 
group between the years 1923 and 1924. In the unlimited-delivery 
groups a slight decrease from 25.69 to 25.04 was noted. Total 
expense percentages in all three groups were practically constant 
for both years. The slight variations noted were probably of little 
significance. Changes in gross-margin percentage were, therefore, 
reflected directly in changes in profit percentages. 
The group of stores operated at a loss for both years was so 
limited in number that few conclusions could be drawn with respect 
to them. They were segregated in order that the profit stores which 
vrere probably more representative of actual operating conditions 
in the retail meat trade might be analyzed separately. However, 
when the stores operated at a profit or loss for both years were com- 
bined into a single group, the conclusions regarding changes in gross 
margins, total expense, and profit percentages in profit stores were 
not materially changed. The various percentages of expense retained 
about the same relation to net sales for both years. 
In the final group, 74 stores were combined irrespective of whether 
they were operated at a profit or a loss both years, or at a profit one 
year and at a loss during the other year. The difference between 
these two groups of stores was negligible, and indicated no essential 
variations in margins, expenses, and profits between the two years, in 
so far as the groups of stores were concerned. 
Comparison of the 74 stores shown in Table 14 with the 129 stores 
shown in Table 4 would seem to indicate that the 74 stores were 
fairty representative of the entire group secured for 1923. Gross 
margin percentage in the group for both 1923 and 1924 were slightly 
higher than in the group of 129 markets. This variation was intro- 
duced probably because the markets making up this group came 
largely from the northeastern and Pacific coast sections of the 
country, the central and southern sections being only partially rep- 
resented. 
The agreement was sufficiently close, however, to justify the con- 
clusion that the group of stores from which data for both years were 
obtained was fairly representative of the entire group of individual 
retail meat markets, which formed the basis for the study of 1923 
margins, expenses, and profits. For example, in 1923, gross margin 
percentage for the 74 stores in Table 14 was but 0.2 per cent higher 
than for the 129 stores in Table 4. The average total expense per- 
centage of the stores in Table 14 was 0.32 per cent below that of the 
129 stores in Table 4. Wages, rent, and wrappings percentages 
