mill III iiiii iiiii ■■■■■ i 
RETAIL MARKETING OF MEATS 
31 
that handle lower grades than among those that handle higher 
grades. 
Table 16. — Relation of g?*oss margin and net profit to classes and grades of 
beef sold 
Per cent of sales 
Per cent of total 
Number of stores 
Range 
of 
gross 
margin 
Aver- 
age 
gross 
margin 
Aver- 
age 
net 
profit 
By classes of total 
beef sold 
By grades of total beef sold 
Steer 
Heifer 
Cow 
Choice 
Good 
Me- 
dium 
Com- 
mon 
30 
8 to 19 
19 to 29 
14.77 
22.52 
0.27 
4.79 
70.00 
G1.24 
16.67 
21.76 
13.33 
17.00 
6.67 
.80 
43.50 
39.60 
40.17 
50.40 
9.96 
25 
10.00 
As has been noted, 20.8 per cent of the stores reported carrying 
more than one grade of beef. (See Table 15.) The average ratios 
in which the quantities of meats in the various grades were reported 
as being sold in these stores were approximately 25 per cent good, 45 
per cent medium, and 30 per cent common, corresponding roughly to 
the country's slaughter. These figures are approximate only and 
of interest chiefly with reference to the prevalence of the custom 
and its relation to the consumer. To the consumer it is of interest 
because of the greater readiness in shifting from a higher to a lower 
grade on a rising market and because of the possibility of selling a 
higher grade to one customer and a lower grade to another, with 
perhaps too little difference or even no difference in price. 
The policy of lowering the grade of meats sold at a time of rising 
wholesale market and of restoring the former grade on a declining 
wholesale market, thereby furnishing meats to customers at prices 
more nearly uniform than would be possible if the same grade were 
maintained constantly, is followed by many dealers and is regarded 
with approval by persons of high business standards in the trade. 
The shifting of grades is somewhat easier to those dealers who usually 
carry more than one grade. Carrying more than one grade also 
enables an unscrupulous dealer to sell meat of a lower grade to a cus- 
tomer who is unskilled in judging meats at the same price as meat 
of a higher grade to a discriminating customer. 
The chief difficulties in bringing about the exercise of true con- 
sumptive demand and in dealing with the evils of misrepresentation, 
deceptive advertising, and substitutions are the absence of a uniform 
standard of classes and grades of meat, recognized by all whole- 
salers, retailers, and consumers alike, and the lack of ability of con- 
sumers to select meats on the basis of grade and quality. The pos- 
sibilities of substitution of inferior for better grades readily appear 
from the fact that the difference in wholesale prices between two 
successive grades, as good and medium steers, medium and common 
steers, or medium and common cows, is likely to be as great as 10 
to 20 per cent, and that meat of a lower class and grade may seem 
to the unskilled buyer the same in quality as that of a higher class 
and grade, although its actual value may be 30 or 40 per cent less. 
(See Table 17.) 
