The Richmond Virginian. (Richmond, Va.) 1910-1920, 1917-08-12
WANT SOMETHING
FOR THEIR LABOR
DIFFICULTY In the Way of Compensat.
Ing Customers Who Carry
Their Parcels.


ing Customers Who Carry
Their Parcels.
While there was disposition in
local dry goods circles not seriously
to regard the movement initiated in
washington a few days ago by Mrs.
Newton D. Baker. wife of the secre-
tary Of war. and the National Woman
Suffrage association. with view to
obtaining discounts on purchases car
ried home from the stores, some re-
greet was expressed that so much pub
licity had been given a proposition
which, in the case of the great ma
1orityN of stores throughout the coun-
try. is highly impracticable.
According to Z. L. Howe, secretary
OF the National Retail Dry Goods as
ISOLATION. not only would 1t be practi-
cally impossible to give discounts on
goods carried from the stores by the
purchasers, but the granting of such
Il request would be an opening wedge
for a dozen and one others.
IF a store gives woman dis
count for carrying her small purchases
home with her the question will soon
be raised why 1t should not give
similar discount to woman who
trades early in the business day, as
against the one who trades during the
rush hours Similarly. the woman who
buys $50 worth of merchandise in one
hour would soon claim a better price
on her goods than the woman who
takes two hours to buy the same
amount, the theory being that she
does not make so large a demand on
the time and service OF the store as
the latter Again. IL a discount for car
rytng parcels were given, the woman
who lived a mile from the store would
consider herself entitled to a bigger
rebate for her efforts than the wo-
man who lives Just around the cor
ner
Suppose the idea of giving dis
counts for the purpose In question
were practicable. How could the prop
or discount be determined? To begin
with. the delivery cost of some stores
runs as low as Ia to "a per cent
of the gross business done. Two per
cent might well represent the aver
age. In the case OF the store with a
| low percentage of delivery cost. it
can readily be seen that a discount
for carrying purchases. based on that
percentage, would be so small as not
to make II worth the customers while
to take the goods home with her.
For purposes of illustration let us
say that a store has offered q per
cent discount on all non-delivered
goods. A woman of slender means
comes into that store and buys a waist
! at 81. The store gives her a rebate of
/ Ave cents for carrying 1t home with
/ her. and saves money on the transac-
ton. A Weather woman comes In
and buys a waist at $40. She takes ii
| home with her In her automobile.
and, on the per cent basis. she gets
a discount of fifty cents Now. the sec
| ond woman's waist probably makes
no bulkter package and costs no
more to deliver than the first woman's,
! yet the latter gets a discount equal
I only to one-tenth of that given the
former.
Not only would such a case be I'M
/ fair to the poorer woman, but the
| store would make money on the non
delivery of the first Notwithstanding
| that 1t costs ten cents each to deliver
them-and lost money on the second.
In addition to this II would definitely
establish two-price basis of sell
| ing goods. thing that all good stores
eliminated years ago and which none
or these stores wants to see come back.
Some one may suggest that, on the
illustrative assumption that 1t costs a
certain store an average OF ten cents
per package to deliver its customers
! purchases. fiat rebate OF ten cents
on all carried purchases would settle
the matter eauitably. But would It?
Suppose the article onlv sold at ten
| cents to begin with. what then? Sup
i pose It sold at Ave cents? These in
stances, while more or less far fetch
ed. easily could come up IN the actual
| transaction OF business.
ut may be argued that this diff
Guilty can be overcome by setting a
limit on the smallness of purchases
| on which these rebates should be
| given. Let rs assume that this is
done. and that the limit liz set at I'll
that is. no rebate will be given for
carrying purchases costing less than
| that amount What would be the re-
suit?
The result would be that, in CIV
ing a ten-cent rebate on 81 pur-
chase. the store with 5 per cent
/ delivery cost would be doubling that
cost, In other words. II would be pay
ing 10 per cent OF the purchase price
for having the package carried by the
customer when 1t could deliver the
package itself for s per cent Then
! arrangement in the case Of a woman
who buys a large tin dishpan. costing
less than 81. and who gets no rebate
for taking 1t with her, while another
woman is paid ten cents for carrying
home a small, fancy pin that might
cost $1.49?
Another thing to consider Is the
effect the offering of discount or re.
bate on non delivered goods would
have on the total number OF deliveries
made by store. Unless the plan re-
suited In material lessening of the
number of articles to be delivered
there would be nothing saved for any
body. AZ long as delivery wagon
or automobile has to be sent over a
given route at all, IL costs less per
package to deliver its contents when
II Is full than when II Is only partly
filled. Unless the number of vehicles
sent out or the number of deliveries
day would be lessened thereby. a
discount or rebate system would do
store more financial harm than
good.
There are only two ways to solve
! the problem that l can see. One OF
these Is for the merchant to sell his
, goods on an free on board store basis
and charge for delivery. The other Is
for the women of the country to car
ry home with them every package
I they possibly can. relying on the hon
| esty of the merchants to give them
the fruits of their labor In the shape
OF lower prices.
Even now a great many merchants
are selling goods lower than they
should In view of conditions and
prireN in the wholesale ma RI hat