University of California 
 College of Agriculture 
 Agricultural Extension Service 
 Berkeley, California 
 
 FACTORS THAT AFFECTED THE ANNUAL AVERAGE PRICES OF 
 CANNED PEARS, 1921-22 TO 1930-31 
 
 (A preliminary report) 
 H, R. Wellman 
 June 1931 
 
 Contribution from the 
 G-iannini Foundation of Agricultural Economics 
 
 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA 
 COLLEGE OF a anirSx?™.* n 
 
1 
 
 FACTORS THAT AFFECTED THE ANN UAL AVER A GE PRICSS OF 
 CA NNED PEARS . 1921-22 TO 1930-31 
 
 H. R. Wellman* 
 
 The purposes of this study are to determine the factors that have been res- 
 ponsible for the variations in the annual average f.o.b. prices of canned pears from 
 1921-22 to 1930-31 and to measure the influence of the more important factors that 
 can be expressed in quantitative terms. It should be clearly recognized that the 
 following analysis explains only what has occurred. It does not forecast what will 
 occur in the future. In order to use this analysis in forecasting the probable price 
 at which a given supply of canned pears can be sold or in forecasting the probable 
 supply that can be sold at a given price, it is first necessary to determine the 
 future positions of the factors that affect canned pear prices. 
 
 The analysis has been divided into two parts: (l) factors that affected the 
 prices received for canned pears sold in the United States, and (2) factors that af- 
 fected the prices received for canned pears exported to the United Kingdom. Obvious- 
 ly the prices received for canned pears sold in both the United States and the United 
 Kingdom are influenced by many factors. Not all of these factors, however, can be 
 measured with the data now available. In this analysis only the following factors 
 have been measured: (1) shipments, (2) trend of demand, and (3) prices of competing 
 canned fruits. While most of the variations that have occurred in the annual aver- 
 age f.o.b. prices of canned pears from 1921-22 to 1930-31 can be accounted for by 
 these three factors, other ones have also had some influence. 
 
 Factors That A ffe cted the Average Annual Prices of Canned Pears 
 Sold in the, U nited States. 1921-22 to" 1930-31 
 
 Relation Between F.O.B. Prices and Domestic Shipm e nts of Canned Pears . The 
 closest approximation to the supply of canned pears consumed in the United States 
 that can be obtained with the data now available is the domestic shipments of canned 
 pears by canners. Except in years when large stocks are carried over by wholesalers 
 and retailers, these shipments virtually coincide with consumption. The total annual 
 shipments of canned pears from the Pacific Coast during the period 1921-22 to 1930-31 
 were computed from data on pack and carryover, and are given in table 1. A relative- 
 ly small quantity of pears is canned in New York and Michigan. They have not been 
 included in this analysis, however, because carryover figures are not available. 
 Domestic shipments of Pacific Coast canned pears were obtained by subtracting exports 
 from total shipments (table l). The annual average f.o.b. prices received for 
 Pacific Coast canned pears sold in the United States are given in table 2, column 1. 
 
 In figure 1 the annual domestic shipments of canned pears are measured along 
 the horizontal scale, the annual average prices along the vertical scale. The 
 diagonal line represents the average relation that has existed between domestic ship- 
 ments and prices adjusted to the situation in 1928-29. From this diagonal line it 
 is possible to estimate the prices at which varying quantities of canned pears could 
 have been sold in the United States in 1928-29 if other conditions had been average. 
 Domestic shipments in 1928-29 amounted to 2,177,000 cases; the actual price was 
 $4.21 a case. The actual price, however, was lower than would normally be expected 
 from the volume of shipments only, chiefly because of the low prices of competing 
 
 * Extension Specialist in Agricultural Economics and Associate on the Giannini 
 Foundation. 
 
■ : i 
 
2. 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 UI<k} 
 
 
 
 
 
 1— 1 
 
 1— ' 
 
 k- 1 
 
 (—i 
 
 M 
 
 |—1 
 
 I— 1 
 
 M 
 
 t— ' 
 
 (—) 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 CO 
 
 hj 
 
 
 tO 
 
 to 
 
 to 
 
 tO 
 
 tO 
 
 tO 
 
 tO 
 
 tO 
 
 tO 
 
 tO 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 o 
 
 f-j 
 
 o 
 
 ca 
 
 ro 
 
 to 
 
 ro 
 
 to 
 
 ro 
 
 ro 
 
 ro 
 
 ro 
 
 to 
 
 
 CD 
 
 
 
 o o 
 
 
 O 
 
 * 
 
 o 
 
 to 
 
 00 
 
 
 Ort 
 
 Ui 
 
 
 c4 
 
 to 
 
 1 1 
 
 
 CD 
 
 
 o o 
 
 
 M 
 
 
 1 
 
 i 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 | 
 
 i 
 
 t 
 
 i 
 
 1 
 
 I 
 
 
 1 
 
 P 
 
 
 1—1 (_I 
 
 o 
 
 H" 
 
 ro 
 
 
 
 to 
 
 to 
 
 to 
 
 to 
 
 ro 
 
 to 
 
 ro 
 
 ro 
 
 
 w 
 
 
 
 
 o 
 
 
 
 
 
 VD 
 
 CD 
 
 
 0~> 
 
 
 T 
 
 
 to 
 
 
 
 
 3 1 
 
 ca 
 
 P- 
 
 41= 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 o 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 w 
 
 o 
 
 & 
 
 P 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 M 
 
 Hj 
 
 •-J 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 t\3 • 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 P 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 P 
 
 P 
 
 | 
 
 p 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 1 — 1 
 
 
 
 
 
 h o 
 
 c+ 
 
 
 ca 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 • 
 
 
 
 
 
 pi O 
 
 P 
 
 ca 
 
 H« 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 o 
 
 
 hj 
 
 
 
 § 
 
 
 
 w 
 
 
 Lb. 
 
 n 
 
 
 ro 
 
 w 
 
 0? 
 
 ro 
 
 | I 
 
 ro 
 
 t— i 
 
 o 
 
 
 CD 
 
 
 
 iIn. (t-5 
 
 
 
 • 
 
 4 
 
 Ml 
 
 4 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 o 
 
 
 o 
 
 
 
 • H* 
 
 
 C_j. 
 
 
 M 
 
 ro 
 
 
 
 ro 
 
 >^ 
 
 M 
 
 
 
 
 
 I— 1 
 
 
 
 
 M 
 
 
 o 
 
 
 C7> 
 
 i— > 
 
 to 
 
 a> 
 
 
 O 
 
 
 Ul 
 
 M 
 
 o 
 
 
 
 
 cc 
 
 
 o 
 
 
 "1 
 
 ro 
 
 
 00 
 
 \J ' 
 
 
 CX) 
 
 tO 
 
 ' — ^ 
 
 \J * 
 
 p 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 c+ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ca 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 CD 
 
 
 
 
 
 p a" 
 
 
 c+ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 CO 
 
 
 
 
 
 w 
 
 c-t- 
 
 
 o 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 # 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 II I 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 M P 
 
 
 O 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 tO CD 
 
 
 < 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 • 
 
 
 
 
 o 
 
 ro 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 o 
 
 
 
 
 p 
 
 t— 1 o 
 
 
 ca 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 o 
 
 
 
 cS 
 
 Hj ^ 
 
 1 p 
 
 
 H" 
 
 
 
 ro 
 
 1—1 
 
 
 CJl 
 
 
 H- 1 
 
 
 
