Shipping Facilities Research Articles

MOLTING OF EUPHAUSIID SHRIMPS: SHIPBOARD OBSERVATIONS1

Limnology and OceanographyVolume 11, Issue 1 p. 120-124 Notes and CommentFree Access MOLTING OF EUPHAUSIID SHRIMPS: SHIPBOARD OBSERVATIONS1 CHARLES W. JERDE, CHARLES W. JERDE Scripps Institution of Oceanography, University of California, San Diego 92112.Search for more papers by this authorREUBEN LASKER, REUBEN LASKER U.S. Bureau of Commercial Fisheries, California Current Resources Laboratory, La Jolla, California 92038.Search for more papers by this author CHARLES W. JERDE, CHARLES W. JERDE Scripps Institution of Oceanography, University of California, San Diego 92112.Search for more papers by this authorREUBEN LASKER, REUBEN LASKER U.S. Bureau of Commercial Fisheries, California Current Resources Laboratory, La Jolla, California 92038.Search for more papers by this author First published: April 1966 https://doi.org/10.4319/lo.1966.11.1.0120Citations: 30 †This paper represents one of the results of research of the California Cooperative Oceanic Fisheries Investigations conducted under the Marine Life Research Program of the Scripps Institution of Oceanography and the California Current Resources Laboratory of the Bureau of Commercial Fisheries. We thank Warren Wilson for his assistance on shipboard, Richard A. Schwartzlose and Dr. Maurice Blackburn for ship time and facilities, and Dr. Edward Brinton for criticism of the manuscript. AboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Citing Literature Volume11, Issue1April 1966Pages 120-124 RelatedInformation

Reciprocal Business Dealings-A New Area of Antitrust Hazards

Abstract Reciprocal business dealings-you buy from me, I will buy from you- is a time-honored and prevalent practice in the business community. After a flurry of attention from the Federal Trade Commission in the 1930's, reciprocity cases disappeared from the enforcement scene until 1962. Since then, both the FTC and the Dept. of Justice have instituted various proceedings striking at reciprocity as anti-competitive and, hence, unlawful. Recently, the Supreme Court, in Consolidated Foods Corp. vs FTC, came very close to embracing the doctrine that reciprocity-creating mergers are, per se, invalid. Reciprocity also seems to be a practice through which the government hopes to go after conglomerate mergers which would otherwise go unchallenged under the more traditional antitrust lines of attack. There is no doubt that reciprocity, more than ever, presents antitrust problems to business men. Introduction What is reciprocity? In Us mot elementary form you may have seen it at work in your home town when the local dentist buys his gasoline from t-he filling station operator who is his patient-excluding the other station operator who is not. Or, take the case of the druggist's wife who patronizes the beautician who is her husband's customer. But this is not really what we are talking about. This is simply an understandable human reaction to do business with someone you know who does business with you. In the business community you will rarely hear the word "reciprocity" used, because, although the practice has had relatively little judicial attention so far, the term awakens a sense of something wrong. Rather, you hear the practice, when mentioned at all, in terms of "trade relations", "sales relations", "national accounts" and so forth. Basically, all expressions mean "you buy from me and I will buy from you".In the field of trade regulation, reciprocity is a matter of concern when it becomes a marketing policy of large companies and is designed to induce suppliers to purchase a company's products to the exclusion of those of a competitor. This type of reciprocity is quite prevalent. In fact, it is much more important today than most companies like to admit. A survey' a few years ago of hundreds of purchasing agents in the chemical, petroleum, iron and steel, and other basic industries, showed that 100 per cent of these agents considered reciprocity a major factor in buyer-seller relations. In addition, the majority of these buyers in these industries reported that reciprocity is on the increase. More than three-quarters of these buyers said they divide their purchases from suppliers in relation to the suppliers' purchases from their companies. Early Cases The prevalence and importance of reciprocity may or may not be surprising to you. But, it has certainly attracted the attention of government antitrust lawyers. This is not to say that governmental action against reciprocity is an entirely new phenomenon. It is not. Three cases involving reciprocity were decided by the Federal Trade Commission in the 1930's. The first two cases involved large meat-packing companies which owned large blocks of stock in railroad equipment manufacturing companies. Because of the meat packers' vast powers as major railroad shippers, they were able to coerce railroad companies to buy railroad equipment from their affiliated companies by threats of withdrawing meat shipments. In both cases the FTC held this exercise of coercive reciprocity to be an "unfair method of competition" under Sec. 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act. The third case involved a large food packer, which also controlled a railroad terminal, a wharf facility and warehouses in San Francisco. The food packer's suppliers were coerced to use the packer's shipping facilities under threats of withdrawal of purchases from the suppliers. Again the Commission found this to be an "unfair method of competition". Consolidated Foods Case From the time of these decisions until recently, nothing further was heard about reciprocity from either the courts or the FTC. However, in Nov., 1962, the Commission handed down its decision in the case of Consolidated Foods Corporation,* which has been the springboard for other actions in this area. The Consolidated Foods case is the basis of the recent concern over reciprocity as a possible area of antitrust hazards. Consolidated Foods is a large processor of a variety of canned foods and, in addition. sells food products at wholesale and retail. JPT P. 907ˆ

