'AN ANALYSIS OF CONSUMER REACTION .
To PREPACKAG ED MEAT.

Thesis for fire Degree of M. S.
MICHIGAN STATE COLLEGE
Raymond. R. Ranfa -
W51

masts _.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

u-l_____;-; L - L L 4‘ .- Is. — l I
‘ 0
£ 4
3.
'l'
‘ This is to certify that the ‘ ' -
. thesis entitled
_ "An analysis of Consumer Reactions .
I ' .- to Pr:pac'<a,'j°d Vent" '.
_ .-
. ’ z s‘
-- ; presented by
1!
‘ anyhow! H. Bantu
- ‘1 2.
_ has been accepted towards fulfillment ‘ ;
1 ' , of the requiremonts for . l
l . t
r.
.\ __'_':_£.9__degree mm‘lral Econ”-mi':5 ,' .
4 g
n I
I V’. l. -.,
' s
.'. ‘ i 3
x -!
_ . 1
Major professor F - a
Date 3503'" P“? 2}. 1951 -, .
, L _ ~:
‘ I
.l
1 -w
1
!
'e ‘

 

 

 

 

tr. 1.

 

This

 

11:35.5

 

ABSTRACT OF THESIS
AN.ANALYSIS OF CONSUMER REACTION TO FREPACKAGBD MEAT

By

Raymond R. Ranta

meat marketing has recently seen an innovation called prepackaging.
Using this method meat retailers divide the carcass into retail cuts
and then each cut is placed on a cardboard, wrapped, heat-sealed,
weighed, priced and displayed in an open-top refrigerated case. A
self-service meat market differs basically from.a service meat market
because there is no personal contact with a butcher. meat is on a
self-serve basis.

The advent of prepackaging meat resulted in diverging views toward
this practice. Many consumers favored the self-service style. Others
resented the elimination of butcher contact. Because of these existing
views and also, because consumer buying habits of meat were not known,
this study was developed to analyze these problems.

The study was conducted in the cities of Flint and Grand Rapids,
Michigan. A.mai1 survey was used to obtain the data. Overall, 2,363
questionnaires were analyzed.

The analysis of the data was done in two ways. First, a purely
descriptive tabular breakdown was made. This showed the relative re-
sults between the two cities and also illustrated the total response.
Secondly, factors sociOIOgical and economic in character, were analyzed
separately. These results showed what the reactions to prepackaged

meat were of segments of the general population.

17-1

Fl

 

Raymond R. Ranta

‘2-

It was found that 72 percent of the people of Flint and Grand
Rapids had tried prepackaged meat. Furthermore, the majority of them
preferred buying their meat direct from.a butcher rather than from a
self-service store.

It was found, however, that some groups of people preferred self-
service more than others; and also, that factors unrelated to the groups
were significant in meat buying preference. Nearly all of the sociol-
Ogical and economic factorsanalyzed showed variations in beliefs and
preferences. The following are examples of the variations found: (1)
Those persons who lived closest to self-service stores preferred butcher
service more than those living further away; (2) Younger people pre-
ferred prepackaged meat more than older peeple; (3) Consumers who
shopped by automobile preferred prepackaged meat more than other con-
sumers who shopped in different ways; (A) Butcher service was pre-
eferred at all educational levels in the same ratio; and (5)'With res-
pect to nationality, Protestants preferred prepackaged meat more than
Catholics.

This study indicated why some consumers did buy prepackaged meat
while others did not. Consumers bought prepackaged meat because: (1)
They could shop more quickly; (2) The weight and total price were
given; (5) There was a convenient selection of sizes; and (h) They
could examine the meat.

The reasons given why consumers did not purchase prepackaged

meat were: (1) They didn't know how long it had been packaged; (2)

268355

'E‘hE

 

Raymond R. Ranta

-3...

They liked to see both sides of the meat; and (5) They wanted the

advice of the butcher.

Approved:

 

Major Professor

T h E

 

AN ANALYSIS OF CONSUMER REACTION TO PEEPACKAGED MEAT

by

Raymond R. Ranta

A THESIS
Submitted to the School of Graduate Studies of Michigan
State College of Agriculture and Applied Science
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of

NMSTER OF SCIENCE

Department of Agricultural Economics

1951

AC IQIOWIEDGELTE N T3

The author expresses his sincere appreciation to all who helped
in the preparation of the manuscript. Valuable assistance was especially
given by Dr. Robert C. Kramer of the Department of Agricultural Economics.
His interest and help throughout the study were greatly appreciated.