 JV) 
 
 o 
 
 
 o 
 
 << 
 
 *^ 4 
 
 ro p* 
 
 
 o 
 
 
 ca 
 
 to 
 
 
 o 
 
 
 Ui 
 
 rf^ 
 
 o 
 
 Ul 
 
 O 
 
 
 ro 
 
 p 
 
 H« 
 
 Q ^ 
 
 ro p 
 
 
 s 
 
 
 ro 
 
 C*3 
 v^* 
 
 
 (V 
 
 Hp* 
 
 i i 
 
 
 
 »— ' 
 
 \J * 
 
 
 
 
 Q 
 
 
 CD 
 
 
 • 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 p 
 
 
 
 
 <S 
 
 c+ hi 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ca 
 
 
 
 ca 
 
 CD 
 
 O Ul 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 CD 
 
 ca 
 
 
 
 
 
 \—> trt 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 tO CD 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 to P 
 
 Ui (JQ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 I P 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 t— ' 
 
 
 
 
 
 JO CD 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 * 
 
 
 ca 
 
 P" 1 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 o 
 
 
 
 <J 
 
 
 
 
 
 Ul 
 
 
 n 
 
 
 05 
 
 
 to 
 
 
 ro 
 
 i — 1 
 
 o 
 
 
 H' 
 
 
 
 O Hj 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Mi 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 o 
 
 
 
 
 
 o 
 
 
 
 
 o 
 
 CJl 
 
 ro 
 
 O 
 
 -<J 
 
 Ul 
 
 ro 
 
 M 
 
 Ul 
 
 
 
 ca 
 
 I 
 
 o 
 
 M 
 
 
 
 
 
 tO 
 
 o 
 
 to 
 
 Ul 
 
 00 
 
 to 
 
 Ui 
 
 
 o 
 
 ro 
 
 o 
 
 
 CD 
 
 hi 
 
 P 
 
 •zJ P 
 
 
 
 
 CJj 
 
 Ul 
 
 i— i 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 00 
 
 o 
 
 -<J 
 
 o 
 
 to 
 
 p 
 
 
 a 
 
 
 & 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ca 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 CD 
 
 
 
 
 CD 
 
 O H, 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ca 
 
 
 
 
 
 P 1 O 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Hj P 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 I— 1 
 
 
 
 
 
 ? H- 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 » 
 
 
 
 Hj 
 
 o 
 
 O P 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 O 
 
 
 
 
 P 
 
 3 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 o 
 
 
 y — i 
 
 
 p 
 
 
 
 
 00 
 
 to 
 
 ro 
 
 1—1 
 
 
 Ul 
 
 
 t— 1 
 
 n 
 
 
 o 
 
 
 CD 
 
 f— 1 
 
 
 hr tJ 
 
 
 
 
 tO 
 
 ca 
 
 to 
 
 
 o 
 
 w 
 
 1 1 
 
 t 
 
 m 
 
 w i 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 9 
 
 
 CD fb 
 
 
 
 
 w 
 
 ro 
 
 ca 
 
 
 ro 
 
 
 1— 1 
 
 to 
 
 00 
 
 O 
 
 o 
 
 
 
 O O 
 
 O 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 p 
 
 
 
 H" 
 
 <! 
 
 O c+ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ca 
 
 
 
 p" 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 CD 
 
 
 
 OQ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ca 
 
 
 
 
 
 ca 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 o o 
 
 Ha 4 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 i— 1 
 
 
 
 
 
 o p* 
 
 P 3 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 # 
 
 
 CO 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 o 
 
 
 p" 
 
 
 
 p" CD 
 
 
 
 
 ca 
 
 W 
 
 ro 
 
 w 
 
 
 ro 
 
 to 
 
 ro 
 
 
 o 
 
 
 H* 
 
 
 
 p W 
 
 
 
 
 o 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 o 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 CD <rt- 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 tO 
 
 00 
 
 
 o 
 
 i — i 
 
 Q 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 o 
 
 
 «o 
 
 CO 
 
 -<j 
 
 ^— i 
 
 tO 
 
 Q 
 
 tO 
 
 
 o 
 
 Ul 
 
 B 
 
 
 
 ca o 
 
 
 
 
 w 
 
 ca 
 
 CD 
 
 
 CD 
 
 
 tO 
 
 Ul 
 
 to 
 
 to 
 
 p 
 
 
 »— ' 
 
 
 
 • p 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ca 
 © 
 
 
 ca 
 
 
 
 o 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 hf 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 CO 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 C! 
 
 
 ti- 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 P^ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 * 
 
 
 
 H' 
 
 
 ca 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 o 
 
 
 CD 
 
 <rt 
 
 
 ca 
 
 
 
 
 (— I 
 
 (— ' 
 
 t— 1 
 
 i— 1 
 
 
 i— j 
 
 M 
 
 
 
 
 o 
 
 
 
 CD 
 
 
 o 
 
 
 
 
 
 «■ 
 
 
 
 IS 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 o 
 
 
 tj 
 
 
 
 o 
 
 
 
 
 
 (— 1 
 
 CD 
 
 ro 
 
 
 
 1— 1 
 
 CO 
 
 o 
 
 CD 
 
 
 01 
 
 O 
 
 
 
 Hi 
 
 
 
 
 to 
 
 v* * 
 
 to 
 
 
 
 CD 
 
 tO 
 
 to 
 
 
 
 o 
 
 
 ' * 
 
 
 
 P 
 
 
 
 
 Ul 
 
 ca 
 
 
 
 tO 
 
 o 
 
 
 1^ 
 
 
 -<2 
 
 p 
 
 
 
 ci" 
 
 
 ct- 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ca 
 
 
 ca 
 
 P 
 
 
 N' 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 CD 
 
 
 
 c+ 
 
 
 O 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ca 
 
 
 
 CD 
 
 
 3 
 
 • 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 # 
 
 
 
 ca 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ■* 
 
 
 ca 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 to 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 o 
 
 
 
 o 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ro 
 
 ro 
 
 t— 1 
 
 M 
 
 1 — 1 
 
 M 
 
 
 
 
 o 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 o 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 -a 
 
 i— 1 
 
 
 tO 
 
 w 
 
 O 
 
 I— 1 
 
 o 
 
 Ul 
 
 
 
 3 
 
 ca 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 o 
 
 i — ■ 
 
 
 
 CT> 
 
 w 
 
 O 
 
 1 — 1 
 
 ro 
 
 c> 
 
 o 
 
 
 CD 
 
 c+ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 < — * 
 
 
 
 tij 
 
 hp* 
 
 
 1 — 1 
 
 CD 
 
 Ul 
 
 p 
 
 ca 
 o 
 
 01 
 
 
 P 
 c+ 
 
 ca 
 
 H* 
 
 o 
 
 
 hj 
 
 p 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 p 
 
 hf 
 hf 
 «< 
 o 
 < 
 
 CD 
 
 CO 
 
 p" 
 
 3 
 
 CD 
 
 o 
 hf 
 
 ca 
 
 o 
 
 Hj 
 P 
 
 o 
 
 H" 
 Hj 
 H- 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 p 
 
 p 
 
 ca 
 c+ 
 
 O 
 P 
 
 O 
 P^ 
 
 hj 
 
 o 
 
 hf 
 ca 
 
 t— 1 
 
 o 
 
Digitized by the Internet Archive 
 
 in 2014 
 
 https://archive.org/details/factorsthataffec05well 
 
3. 
 
 w ro 
 
 C+ C+ bd 
 
 p (D ^ 
 
 CD 
 
 l-J 
 
 i«4 
 
 O H- 
 
 P o 
 
 
 M 
 
 I— 1 
 
 M 
 
 tD 
 
 
 
 
 03 
 
 ro 
 
 ro 
 
 JO 
 
 O 
 
 
 00 
 
 
 1 
 
 03 
 
 1 
 
 l 
 
 ro 
 
 1 
 
 ro 
 
 M 
 
 o 
 
 
 CO 
 
 03 
 
 CD 
 
 UD 
 
 m 
 
 I 
 
 ro 
 
 t— • 
 
 ro 
 
 
 
 M 
 
 <£> 
 
 UD 
 
 <£> 
 
 ro 
 
 W 
 
 ro 
 
 03 
 
 ro 
 
 
 ! 
 