An Empirical Study of State Trading

State trading is commonly defined as purchase on government account, by an agent of the government or by a monopoly under its control, with the intention of eventual resale. Clearly, this definition excludes purchases of military goods or other commodities restricted to government use, since these are not usually purchased for eventual resale.' Furthermore, it is not essential that the government perform the actual importing; it may limit itself to contracting the price and quantity with the foreign suppliers, allowing licensed importers to fulfill the obligations of the contract. The primary difference between state trading on the one hand, and other controls such as tariffs and quotas, on the other, is that with state trading the government establishes both price and quantity, whereas with tariffs it fixes only the approximate price of imports and with quotas it establishes only the maximum quantity importable. State trading has been widely studied as an aspect of economic warfare and political aggression. A great deal has been written about Nazi Germany's program, devised by Dr. Schacht, and its repercussions on other economies.2 Likewise, the state trading activities of the Soviet Bloc have been studied recently.3 However, state trading solely as an economic organization established for the purpose of exploiting oligopsonistic and oligopolistic advantages has been neglected by economic analysts. The object of this study is to investigate price determination under state trading. During World War II, many nations brought large segments of their international trade under state trading, usually signing long-term contracts, in order to insure the supply of essential commodities and in order to facilitate the planned use of limited shipping facilities. Great Britain brought more than twenty-five percent of its foreign trade under state trading during this period.4 After the War, Great Britain gradually reduced its state trading and terminated it in 1955. State trading was continued after the War in order to insure the supply of scarce commodities, to enable Great Britain to control prices to the consumer, and thus to restrain inflationary forces. Governmental purchases of large quantities of a commodity can also be used as a device to obtain goods at favorable prices. The British butter contracts with Aus-

Decreasing Costs by Improved Handling of Materials

water during the course of treatment is relatively small. In the past men needed at the plant for other duties could empty the necessary bags of chemicals into the feeders with very little expenditure of time. It has now become necessary, however, for operators to review the situation. Housing and population growth has greatly increased the amount of water being used. To meet this demand, the output of existing facilities must be enlarged and new plants constructed. Operating expenses have risen sharply, and labor is in short supply. Improved methods of handling materials constitute an increasingly important means of cutting material costs. Through the use of fork trucks (Fig. 1), which are adapted to high stacking of palletized loads, the amount of floor area allocated to the storage of bags of dry chemicals can be materially reduced. Palletized loads can be readily stacked three tiers high. This provides the same reserve supply in one-third the space and affords a considerable saving in building costs. When planning a new facility or modernizing an existing plant, the designer should take into account the many operational advantages that mobile, power-operated equipment provides in elevating, moving, and storing, not only dry chemicals, but also other types of supplies including pipe (Fig. 2), fittings, and meters. The producers of dry chemicals have pioneered many of the advances in handling methods. They have led the way in developing palletized loads and unit loading. Their plants, warehouses, and shipping facilities are developed around the modern fork truck. Most suppliers prefer to load trailers and boxcars with palletized loads. If they are required to hand-load a car, their labor cost goes up. Although, in view of the comparatively small amounts of dry chemicals used daily at the water plant, some planning would be required to arrange for palletized-

Recent Industrial Development in the Gulf South

T HE physical growth of America's industrial plant in the past decade has perhaps nowhere been more spectacular than in the Gulf South. Unsurpassed ac.cessibility to petroleum, natural gas, and key chemical raw materials is here combined with low power costs, tidewater shipping facilities, a mild climate, and a growing regional and export market. Each of these factors, together with a boundless enthusiasm for regional promotion, has contributed to a proliferation of industrial plants on the coastal plains and in the piny woods that is remolding the face of the landscape in much of Texas and Louisiana.

British Food Journal Volume 45 Issue 3 1943

British Food Journal Volume 45 Issue 3 1943

Harbor Craft Ship-to-Shore Radio Telephone Service in Puget Sound Area*

Puget Sound with an area of about 6,000 square miles serves a large region whose principal resources are lumber and fishing. Movement of the raw products to points where the manufacturing and processing are carried on comprises a major part of the short-haul shipping in the Puget Sound area. Large lumber and pulp mills have been permanently established at locations where deep sea shipping and rail facilities are readily available. Logs in the form of large booms are towed to the mills from the sources of supply which extend throughout the area drained by the Puget Sound. The average haul of each boom is about 75 miles and consumes several days. Because of the relatively long time a tug is isolated in each operation, some economical means of dispatching and directing the activities of the tow boats from the land headquarters is desirable. In the case of fishing, there is an even greater need than in the case of log towing for dose contact between fishing boat and cannery in order that both the fishing and cannery activities may be coordinated so as to prevent waste of fish during large runs.

Commerce and Customs of Papua1

IN his Report on the Territorv of Papua for the year ending June, 1919, the Lieutenant-Governor, the Hon. J. H. P. Murray, shows that, as in so many other parts of the world, the scarcity and irregularity of shipping facilities are acting prejudicially to the progress and development of the Territory. This is especially indicated by the decrease of exports upon which the prosperity of the country mainly depends. Rubber alone showed an increase, but the quantity is as yet small (207 tons as compared with 144 tons in 1918). Another important vegetable export, copra, has decreased (2598 tons as compared with 3189 tons in 1918). Native-made copra forms a large proportion of the output, and, owing to variation in the production, this does not increase steadily like the plantation product. The production of sisal hemp has also decreased, whilst the value of all the crops has been much reduced by a fall in prices. The export of the chief minerals, gold and copper, has decreased, but there are good prospects of development and increased production at Port Moresby and Misima Island. The value of the gold was 26,766l. in 1919 as against 33,512l. in 1918. Copper was worth 11,537l. in 1918, but only 1653l. in 1919.