Evaluation of Shipping Containers for Washington Cherries

James B. Fountain and Peter G. Chapogas

No 311379, Marketing Research Reports from United States Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Marketing Service, Transportation and Marketing Program

Abstract: Excerpts from the report: It was estimated that 91 percent of the Washington State Bing and Lambert variety cherries shipped to market in 1957 were face-packed in 15-pound wood boxes, 8 percent were packed loose in 20-pound wood boxes, and 1 percent (mostly smaller cherries) were packed loose in 12- and 14-pound boxes. During the 1958 and 1959 seasons shippers experimented with cherries packed in consumer size plastic baskets. The Washington State cherry industry, much aware of rising costs of labor and materials, has wanted to ship most of its cherries in less expensive packs. However, the industry has been uncertain about the advantages and disadvantages of changing a substantial part of its production from the more expensive faced pack (generally known as the double row face) to the less expensive but less attractive loose pack. Because of potential savings, the industry has been particularly interested in the larger 20-pound loose cherry pack. During 1957, preliminary studies were begun on cherry shipping containers then in use. These studies were continued during 1958 and 1959. The three most widely used cherry packs were studied; (1) the 15-pound face, (2) the 20-pound loose, and (3) the 14-pound loose. The objective of this study was to evaluate containers used by the Washington cherry industry by comparing container and accessory material costs, labor requirements, arrival condition, and trade acceptance.

Keywords: Crop Production/Industries; Labor and Human Capital; Marketing; Production Economics; Research and Development/Tech Change/Emerging Technologies (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Pages: 34
Date: 1960-09
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/311379/files/mrr426.pdf (application/pdf)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:ags:uamsmr:311379

DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.311379

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in Marketing Research Reports from United States Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Marketing Service, Transportation and Marketing Program Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by AgEcon Search ().