 I 
 
 1 
 
 ro 
 
 ro 
 
 ro 
 
 
 03 
 
 ro 
 
 CO 
 
 ro 
 
 ZN5 
 
 Ul 
 
 if* 
 
 en 
 
 • • • 
 
 >F> Ui Cn 
 
 -v2 rv> 
 
 -<1 
 
 o 
 
 Cji 
 
 o 
 
 rororoMh-'H-'h-'i-'H- 1 
 
 — 3 t-F^- i — 1 CT> <£> 03 O M O Ui 
 COO-~3-^Oi^03H-'COCn 
 
 M 
 
 h- 1 
 
 CO 
 
 I— J 
 
 VO O 
 
 o 
 
 • • 
 
 o 
 ft) 
 
 • 
 
 iff 
 
 CO 
 
 M 
 O 
 03 
 • 
 
 03 
 
 03 
 
 CD CI) 
 I P 
 
 O 
 
 o w f-i 
 
 P CD H> 
 
 BO 
 
 Hj CD 
 
 O 
 
 0 W 
 • CD 
 
 0 1 4 
 
 03 t) 
 
 & o 
 
 3 w 
 
 © c+ 
 
 c+ O 
 CO 
 
 0 
 
 <i 
 
 CD 
 P 
 
 Cj TO 
 
 CD 
 
 CD 4 
 O 
 
 02 CD 
 c+ Ui 
 P 
 
 W 
 
 CD CD 
 W O 
 CD 
 
 P H« 
 3 <j 
 
 CD 
 
 O 
 
 § 
 p 
 
 O 
 O 
 
 cn 
 
 o 
 
 P 
 o 
 
 H» 
 H) 
 H« 
 
 O 
 
 O 
 O 
 P 
 CO 
 
 Hj O 
 
 Hj 
 
 CD 
 O 
 c+ 
 H* 
 
 TO 
 
 P 
 
 CD 
 
 CD 
 1-3 p 
 
 CO 
 CO 
 
 o 
 
 3 
 
 CD 
 
 H3 
 
 CD 
 
 ro 
 
Fig. 1. Relation Between F. O.B. Prices and Domestic Shipments of Pacific 
 Coast Canned Pears, Adjusted to the Situation in 1928-29 
 
 6.20 
 
 S 5 - 80 
 
 o 
 
 CD 
 
 w 
 u 
 a 
 
 iH 
 «H 
 
 O 
 t3 
 
 5.40 
 
 5.00 
 
 4.60 
 
 g 4.20 
 
 •H 
 
 ^ 3.80 
 
 3.40 
 
 .6 .8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 
 
 Domestic shipments - million cases 
 
 2.6 
 
 Fig. 2. Trend of Demand for Canned Pears in the United States 
 
 + 60 
 + 40 
 
 * 20 
 
 -120 
 
 -140 
 
 1921 '22 '23 
 
 '24 '25 '26 ♦ 27 * 28 
 
 Year beginning June 1 
 
 '29 '30 
 
5. 
 
 Fig. 3. Relation Between Prices Received for Pacific Coast Canned Pears Sold 
 in the United States and Index of Prices of Competing Canned Fruits 
 
 SO 85 90 95 100 105 110 115 120 
 Index - canned fruit prices 
 
6 
 
 canned fruits. Under normal conditions domestic shipments of 2,177,000 cases could 
 have been sold for $4,38 a case. And if domestic shipments in the year had been as 
 small as they were in 1924-25, when they amounted to 1,003,000 cases, the price would 
 have been around $5.83 a case; or if they had been the same as in 1925-26 - 
 1,334,000 cases - the price would have been around $5.42 a case. The diagonal line, 
 therefore, represents the situation that has existed between shipments and prices at 
 a given time; namely 1928-29. The same situation may also exist over a period of 
 time if there is no change in the demand for canned pears. 
 
 Trend of Deman d for Ca nned Pears in the United States . The trend of demand 
 for canned pears in the United States from 1921-22 to 1930-31 is shown in figure 2, 
 The level of demand in 1928-29 is taken as the base and is shown on the vertical 
 scale as zero. The trend of demand in the other years is measured from the base year. 
 Figure 2 shows that the same volume of canned pears could have been sold in the 
 United States for $1*12 a case more in 1928-29 than in 1921-22, and for 6 cents a 
 case more in 1930-31 than in 1928-29, provided the actual demand has coincided with 
 the trend. It will be noted that the trend of demand increased rapidly during the 
 first part of the period but less rapidly during the past few years. 
 
 Relation Between F.O.B. Prices of Canned Pears and Index of Prices of 
 Competing Canned Fruits . The price that consumers will pay for canned pears at any 
 given time is influenced not only by supply of canned pears but also by the prices 
 of products that serve as substitutes for them. If the prices of these alternative 
 products are low relative to the price of canned pears, consumers will buy more of 
 them and fewer canned pears. On the other hand, if the prices of the alternative 
 products are high relative to the price of canned pears, consumers will tend to sub- 
 stitute canned pears for them. 
 
 With the information now available it is not possible to determine exactly 
 what products compete with canned pears and to measure accurately the influence of 
 each of the products. In lieu, therefore, of an index which contains all of the 
 products that compete with canned pears and only those products and which gives each 
 product its correct weight, an index consisting of the prices of canned peaches, 
 pineapples, and apricots is used, (table 2, column 3), 
 
 This index reflects not only changes in the supplies of canned peaches, pine- 
 apples, and apricots from year to year, but in addition it takes into account changes 
 in the supplies of other products which compete with canned fruits and also changes 
 in the buying power of consumers and changes in the general price level. It would, 
 therefore, be a duplication to include these factors in the analysis after having 
 already used an index which reflects them. For reference purposes, however, indexes 
 of commodity prices, employment, and fruit production in the United States are given 
 in table 4. 
 
 In figure 3 the index of canned fruit prices is measured along the horizontal 
 scale and the price of canned pears along the vertical scale. The diagonal line 
 shows the average effect that changes in the index of canned fruit prices have had 
 upon the price of canned pears. In 1929-30 when the index of canned fruit prices 
 was 116.9, the price of canned pears was 68 cents a case higher than it would have 
 been if the index of canned fruit prices had been 100. On the other hand, in 1930-31 
 the very low prices of competing canned fruits - the index was 92.6 - resulted in a 
 decrease in the price of canned pears of 30 cents. 
 
