The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1916-1920, 1919-08-07

this country. In those classes Of hides
that enter Into the production of the
lighter ieathefs there 10 not the same
eegree Of contrib IN the hands ofSpaci-
ers ss}tn The hssvtcr- grades. yet sorne
% these same paqlsers ere very I Inn
postspt factors In the country hide trade
Taking into Account the extent 10 'which
domestic hideA the extsnt 10 which they
control the hides that are available for
import and the extent to which some Of
them arc enrased I'M the country hide
business. and taking also into account
the s1tent 10 which, they are eiigaEed
In the tanning business, they seam to be
n q position largely to control the hide
mnrssf-t az $3.50 ~ ~ .t.fs .isfv g, . N
The systsm OF handling and market
ing county hides Is not satisfactory.
The farmer, and often the small butcher,
usually sell their hides without grading.
Az q Consequence ofsthis mathod OF pur-
chasing hides from tho primary owner
Il b oftcn the case that no distinction
10 made between those, hides. that are
we'll taken OF and we'll cured and those
that are not.
Tanning. Prices Increase. 49,
During the four years 1914 to 1st7
the cost OF producing sole leather in
creased from 0 to more than 20 cents
per pound Of leather produced. About
u pey cant of the increase was due to
tho increased. cost OF hides. The IN
crease In cost other than for materials,
including overhead expenses, during four
years ranged from about / " cents to
cents Per pound OF leather produced.
For upper leather the increase In the
conversion cost between 1914 and 1917
"a
cent. though tho total cost Of producing
this class Of leather. including the cost
OF the hides. was approximately only
20 per cent The cost Of producing kip
upper leather. including the cost of the
hides. increased during the four years
about ~ per cent, while the cost OF
producing calf leather Increased a little
moro.
Tho earnings on investment in the
tanning business were very much greater
In 1915 and 1917 than they were In
1914 and 1915 The poorest results were
In 1914. OF nfty-three representative
companies tWenty-four earned less than
10 per cent. in 1e14, and eleven had
earnings Of over 30 per cent. while none
earned AZ much as 40 per cent. In
1917 only Two of the nfty-three compa-
MES earned less than 10 per cent,
thirty-two earned over 20 per cent and
nine earned over 20 per cent.
There was . great increase in the
cost OF producing shoes between 1914 ana
1917. the principal increase being in the
cost OF leather. Between 1914 and 1917
the cost of leather increased from 20
to 100 per cent. In majority Of shoes
tho increase was over 50 per cent The
cost of materials other than leather. such
as Innings. trimmings. cartons and pack
lN4na -l,,.a t.lx
the same rate as leather. Labor and
general expense did not increase at 90
great a rate as either leather or other
materials
There was but little difference in the
rate Of increase in the various elements
Of cost of shoes except for misses shoes,
which had a greater increase in leather
cost than any other class, and childrens
and infants shoes. which had a greater
increase In cost for materials other than
leather. It should be noted in this con-
nection that leather constituted from so
to 10 per cent Of the total cost of all
classes Of shoes In 1914, except infants
and by 1917 this percentage had In
creased to about 90 to 76 per cent.
Manufacturers Demand More.
The manufacturers selling prices Of
rate than costs. In 1915 costs in many
Instances were less than 1917, but re-
auctions In selling prices occurred in
only about half of the shoes showing
reduced costs.
THE rate Of return on investment was
much greater, in. 1916 and 1917 than in
1914 and 1918. Out Of 256 companies
where comparisons could be made for
these years a. had losses in 1914. q By
q a a.. Il. - = a A. a Al.
were only Q companies with losses, and
in 1917 there were 8. There were i0e
companies out of 2s6 that had earnings
Of Is per cent or more in 1914, while in
1917 there were 16s companies in this
Glars More than lone-third of the COM
panies here considered earned rs per
cent or moro in 1917. while only about
one-sixth earned this much in 1914. OF
236 companies 104 earned rs per cent,
or more in 1915. -
THE gross profits of wholesale shoe
merchants generally ranged above 20 per
cent Of the cost and they were rsorneT
years '
There was q heavy increase in the
price Of shoes TO consumers between the
years 1914 and 1918. The retailers Gross
profit is around 80 per cent-sometimes
more and occasionally less. In 1914. the
retail merchants rate of profit was
somewhat lower than Il was In 1918.
The absolute amount of profit per pair
Of shoes was very much greater in 1918
than In 1914. A good work shoe for
men that cost the dealer s1.7s in 1914
and retaiied for $3.50 cost him s2.75
In 1918 and retailed for $500.
"In this instance the retailer took. a
margin Of rs cents in 1914. or AZ per
cent. and In 1913 a margin Of $1.25. or
Is per cent. In o group Of shoes that
COST the retailer from t2.0e 70 $3.50 In
1914 q. largo proportion Of them re-
tailed for SS.So with a percentage of
gross profits ranging from 40 to 81 per
cent. The same shoes in 1918 cost the
retailer from s3.o5 to s4.46 per pair and
retailed ut from about $500 to as high
as 800 per pair, with tho percentage
Of profit ranging from 30 to % per cent.
In 1914. the retailers absolute gross
proit for this group averaged a little
more than $1.oo per pair, while in 1915
It averaged moro than $3.50 per pair.
I '' Costs Remain Same. 49,.
''''I'hs absolute amount Of money neces-
-sary to conduct business in 1917 and
1918 was greater than In 1914. but the
relative cost OF doing business prac-
tically did net change. The percentage
Of total sales Of dealers that was ex-
pended for the conduct of business was
approximately the Same In 1917 and 1918
ss 1t was In 1914. The volume of bust
ness OF more than so wholesalers In
creased 81 per cent In four years, while
their actual expenses In dollars and
cents increased only "a per cent.