The clerical assistance by Miss Iva Mae O'Bryant and Mrs. Joanne
Schultz, secretaries in the Department of Agricultural Economics was
an invaluable aid in the completion of the study. For the typing of
the thesis, the author acknowledges the work done by Miss Genevieve
Marshall, also of the clerical staff.

Finally, the author is indebted to Miss Trude Heinze, for the
help she extended in proofreading this manuscript and the encourage-
ment given to him during the study.

Although many persons worked on the study, the author assumes

full responsibility for any errors which may be present.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF TABI-AES O O O O C O O O O O O O O O C O 0 O O 0

CHAPTER
I

II

III

IV

INTRODUCTION '. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Definition of Prepackaged Neat . . . . . . .
History of Prepackaged meet . . . . . . . .
Selection and Purpose of Study . . . . . . .
Presentation of Results . . . . . . . . . .

GENERAL METHODOLOGY . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Area selected . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Selection of Sample . . . . . . . . . . . .
Variations in Drawing of Sample . . . . . .
Total Sample . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Postcard Reminders . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Time Period for the Study . . e . . . . . .

SAMPLE RETURNS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Percentage Return . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Reasons for Response . . . . . . . . . . . .
Returns by Names and Occupants . . . . . . .
Reasons for Variance of Names and Occupants
Return of Unclaimed Questionnaires . . . . .
Usable Questionnaires . . . . . . . . . . .

DESCRIPTIVE ANALYSIS OF SURVEY . . . . . . . .
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Number of People Eating Two Meals Per Day at

PAGE

I'D

COO\U'IU'1.I:"\N

10
10
11
12
12
15
16
18
19
19
21

21

CHAPTER

TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued)

How Often is Meat Bought? . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Meat Storage at Home . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Food Bill Per Week . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Meat Bill Per week . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
weekly Income . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Have You Ever Bought Prepackaged Meat? . . . . . .
Belief of High Prices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Preference for meat . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Favorite Types of Prepackaged meat . . . . . . . . .
Percentage of Meat Bought Prepackaged . . . . . . .

Length of Time Neat Has Been Bought from a Self-
Service Prepackaged Store 0 e o e e e e e e o s e 0

Consumption of Total Meat in Relation to Prepackaged
A’IeatBuying....................

Why Prepackaged Meat is Purchased . . . . . . . . .
'Why Prepackaged Meat is Not Bought . . . . . . . . .

.Proportion of Meat, Fruits and Vegetables and other
Groceries Bought from a Self-Service Meat Store. . .

Preference of Meat Cuts . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Family Meat Buyer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Mode of Travel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Type of Store from Which Heat‘was Purchased . . . .
Distance from a meat Market . . . . . . . . . . . .
Distance from a Self-Service Meat Store . . . . . .

Delivery in Prepackaged Neat Stores . . . . . . . .

ii

PAGE

23
23

81

28
29
31

52

33
33
35

36
58
ho
ho
h2
’43

L93

Q

I“

U:

 

 

 

 

TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued)

CHAPTER

Hfiscellaneous Cuts

Education . .
Religion . . .
.Age . . . . .
Nationality .

Occupation . .

V CROSS ANALYSIS OF

FACTORS.AFFECTING CONSUEER PREFERENCE

Amount of Money Spent for Food Per'Week

Amount of an y Spent for Meat Per week

weekly Income

Mode of Transportation . . . . . . . . .

Distance from the Nearest Meat Market

Distance from the Nearest Self-Service

Person Who Buys . . . . . .

Size of Family
Age eooee

Education . .

Nationality

Religion . .

Occupation . .

Preference . .

VI SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

Summary

Conclusions

iii

Store

PAGE
h5
h?
h7
h8
b9
51

55
56
58
59
61
62
63
65
67
69
7o
72
73
7h
78
78

80

 

#35.

T

 

CHAPTER

TABLE OF CONTENTS (concluded)

APmJDIXA ........'.....
Amount Spent for Food Per week . .
Amount Spent for Neat Per'Week . .
weekly Income . . . . . . . . . .
Transportation . . . . . . . . . .
Distance from Meat market . . . .
Distance from Prepackaged Store .
Person Who Buys . . . . . . . . .
Size of Family . . . . . . . . . .
Age . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Education . . . . . . . . . . . .
Nationality . . . . . . . . . . .
Religion . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Occupation . . . . . . . . . . . .
Preference . . . . . . . . . . . .

APPENDIX B . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Introductory Letter . . . . . . .
Questionnaire . . . . . . . . . .
Return Envelopes . . . . . . . . .
Reminder Postcard . . . . . . . .