 Comparison of the Actual Prices with the Prices Accounted for by the Factors 
 Measured . From the three factors of domestic shipments, trend of demand, and index 
 
7. 
 
 o o o o o 
 o o o o o 
 
 1 — 'I — ' (■— ' 
 
 * 
 
 O 4 
 CD 
 I— 1 
 
 Qi ^ W M H 
 
 4 O ti) hj ti] 
 
 4 o 4 ^ ^ 
 
 O M O O O 
 
 3 fi 3 3 3 
 
 w ro h 
 
 o 
 
 O 
 
 M 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 h- 1 
 
 CO 
 
 • 
 
 
 
 o 
 
 
 o 
 
 
 *s 
 
 
 9 
 
 
 CD 
 
 
 CO 
 
 
 »d 
 
 
 o 
 
 
 
 
 ft 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Hj 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 CD 
 
 
 CO 
 
 
 H« 
 
 
 
 
 o 
 
 
 o 
 
 
 
 Hj hi 
 
 «<! 
 P I 
 
 c+ 
 
 P M 
 
 " s 
 
 CD 
 O 
 c+ 
 
 e+ 
 O 
 
 CD 
 < 
 
 CO 
 (-"• 
 
 o 
 
 M 
 
 03 
 
 o 
 I 
 
 w 
 
 I — 1 
 
 M 
 
 tQ 
 to 
 
 i 
 
 w 
 o 
 
 U3 
 
 ro 
 
 CD 
 
 ro 
 -a 
 
 00 
 
 ro 
 cn 
 
 ro 
 -a 
 
 M 
 
 <£> 
 
 ro 
 I 
 
 ro 
 cn 
 
 ro 
 cn 
 
 M 
 
 M 
 
 H 
 
 tO 
 
 
 tD 
 
 tO 
 
 ro 
 
 ro 
 
 
 ro 
 
 M 
 
 I 
 
 & 
 
 ro 
 
 
 
 ro 
 
 
 
 CJ1 
 
 
 Cn 
 
 Cn 
 
 cn 
 
 Cn 
 
 0> 
 
 • 
 
 • 
 
 • 
 
 • 
 
 s 
 
 • 
 
 o 
 
 • 
 
 • 
 
 
 
 o 
 
 Cn 
 
 
 CD 
 
 Oi 
 
 CD 
 
 03 
 
 O 
 
 CD 
 
 05 
 
 
 ro 
 
 w 
 
 
 o 
 
 01 
 
 £3= 
 
 o 
 p 
 
 CO 
 CD 
 
 + 
 o 
 
 + 
 o 
 
 O 
 
 I 
 
 o 
 
 I 
 
 o 
 
 1 
 
 o 
 
 
 ! 
 
 O 
 
 l 
 
 o 
 
 l 
 
 • 
 
 • 
 
 • 
 
 • 
 
 • 
 
 • 
 
 • 
 
 • 
 
 * 
 
 • 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 H* 
 
 05 
 
 
 to 
 
 
 
 05 
 
 o 
 
 
 <J3 
 
 00 
 
 
 
 oq 
 
 ro 
 
 €-1 
 
 1 
 
 + 
 
 i 
 
 I 
 
 
 1 
 
 + 
 
 ! 
 
 + 
 
 1 
 
 
 • 
 
 • 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 03 
 
 
 o 
 
 ro 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 
 I— 1 
 
 M 
 
 ro 
 
 o 
 
 O 
 
 CO 
 
 CD 
 
 CO 
 
 o 
 
 ro 
 
 o 
 
 03 
 
 05 
 
 o 
 
 P 
 
 03 
 
 
 
 
 m 
 
 Cn 
 
 cn 
 
 *> 
 
 cn 
 
 cn 
 
 • 
 
 • 
 
 • 
 
 • 
 
 • 
 
 • 
 
 9 
 
 • 
 
 • 
 
 Cn 
 
 CO 
 
 05 
 
 
 cn 
 
 ro 
 
 Cn 
 
 CO 
 
 O 
 
 O 
 
 O 
 
 HJ 
 
 o 
 
 
 cn 
 
 ro 
 
 cn 
 
 -<2 
 
 o 
 
 
 03 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 cn 
 
 
 Cn 
 
 cn 
 
 • 
 
 • 
 
 • 
 
 • 
 
 • 
 
 • 
 
 • 
 
 • 
 
 • 
 
 • 
 
 
 CO 
 
 ro 
 
 -a 
 
 
 cn 
 
 Cn 
 
 
 h- 1 
 
 O 
 
 00 
 
 ro 
 
 
 cn 
 
 -a 
 
 ro 
 
 -a 
 
 Cn 
 
 O 
 
 Cn 
 
 CD 
 <f 
 
 O 
 P 
 
 co 
 
 CD 
 
 ro 
 
 CD CD 
 I P 
 
 CO 
 
 bJ 
 
 CO 
 c+ 
 
 S g 
 
 I— 1 CD O P 
 
 e+ 
 CO 
 
 c+ 
 CD 
 
 CD 
 p. p, 
 
 Hj > 
 O P> 
 
 CO 
 
 05 
 
 HP- 
 
 O O 
 
 Hj Hj i> 
 
 B ° ^ 
 3 o *j 
 
 CD O 
 
 P* 3 >xS ca 
 
 Hj CD 
 CO 
 
 o to 
 
 CD P 
 CO ct 
 
 O 
 
 ct CD 
 CD CD 
 
 M 
 p Hj 
 O O I— 
 
 C+ H[ P 
 
 O CD H* 
 4 I 3 
 
 H5 
 
 <■* O 
 
 o d 
 
 CD P 
 I — 1 
 
 CO 
 
 CD 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 CD 
 CO 
 
 W 
 
 O 
 CD 
 H* 
 <} 
 0 
 P* 
 
 Hj 
 O 
 
 p 
 o 
 
 H" 
 Hj 
 H" 
 
 O 
 
 O 
 
 o 
 p 
 w 
 
 c+ 
 
 a 
 
 CD 
 
 p- 
 
 CD 
 P 
 
 hf 
 
 CO 
 
 CD 
 O 
 
 H* 
 
 B 4 
 
 c=i 
 
 H" 
 
 CD 
 P< 
 
 CO 
 
 c+ 
 
 p 
 
 c+ 
 CD 
 CO 
 
8. 
 
 Table 4 
 
 Indexes of Prices, Employment, and Fruit Production in the United States 
 
 
 Wholesale 
 
 
 
 
 
 prices of all 
 
 
 Factory 
 
 Fruit 
 
 Year 
 
 commodities 
 
 General prices 
 
 employment 
 
 production 
 
 
 Av. 1910-1914=100 
 
 1913 = 100 
 
 Av. 1923-1925=100 
 
 Av. 1923-1925=100 
 
 
 1 
 
 2 
 
 3 
 
 4 
 
 1921-22 
 
 136 
 
 158 
 
 84.3 
 
 61 
 
 1922-23 
 
 147 
 
 162 
 
 98.4 
 
 97 
 
 1923-24 
 
 144 
 
 166 
 
 101.5 
 
 104 
 
 1924-25 
 
 146 
 
 167 
 
 96.0 
 
 97 
 
 1925-26 
 
 150 
 
 172 
 
 101. 2 
 
 99 
 
 1926-27 
 
 142 
 
 171 
 
 100.4 
 
 130 
 
 1927-28 
 
 141 
 
 173 
 
 97.0 
 
 89 
 
 1928-29 
 
 142 
 
 178 
 
 99.7 
 
 118 
 
 1929-30 
 
 138 
 
 177 
 
 96.7 
 
 95 
 
 1930-31* 
 
 117 
 
 161 
 
 80.0 
 
 112 
 
 . 
 
 1930 
 
 
 
 
 
 June 
 
 127 
 
 169 
 
 88.8 
 
 
 July 
 
 123 
 
 167 
 
 S5.5 
 
 
 .ri-UgUS t 
 
 Xtto 
 
 loo 
 
 OD. 1 
 
 
 September 
 
 123 
 
 167 
 
 86.4 
 
 
 October 
 
 121 
 
 163 
 
 84.3 
 
 
 November 
 
 117 
 
 161 
 
 81.0 
 
 
 December 
 
 114 
 
 158 
 
 78.8 
 
 
 1931 
 
 
 
 
 
 January 
 
 112 
 
 157 
 
 76.4 
 
 
 February 
 
 110 
 
 157 
 
 77.3 
 
 
 March 
 
 109 
 
 157 
 
 78.1 
 
 
 April 
 
 107 
 
 
 77.9 
 
 
 ^'•Preliminary - subject to revision. 
 Sources of data: 
 
 Column 1. U. S. Dept. Labor, Bur. Labor Statistics. Index obtained by dividing 
 the new series, 1926=100 by its pre-war average 1910-1914, 68.5. 
 
 Column 2. Standard Trade and Securities Service. Standard Statistical Bulletins. 
 Index prepared by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. 
 
 Column 3. Federal Reserve Bulletins. 
 
 Column 4. Fruits included are as follows: canned apricots, cherries, peaches, 
 pears, pineapples; fresh apples, apricots, peaches, pears, plums, 
 prunes, grapefruit, oranges, bananas; dried apricots, peaches, prunes. 
 
9. 
 
 of prices of competing canned fruits, it is possible to explain most of the varia- 
 tions that have occurred in the annual average prices received for canned apricots 
 sold in the United States during the 10 years from 1921-22 to 1930-31. This is 
 shown in detail in table 3. For example, in 1924-25 domestic shipments amounted to 
 1,003,000 cases. If domestic shipments in 1928-29 had been only 1,003,000 cases, 
 the price would have been around $5.83 a case, (figure l). Figure 2 shows, however, 
 that the trend of demand in 1924-25 was 37 cents a case less than in 1928-29, so we 
 must subtract 37 cents from $5.83, The index of prices of canned fruits in 1924-25 
 was 102.4, and from figure 3 we find 10 cents must be added,, The result of these 
 calculations is $5.56. The actual price in 1924-25 was $5.57 a case. From table 3 
 it will be observed that the prices accounted for by the three factors measured agree 
 closely with the actual prices in most years. 
 
 Definite information is not available as to why the price accounted for by 
 the factors measured was 30 cents a case lower in 1925-26 than the actual price. A 
 partial explanation might be that wholesalers and retailers had relatively large 
 stocks of canned pears on hand at the end of the season and that, therefore, consump- 
 tion in 1925-26 was smaller than shipments. If such had been the case, it would also 
 account for the actual price in 1926-27 being 8 cents a case lower than the price ex- 
 pected from the factors measured. A similar situation may have been responsible for 
 the actual prices being 10 cents a case higher in 1922-23 and 12 cents a case lower 
 in 1923-24 than the prices accounted for by the factors measured. In 1928-29, how- 
 ever, the difference of 9 cents a case between the actual and expected price cannot 
 be explained by unusually large or small stocks in hands of wholesalers and retailers 
 since the available information indicates that their stocks were not abnormal in 
 that year. 
 
 It is evident that factors other than those mentioned, such as the quality 
 of the canned pears, advance or decline in canners' prices during the year, and the 
 lag of retail prices, have also had some influence upon the average annual prices 
 canners received. 
 
 Factors That Affected the Average Annual Prices Received for Pacific 
 Coast Canned Pears Sold in the United Kingdom, 1923-24 to 1930-31* 
 
 Relation Between Prices Received for Pacific Coast C anne d Pears Exported to 
 the United Kingdom and Unit e d Kingdom Imports of Canne d Pears. Imports of canned 
 pears into the United Kingdom have not been separately reported. However, a rough 
 approximation to the imports may be obtained from quantities exported from the United 
 States and Australia (table 5). During the calendar year of 1930 these two countries 
 furnished 94 per cent of the total United Kingdom imports of canned pears. The Union 
 of South Africa and Canada furnished most of the remaining 6 per cent. 
 
 In figure 4 the United Kingdom imports (exports from the United States and 
 Australia to the United Kingdom) of canned pears are measured along the horizontal 
 scale, the annual average prices of Pacific Coast canned pears t f.o.b. Pacific Coast 
 dock, along the vertical scale. The diagonal line represents the average relation 
 that has existed between imports and prices adjusted to the situation in 1928-29. 
 From this line it is possible to estimate the prices at which varying quantities of 
 canned pears could have been sold in the United Kingdom in 1928-29 if other condi- 
 tions had been average. Imports in 1923-29 amounted to 1,704,000 cases; the actual 
 
 It was not possible to include 1921-22 and 1922-23 in the analysis because exports 
 of canned pears from Australia are not available for those years. 
 
i • ; ' 
 
10. 
 
 ID 
 
 o 
 
 G 
 *i 
 
 O 
 
 o 
 P 
 
 c+ 
 
 4 
 
 
 o 
 
 
 
 o 
 
 ■S 
 
 
 
 P 
 
 
 
 00 
 
 P< 
 
 o 
 
 
 o 
 
 
 pi 
 
 
 P 
 
 
 
 c+ 
 
 <J 
 
 
 
 H" 
 
 P 
 
 
 P 
 
 
 o 
 
 iaS 
 
 • 
 
 Pi 
 
 P 
 <i 
 
 
 a 1 
 
 H- 
 
 
 «=< 
 
 p 
 
 
 
 c+ 
 
 
 g 
 
 
 
 
 B 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 o 
 
 
 C 
 
 
 
 P 
 
 
 
 p 
 
 the 
 
 
 o 
 
 a p 
 
 G 
 
 O 
 ca 
 
 F H" 
 
 O 
 
 P G 
 
 H« ca 
 
 | 3 
 
 1— 1 
 
 f2 
 3 
 
 o 
 
 p 
 1 
 
 p 
 
 & 
 
 o 
 
 
 
 
 
 e 
 
 cn 
 
 Cn 
 
 
 
 • 
 
 • 
 
 • 
 
 
 » 
 
 • 
 
 e 
 
 
 Cn 
 
 CD 
 
 O 
 
 fe 
 
 o 
 
 oj 
 
 ro 
 
 Cn 
 
 
 
 ro 
 
 
 CD 
 
 CO 
 
 0"> 
 
 
 03 
 
 o 
 
 ro 
 
 <0 
 
 I 
 
 o 
 
 <o 
 fo 
 
 CD 
 I 
 
 ro 
 
 <0 
 
 tO 
 -3 
 I 
 
 CO 
 
 ro 
 
 *0 
 -3 
 
 tO 
 
 ro 
 cn 
 
 I 
 
 lO 
 
 cn 
 
 t— ' 
 
 tO 
 £0 
 
 I 
 
 1— 1 
 
 <0 
 
 ro 
 w 
 I 
 
 to 
 
 
 
 V- 1 
 
 M 
 
 
 