BIBLIOfS’RfiEPIY O O O O O O C O O O O 0

iv

111
116
123
128
138
1h6
150
158
169
170
171
172
172

173

TABLE

10

ll

12
13
1h
15

lo

17
13

19

LIST CF TABLES

Questionnaires Returned by Days . . . . . . . . . . .
Questionnaires Returned As Unclaimed Nail . . . . . .
Questionnaires Returned from "Names" and "Occupants".

what Is the Numeer of People Eating Two heals Per Day

C)

in YO‘JI' Home? 0 o o o o o o o o o o O O O O O O 0 e o
How Often Do You Buy heat? . . . . . . . . . . . . .
How DO You Store Your heat at Home? . . . . . . . . .

About Jhat Is the Average Amount Spent for One Week's
FOOd bUp-1J for Your Family'? 0 O O o o e o e o e O 0

About What Is The Average Neat Bill for Your Family
Per 'Neek? O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 O O O O O O O O 0

That Is the Weekly Income, After Deductions, in Your
Family/7......................

Have You Ever Bought Prepackaged Meat? . . . . . . .

Do You Believe You Pay More for Prepackaged Fresh Meat
Than for Comparable Meat Not Packajed? . . . . . . .

Overall, How Do You Prefer to Buy Your Fresh heat? .
What Is Your Favorite Type of Prepackaged Neat? . . .
What Percentage of Your Meat Do you Buy Prepackaged?.

How Long Have You Bought heat from a Self-Service
Prepackaged3t0r87....e............

Since You Have Been Buying Prepackaged Meats, Has
YourFafnilyBeenSatingt......o... one.

Nhy Do You Buy Prepackaged Meat? . . . . . . . . . .
Why Don't You buy Prepackaged Meat? . . . . . . . . .

what Progortion Of Meat DO You Buy from a Self-Service

iiieatstoreOOOOOOOOOOOOO00000.00

PAST
13
1h

17

N
('1)

30

31

32

33
3h
30

37

TA 3113

20
21

22
23
2h

26
27
28
29

30

31
32
33
3h
35

37

LIST OF TAzLLS (continued)
PAGE

“hat Proportion of Fruits and Vegetables Do You Buy
From a SQlf‘SBPVng Store? O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 37

What Proportion of Other Groceries Do You Buy from a
self’serViCe Store? O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 3

CI)

How Thick Do You Like Steak from a Beef Round Cut? . . . . 39
How Many Pork Chops DO You Like To Buy at One Time?. . . . 39
What weight Beef Chuck Roast Do You Prefer? . . . . . . . to
In Your Family Who Does Most of The Meat Buying? . . . . bl
Do You Usually Shop for Neat by: . . . . . . . . . . . . . bl
Type of Store from Which Meat Has Purchased . . . . . . . £2
How many Blocks Do You Live from the IVearest “eat Larketl. b}

How hany Blocks Do You Live from a Store Nhich Sells
PrepackAged Meat? O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O bh

Do You Know of Any Self—Service heat Store Which Accepts
Phone Orders and Delivers heat to the Home . . . . . . . . hS

Would You like here of These Prepackaged? . . . . . . . . he
Would You Like Less of These Prepackaged? . . .. . . . . b7
What Is the Last Grade or Year in School That You bompletedfi’hd
Is Your Family Predominately: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ha
In What Age Group Do You Fall? . . . . . . . . . . . . . h9
Of “hat “ationality Origin Is Your Family Mostly Composed? 50

From Nhat Occupation Does Your Family Derive Its hain
Source Of Income? O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 52

vi

CHAPTER I
INTRODUCT ION

Innovations in the merchandising of goods result in marked
changes in all phasis of marketing. Farmers, wholesalers, retailers
and consumers are generally all affected by a new development in
the buying or selling of goods. In this thesis the prepacking of

meat, an innovation in the merchandising of seat, was analyzed.

Definition of Prepackaged Most

In simple terms, prOpackaged most is most that is packaged
previous to s custaners purchase. However, O. more complex and
accurate definition should include terms of cutting, trimming,
wrapping, host sealing, weighing, pricing, and displaying. A
typical package of prepackaged meat goes through all these pro-
cedures. A most carcass is first out into retail cuts. Each out
is then trimed of excess fat and bone. After having been trimmed,
the most out is placed on cardboard and wrapped in cellophane or
some other transparent film. Sealing of the package is accomplish-
ed by host. The last steps in propacksging most are to then weigh
and price each cut and to display it in open-tap refrigerated
cases.

All this preparation occurs before O. customer enters a most

store and purchases thO nest.

History of Prepackaged Meat

The prepackaging of meat started in a very limited manner as
far back as 1923.1 The Hudson Bay Company in Winnipeg, Canada ex-
perimented with the idea but shortly thereafter, discontinued it.