 
 *» 
 
 i* 
 
 •* 
 
 <• 
 
 <• 
 
 03 
 
 o 
 
 CT> 
 
 M 
 
 ro 
 
 cn 
 
 
 M 
 
 03 
 
 O 
 
 CO 
 
 
 ro 
 
 
 O 
 
 1 — 1 
 
 o 
 
 ro 
 
 tO 
 tD 
 CO 
 
 CD 
 
 o 
 
 03 CO 
 
 o o 
 
 Cn 
 o 
 
 ro 
 
 ro 
 
 ro 
 
 i— 1 
 
 03 
 
 -2 
 
 ro 
 o 
 
 o 
 o 
 o 
 
 o 
 p 
 
 CO 
 
 G 
 co 
 
 
 
 1 — 1 
 
 t— 1 
 
 M 
 
 M 
 
 
 » 
 
 
 
 -» 
 
 <i 
 
 
 <■ 
 
 Cn 
 
 o 
 
 
 I- 1 
 
 03 
 
 Cn 
 
 1— 1 
 
 O 
 
 
 O 
 
 Cn 
 
 O 
 
 ro 
 
 03 
 
 ro 
 
 M 
 
 
 M 
 
 CD 
 
 
 cn 
 
 ro 
 
 G* 
 
 G 
 
 hf 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 1— 1 
 
 
 
 
 P 
 
 to 
 
 o 
 
 ID 
 
 <0 
 
 O 
 
 tO 
 
 O 
 
 CD 
 
 G 
 
 
 P" 
 
 o 
 
 03 
 
 CO 
 
 
 M 
 
 
 o 
 
 to 
 
 
 
 G 
 
 • 
 
 • 
 
 • 
 
 » 
 
 • 
 
 • 
 
 « 
 
 • 
 
 O 
 
 
 CO 
 
 ro 
 
 
 M 
 
 o 
 
 O 
 
 
 o 
 
 03 
 
 ro 
 
 03 
 
 Cn 
 
 P Nj 
 
 G G 
 
 I P 
 
 P 
 
 P o 
 
 O P 
 
 H- CO 
 
 P" Hi G 
 O H- 
 O O 
 
 Hi 
 
 o 
 
 G 
 
 O • G 
 
 P a 2 
 
 CO • 
 
 P 
 H* 
 H" 
 G 
 Pi 
 
 CO 
 c+ 
 
 P 
 c+ 
 G 
 CO 
 
 g 
 
 M 
 P 
 
 P CJ 
 
 ti P 
 
 pi H- 
 
 c+ 
 
 tt> G 1-3 
 £ Pi O 
 CO et- 
 c+ CO p 
 hf ct H 
 
 p p 
 
 t-J c+ 
 H« G 
 P CO 
 
 CD 
 
 o 
 
 CO 
 c+ 
 
 o 
 
 c+ 
 
 ff 
 
 H" 
 c+ 
 G 
 P 
 
 w 
 
 P 
 o 
 B 
 
 o p 
 
 H, P 
 
 G 
 
 G M 
 P o 
 
 u§ ° 
 
 e+ P H' 
 M 05 O 
 G 
 CO 
 
 <rt- 
 O 
 
 c+ 
 
 CD 
 
 Cj G 
 P 
 
 c+ 
 G 
 
 P G 
 G 
 
 CO 
 
 W 
 
 G 
 
 H« 
 
 P 
 
 P G 
 O G 
 3 H- 
 <J 
 G 
 P 
 
 o 
 
 p 
 
 E 
 
 o i-d 
 
 P 
 
 G 
 
 C+ H- 
 G 
 
 P a 
 
 G O 
 
 c+ p 
 
 O CO 
 
 00 
 
 a 
 
 i» P 
 
 G G 
 
 G P 
 c+ 
 H* 
 
 P G 
 
 era P 
 
 H3 00 
 
 B 1 w 
 
 o 
 
 G 
 P 
 
g. 4. Relation Between Prices Received for Pacific Coast Canned Pears Exported 
 
 to the United Kingdom and United Kingdom Imports of Canned Pears, Adjusted 
 
 to the Situation in 1923-29 
 
 5.60 
 
 .7 .8 .9 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.8 1.9 
 
 Imports - million cases 
 
 Fig. 5. Trend of Demand for Canned Pears in the United Kingdom 
 
 CD 
 CO 
 
 o 
 
 0) 
 
 Pi 
 
 CO 
 
 -p 
 
 CD 
 
 o - 
 
 + 100 
 
 + 80 
 
 + 60 
 
 + 40 
 + 20 
 
 0 
 
 20 
 
 - 40 
 
 - 60 
 
 ' — 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 7 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 i 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 . 1 
 
 
 
 
 i 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 19P.3 ' PA ' 2F> ' 9A '97 I op. » « 
 
 DO « *7 r\ 
 
 
 
 Year beginning June 1 
 
. 6. Relation Between Prices Received for Pacific Coast Canned 
 Pears Exported to the United Kingdom and Index of Prices 
 of Competing Canned Fruits 
 
 +80 
 +60 
 
 +40 
 
 -80 
 
 88 90 92 94 96 98 100 102 104 106 108 
 Index - canned fruit prices 
 
13. 
 
 price was $4.04 a case. The actual price, however, was lower than would normally 
 be expected, chiefly "because of the low prices of competing canned fruits. Under 
 normal conditions imports of 1,704,000 cases could have been sold for $4.14 a case. 
 And if imports in 1928-29 had been as small as they were in 1924-25 when they amount- 
 ed to 1,135,000 cases, the normal price would have been around $4.62 a case, or if 
 they had been the same as in 1925-26 - 1,524,000 cases - the normal price would have 
 been around $4.28 a case. The diagonal line, therefore, represents the situation 
 that has existed between imports and prices at a given time; namely 1928-29. The 
 same situation may also exist over a period of years if there is no change in the 
 demand for canned pears. 
 
 Trend of Demand for Canned P e ars in the United Kingdom. The trend of demand 
 for canned pears in the United Kingdom from 1923-24 to 1930-31 is shown in figure 
 5. The level of demand in 1928-29 is taken as the base and is shown on the vertical 
 scale as zero. The trend of demand in the other years is measured from the base 
 year. Figure 5 shows that the same volume of canned pears could have been sold in 
 the United Kingdom for 60 cents a case more in 1923-24 than in 1928-29, and for 14 
 cents a case more in 1928-29 than in 1930-31, provided the actual demand had coin- 
 cided with the trend. It will be noted that there has been a sharp downward trend 
 in the demand for canned pears in the United Kingdom, whereas in the United States 
 there was a pronounced upward trend in demand from 1923-24 to 1926-27. 
 
 Relation Between Prices Received for Pacific Coast Canned Pears Exported to 
 Unite d Kingdom and Index of P rices of Competing Canned Fruits . Just as the price, 
 which consumers in the United States will pay for canned pears at any given time, 
 is influenced by the prices of products that serve as substitutes for them so is the 
 price, which consumers in the United Kingdom will pay for canned pears at any given 
 time, influenced by the prices of competing products. 
 
 In figure 6 the index of prices of competing canned fruits (table 5, column 
 5) is measured along the horizontal scale and the price of canned pears along the 
 vertical scale. The diagonal line shows the average effect that changes in the in- 
 dex of canned fruit prices have had upon the price of canned pears. In 1929-30, when 
 the index of canned fruit prices was 103.4, the price of canned pears was 20 cents a 
 case higher than it would have been if the index of canned fruit prices had been 100. 
 On the other hand, in 1930-31 the very low prices of competing canned fruit - the 
 index was 90.2 - resulted in a decrease in the price of canned pears of 60 cents a 
 case. 
 
 The index of canned fruit prices reflects not only changes in the supplies 
 of canned fruits from year to year, but in addition it takes into account changes in 
 the supplies of other products which compete with canned fruits and also changes 
 in the buying power of consumers and changes in the general price level. For refer- 
 ence purposes, however, the United Kingdom production and imports of fresh and canned 
 fruits are given in table 7 and indexes of commodity prices and unemployment are 
 given in table 8. 
 
 Comparison of the Actual Prices with the Prices Accounted for by the Factors 
 Measured . From the three factors of imports, trend of demand, and index of prices of 
 competing canned fruits it is possible to explain most of the major variations that 
 have occurred in the annual average prices received for Pacific Coast canned pears 
 sold in the United Kingdom during the 8 years from 1923-24 to 1930-31. This is 
 shown in detail in table 6. 
 
w 
 
 o 
 o 
 
 CD 
 CO 
 
 (-" 
 
 TO 
 
 n 
 
 CD 
 Ul 
 
 H- 
 O 
 
 o 
 M 
 
 CO 
 
 ro 
 
 § 
 
 p. 
 
 oq 
 o 
 I 
 
 H 
 
 ro 
 
 & 
 
 o 
 
 IV) 
 00 
 
 ro 
 
 IV) 
 
 i 
 
 ro 
 
 03 
 
 IV) 
 C7> 
 
 I 
 
 I— ' 
 
 ro 
 
 Cn 
 
 1 
 
 ro 
 
 ro 
 
 CH 
 
 M 
 
 <£> 
 IV) 
 W 
 I 
 
 IV) 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 • 
 
 • 
 
 • 
 
 • 
 
 • 
 
 • 
 
 • 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ro 
 
 
 00 
 
 o 
 
 CT> 
 
 
 O 
 
 
 CD 
 
 ro 
 
 o 
 
 % 
 
 o 
 p 
 
 w 
 
 CD 
 
 I 
 
 I 
 
 CD 
 
 O 
 
 + 
 
 + 
 
 + 
 
 + 
 
 + 
 
 
 ro 
 
 
 Cn 
 
 CJ> 
 
 O 
 
 
 vO 
 
 ro 
 
 o 
 
 I + 
 
 cn ro 
 o o 
 
 I 
 
 I— ' 
 
 IV) 
 
 I 
 
 ro 
 
 on 
 
 + 
 
 i 
 
 if* 
 
 o 
 
 i 
 
 OJ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Cn 
 
 if* 
 
 • 
 
 • 
 
 • 
 
 • 
 
 • 
 
 e 
 
 a 
 
 » 
 
 On 
 
 
 O 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 CD 
 
 ro 
 
 CJ1 
 
 en 
 
 OJ 
 
 
 cn 
 
 
 lf> 
 
 
 • 
 
 
 cn 
 
 Cn 
 
 
 • 
 
 p 
 
 • 
 
 • 
 
 • 
 
 • 
 
 • 
 
 CJI 
 
 CD 
 
 o 
 
 
 o 
 
 oi 
 
 ro 
 
 cn 
 
 
 ro 
 
 
 o 
 
 CO 
 
 CO 
 
 
 <2 
 
 ©5= 
 Id 
 
 to 
 
 03 
 
 on 
 
 CD CD 
 i P 
 
 5d 
 
 
 
 H" 
 
 CO 
 
 mp 
 
 c+ 
 
 
 o 
 
 
 
 
 
 ct 
 
 w 
 
 CD 
 P> 
 
 o 
 
 
 
 Hj 
 
 1— 1 
 
 
 
 
 g 
 
 o 
 
 pi 
 
 o 
 
 9 
 
 Pi p. 
 
 H, J> 
 O P* 
 
 hi C_l. 
 
 ct W 
 
 hf ct 
 
 CD 5 
 
 ct 
 
 P o > 
 
 Pip" 
 
 5 e_i. 
 
 oy is 
 
 P- 4 CO 
 
 H- ct 
 
 Hj o B 
 
 4 CD CD 
 
 £ OJ P 
 H- ct 
 ct O 
 
 TO 4 
 
 O O* H" 
 
 fcS CD 
 
 TO ct 
 
 F CD 
 
 Ha CD X 
 P M 
 
 O Hj l- 1 
 
 ct O P 
 
 O hi' H- 
 
 hi CD B 
 
 CO I CD 
 P< 
 
 hf O 
 
 H' ct 
 
 O cj 
 CD p 
 I— 1 
 
15. 
 
 Definite information is not available as to why the prices accounted for by 
 the factors measured were 75 cents a case lower in 1925-26 and 65 cents a case high- 
 er in 1926-27 than the actual prices. The available evidence indicates, however, 
 that wholesalers and retailers had relatively large stocks of canned pears on hand 
 at the end of the 1925-26 season, and that imports of canned pears were, therefore, 
 larger than consumption in 1925-26 and smaller than consumption in 1926-27. It may 
 also have been that exports of canned pears to the United Kingdom from countries 
 % other than the United States and Australia were unusually light in 1925-26 and 
 unusually heavy in 1926-27. A similar situation may also have been responsible for 
 the actual prices being IS cents a case lower in 1923-24 and 12 cents a case higher 
 in 1924-25 than the prices accounted for by the factors measured. 
 
 In addition to the factors already mentioned it is probable that other ones 
 such as the quality of the canned pears, the advance or decline in canners' prices 
 during the year, and the lag of retail prices also had some influence upon the prices 
 canners received*, 
 
 Comparison of Prices per Case of All Grades and Sizes of Cans 
 with Prices per Case of No, 2-| Choice 
 
 The prices which California canners received for No. Z\ Choice pears in 
 1929-30 averaged 8.9 per cent above the prices received for all grades and sizes of 
 cans. The range among the canners reporting was from 5.7 per cent to 11.1 per cent, 
 Records from two California canners were obtained for the years 1922-23 to 1929-30. 
 Puring those S years the prices received for No. Z\ Choice average 3.6 per cent above 
 the prices received for all grades and sizes of cans. The range was from 5.2 per 
 cent to 12.0 per cent. Similar data on prices received for No. 2\ Choice pears by 
 Pacific Northwest canners are not available. 
 
16. 
 
 o o 
 
 o o 
 
 M h-i 
 
 * 
 
 CO hj 
 
 O T 
 
 ' CD 
 
 P- 
 
 I 
 
 W 
 
 ro 
 
 p 
 
 3 o 
 
 pj Hi 
 03 H* 
 
 • o 
 
 H' 
 
 O 0) 
 2 CQ 
 
 o p 
 
 O ct 
 5 CD 
 P CQ 
 
 o 
 
 CD 
 CQ 
 
 O 
 Hi 
 
 
 
 CO 
 
 O 
 
 
 H} 
 
 W 
 
 
 CD 
 
 ct 
 
 M 
 
 (-> 
 
 P 
 
 CD 
 
 ct 
 
 
 
 t=i 
 
 
 H- 
 
 
 
 
 H" 
 
 ct 
 
 w 
 
 O 
 
 ct 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 p 
 
 o 
 
 pi 
 
 
 CD 
 
 
 
 
 P 
 
 
 
 
 Pj 
 
 
 
 o 
 
 ^ £3 
 
 P 
 
 
 
 ct 
 
 
 
 
 
 p 
 
 CD 
 
 ct 
 
 • 
 
 H' 
 
 
 
 
 8 
 
 
 o 
 
 
 Hi 
 
 
 ef- 
 
 
 ts' 
 
 
 CD 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 H" 
 
 
 ct 
 
 
 CD 
 
 
 Pi 
 
 
 B 
 
 i 
 
 p 
 
 ct 
 P CQ 
 
 " & 
 
 CLj. 
 