The succeeding years had many other attempts in self-service
meat merchandising. Most of them failed because of inadequate
wrapping methods, improper refrigeration, and other shortcomings.

On February )4, 19141, A a: P put the first self-service meat
case into operation in Boston. From that point on, the idea of
prepackaging meat was no longer an experiment. Self servicing of
meat was here to stay.

The West Coast led the growth of self-service meat stores.
Los Angeles, in 19142, was the first city in that area to try
prepackaged meat.2 Other coast cities were quickly developing
plans to expand. Because the war was in progress, however,
materials became scarce and so the expansion of the idea and
practice of prepackaging meat was effectively checked.

In 19146, after the close of the war, there were only twenty-
five retail stores that had canpletely converted to self-service.3

That is, all meat retailed in those stores was prepackaged.

 

1
Anonymous, Meat Merchandising, Inc., St. Louis, Missouri, 1919.

2
Gilchrist, F. W., ”Self-Service Retailing of Meat", The Journal
of Marketing, Volume XIII, January, 1914.9.

3 Armour and Company, "Prepackaged Self-Service Meat", 19149 Report.

Tn

‘H

 

.At the same time, there were many more partial self-service
stores. In partial self-service stores, some meats, such as,
frankfurters, sausage and lunch meats are sold in prepackaged form,
whereas roasts, steaks and hams are still sold over the counter.

In l9h7, materials that had been scarce, became more prevalent
and equipment needed for the packaging of meat was built. Mean-
while, the number of self-service stores continued to grow.

Since l9h5, the number of 100 percent self-service stores

has risen from 15 to approximately'h,000 stores today.h' Simul-

taneously, there has also been a rapid growth of partial self-

service stores.
Selection.and Purpose of Study

A.variety of divergent views have been expressed towards
prepackaged meat since it has been made available to consumers.
many customers have accepted it favorably, while others have
looked upon it with disfavor. Those who liked to shop quickly
appreciated its time saving value. Others were more particular
and preferred personal contact with the meat personnel.

Because of these differences, and others, this study was
conducted to evaluate the effect that prepackaged meat had on
consumers.

The avowed purposes of the study which are reported in the

following chapters, are threefold. First of all, the study was

 

Armour and Company ”Self-Service Meats Today", 1951 Report.

’U

nil Iii! » ‘

made to study consumer buying habits or patterns. Primarily,
these habits or patterns are used with respect to prepackaged meat
buying. Secondly, the study was set up to determine what imprint
prepackaged meat had left with the shopper. After being on the
market for several years, an examination of this imprint was
possible. Finally, the study was arranged to gain an objective,
namely, to help solve existing problems between the retailer and
customer. If the study showed significant trends, then the infor-
mation could be so disseminated that greater advantages for all

might be enjoyed.

Presentation of Results

The manner of presentation of the rest of the material will
be as follows: the methodoIOgy used in conducting the study will
be reviewed in Chapter 2. In Chapter 5, an elaboration of the
response of the sample is given. In Chapter 14 and 5, the infor-
maticn revealed from the study is presented. Chapter 14 contains
a purely descriptive tabulation of the questions asked. However,
in Chapter 5 a more complete breakdown of some of the individual
canponent questions is presented. In this part, questions which
are economical and sociological in character are tested to see
‘ what effect they had on preference or non-preference of prepack-
aged meat. The final chapter, Chapter 6, contains a summary and

restates conclusions of the previous sections.

It“

 

CHAPTER II

GENERAL METHODOLOGY
Area Selected

The cities selected to comprise the study were Flint and
Grand Rapids. They were chosen for several reasons. One was
that, for the state of Michigan, these cities ranked next to
Detroit in population. Because larger cities were the first to
have prepackaged meat, there was, consequently, a greater possibil-
ity that residents of these cities had had more opportunity to come
in contact with self-service purchasing of meat. To further con-
firm this reasoning, letters, requesting the total number of 100
percent prepackaged neat stores in their cities, were sent to the
Chamber of Camerce and the Michigan Meat Dealers Association of
each city. The replies pointed out that there were three 100
percent prepackaged meat stores in Flint and four 100 percent pre-
packaged meat stores in Grand Rapids.

The secmd reason for the selection of these cities was that,
previously, in 19149, a study of consumer preference was conducted
in Detroit and Lansing.s The belief was held that if new cities
under new conditions were tested, then a comparison between cities
and responses could be noted. Therefore, a further study of Detroit
and Lansing preference was eliminated.