 CD 
 O 
 ct 
 
 ct 
 O 
 
 CD 
 <l 
 H" 
 CQ 
 H" 
 O 
 
 8 
 
 1 — 1 
 
 
 1 — 1 
 
 M 
 
 
 tQ 
 
 
 tO 
 
 tO 
 
 to 
 
 oq 
 
 ro 
 
 ro 
 
 ro 
 
 ro 
 
 o 
 
 tO 
 
 CD 
 
 -3 
 
 CT> 
 
 i 
 
 i 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 
 w 
 
 ro 
 
 ro 
 
 lO 
 
 
 o 
 
 to 
 
 CO 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 tQ 
 
 ro 
 cji 
 
 to 
 
 i 
 
 ro 
 en 
 
 tO 
 
 ro 
 w 
 l 
 
 ro 
 
 tO 
 
 ro 
 ro 
 i 
 
 ro 
 
 05 
 
 tO 
 
 ro 
 
 M 
 
 ro 
 ro 
 
 M 
 
 
 
 
 
 t- 1 
 
 
 
 «» 
 
 «• 
 
 
 
 
 <• 
 
 
 
 M 
 
 ro 
 
 -d 
 
 ro 
 
 
 M 
 
 CO 
 
 
 
 J? 
 
 tO 
 
 <j> 
 
 8 
 
 CO 
 
 M 
 
 --a 
 
 ro 
 
 ro 
 
 tO 
 
 -J 
 
 
 tO 
 
 o 
 
 tD 
 
 
 
 « 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 CJ> 
 
 tO 
 
 ro 
 
 w 
 
 CJi 
 
 CO 
 
 
 tQ 
 
 en 
 
 ->a 
 
 
 to 
 
 -<2 
 
 CO 
 
 CJ> 
 
 0> 
 
 o 
 
 Oi 
 
 ro 
 
 ro 
 
 cn 
 
 CO 
 
 CD 
 
 CD 
 
 to 
 
 01 
 
 ro 
 
 ro 
 
 ro 
 
 ro 
 
 ro 
 
 ro 
 
 ro 
 
 H- 1 
 
 
 
 
 >• 
 
 
 <* 
 
 <• 
 
 
 
 
 -3 
 
 o 
 
 CJi 
 
 cn 
 
 CO 
 
 CJI 
 
 CJi 
 
 CJI 
 
 M 
 
 lO 
 
 CO 
 
 w 
 
 03 
 
 
 o 
 
 Cn 
 
 CJ> 
 
 M 
 
 -a 
 
 ro 
 
 a> 
 
 
 to 
 
 
 cn 
 
 l — * 
 
 -a 
 
 O 
 
 
 cn 
 
 <* 
 
 
 SB 
 
 * 
 
 
 
 *• 
 
 
 ♦ 
 
 
 o 
 
 ifc 
 
 CO 
 
 
 03 
 
 
 oa 
 
 
 CO 
 
 ro 
 
 o 
 
 CO 
 
 o 
 
 CJI 
 
 CO 
 
 O 
 
 
 O 
 
 ro 
 
 
 o 
 
 
 to 
 
 cj> 
 
 CP 
 
 CO 
 
 
 O! 
 
 -a 
 
 
 en 
 
 
 
 c^ 
 
 CJI 
 
 
 CJi 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Cn 
 
 co 
 
 M 
 
 tO 
 
 CJi 
 
 CJ> 
 
 ro 
 
 
 -<! 
 
 
 oq 
 
 V- 1 
 
 o 
 
 to 
 
 CJI 
 
 o 
 
 a> 
 
 CJi 
 
 I- 1 
 
 O 
 
 cr> 
 
 
 
 o 
 
 CJI 
 
 CO 
 
 ro 
 
 o 
 
 
 
 
 to 
 
 
 
 M 
 
 
 « 
 
 Hi 
 
 o 
 
 co 
 
 w 
 
 Cn 
 
 CJI 
 
 ro 
 
 tO 
 
 to 
 
 CJ> 
 
 CO 
 
 o 
 
 ro 
 
 
 a> 
 
 o 
 
 CJI 
 
 t- 1 
 
 CJi 
 
 to 
 
 
 o 
 
 
 
 to 
 
 
 Ol 
 
 M 
 
 Cn 
 
 w 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 o 
 
 •tf 
 
 o 
 
 Ci 
 
 P. 
 
 CQ 
 
 O 
 
 o 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 s 
 
 CQ 
 
 ro 
 
 03 
 
 pi 
 
 «<! c? 
 i P 
 
 g 
 
 CD 
 
 o 
 
 Hj CD 
 hf p O 
 
 pi ct 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 Hj 
 
 Hj 
 
 a 
 
 H' 
 
 ct 
 CQ 
 
 S 
 
 Hj hcj 
 
 hf o 
 
 CD H 
 CQ ct 
 !d j CQ 
 
 o 
 
 Hj O 
 
 P ts 
 a B o 
 p. 3 <-j 
 ct CD ct 
 CQ pi CQ 
 
 O 
 
 §= 
 
 H* 
 Ct 
 CD 
 P> 
 
 N 
 
 H- 
 
 & 
 
 era 
 Pi 
 o 
 3 
 
 hj 
 
 o 
 Pi 
 
 o 
 
 ct 
 H* 
 O 
 
 S 
 
 Pi 
 t— i 
 
 I 
 
 o 
 
 ct 
 W 
 
 o 
 
 H} 
 
 ct 
 
 1-3 
 CD 
 
Table 8 
 
 Indexes of Wholesale Prices and Unemployment in England 
 
 Year 
 July- June 
 
 Index of 
 wholesale 
 
 prices 
 1913=100 
 
 Percentage 
 of insured 
 
 persons 
 unemployed 
 
 1921-22 
 
 172 
 
 14.3 
 
 1922-23 
 
 153 
 
 12.0 
 
 1923-24 
 
 162 
 
 10.8 
 
 1924-25 
 
 166. 
 
 11.0 
 
 1925-26 
 
 151 
 
 11. 5 
 
 1926-27 
 
 146 
 
 11.8 
 
 1927-28 
 
 142 
 
 9.8 
 
 1925-29 
 
 138 
 
 11. 1 
 
 1929-30 
 
 130 
 
 12.3 
 
 1930 
 
 
 
 July 
 
 119 
 
 16.7 
 
 August 
 
 118 
 
 17.1 
 
 September 
 
 116 
 
 17.6 
 
 October 
 
 113 
 
 18.7 
 
 November 
 
 112 
 
 19.1 
 
 December 
 
 109 
 
 20.2 
 
 1931 
 
 
 
 January 
 
 107 
 
 21.5 
 
 February 
 
 106 
 
 21,7 
 
 March 
 
 106 
 
 
 Source of data: 
 
 Published in the United States Federal Reserve 
 Bulletin.