Another reason for the selection of Flint and Grand Rapids

was to make the study be as representative as possible. Grand

 

5 Kramer, Robert C., "Consmer Response to Prepackaged Fresh Meats',
Michigan Quarterly Bulletin, Volume 32, Number 1.

Rapids is a noted furniture manufacturing city. In contrast,
Flint is known for its automobile industry affiliations. Results
from a study of both cities would be more significant than if only
one city was analysed.

A final reason for the selection of Grand Rapids was that it
is considered to be a typical American city. Nationwide surveys
often include Grand Rapids because of its rcpresentativeness.
Therefore, because of this characteristic, the results from the
study including Grand Rapids were more apt to be useful for more

areas, than if another city had been selected.
Selection of Sample

The selection of the sample was obtained in the following
manner. A mail survey was first decided upon as the basis for
gathering the informtion. Then a city directory was designated
as the source of the sample names.

An elaboration of the merits or limitations of a mail survey
need not be discussed here. A detailed explanation can be found
in any survey methodology book. It is sufficient to say that, if
properly carried out, a mail survey is an accurate sampling tech-
nique.

One of the factors for a mail survey's success is that it
has adequate coverage of the population. It was for this reason
then, that the city directory was selected as the source of names.

The city directory used was divided into two sections. One

section listed the residents alphebetically. The other enumerised

the streets alphabetically. Under each street's heading, a numer-
ical sequence of the houses was listed. After each house number,
the name of the occupant residing there was given. For this study,
the latter section was selected.

No figures were available as to the exact number of house-
holds listed in the directory. Therefore, an appronmation of the
number of households was derived in this way. The city directory
was opened 15 times. With each new Opening, the exact number of
households listed on that page was counted. The average of these
15 pages then mltiplied by the number of pages listing house-
holds, gave a rough approximation to the total number of house-
holds for that city. The same procedure was followed for both
cities.

The number of names drawn to comprise the population sample
was a nth'proportion of that total. The decision was made to have
7,500 names constitute the sample. This figure was approximately
ten percent of all the households listed in both cities. Thus,
having the total number of households for both Flint and Grand
Rapids and observing the ration difference between them, it was
then discovered that by including every fifteenth name in the
directory, the 7,500 desired total would approximately be reached.

The fifteen numbers fran one to 15 were written on slips
and placed into a hat. After being thoroughly mixed, one slip
was drawn out. The number drawn was seven. Therefore, starting
with the seventh household under the first street beginning with

A, and including every 15th household or name thereafter, such

as 7, 22, and 57, the names were selected.
Variations in Drawing of Sample

There were variations from the procedure given above. It
was felt that, if half of the questionnaires were sent to "occupant",
the response would differ from the remaining questionnaires which
were sent to the resident's "name“. Then, too, it was believed
that the answers to the questionnaire might vary between those who
replied as “occupant" and those who replied as 'name'. Therefore,
the following procedure was carried out. The first name drawn was
mailed to an occupant. Every other one thereafter, was also sent
to an occupant.

Another variation in the drawing of the sample occurred be-
tween names drawn in the two cities. As was explained previously,
the street names were arranged alphabetically in the city directory,
and under each street heading, the house numbers were listed numer-
ically. After each household number, the name of the person who
resided there was given. After many of the names, the occupation
of that person was given. For example, under Baker Street you
could have listed: 701 Jones, Phil. , Carpenter; 705 Vacant;
and 707 Smith, Mary, Nurse. Those households drawn that had occupa-
tions listed after the resident's name were excluded from the sample
in Flint. In Grand Rapids, these people were included in the sample.
This procedure was followed because it was felt there could be a
different response if one sample would not include names that had

occupations listed. Therefore h: Flint, some of the streets that

contained predominately business buildings were often excluded
entirely.

This reasoning actually resulted in a slight bias. Residents
of Grand Rapids had the possibility of being selected twice. This
might have occurred, if, for example, Joe Smith had his office
residence on Pierce Street and his home on Glendale Avenue. Both
addresses could have fallen into the sample. This may have occurred
a few times.

A final variation in the selection of the sample resulted
after the questionnaires had been mailed. Within a few days, 200
questionnaires had been returned from the post office as unclaimed
mail. The reasons for this occurrence will be discussed in the
next chapter. As these questionnaires were not subject to being
answered or refused, a new set of 200 names and occupants was drawn,
included in the sample, and later mailed.6 The procedure for select-
ing the additional sample was to include the next name or occupant
listed beneath the one previously used, but which had been returned.
This name or occupant had to meet the other requirements, however,
and usually did. An exception to this occurred when an original
questionnaire was returned for the reason, 'No Such Street". In
that instance, the possibility was that a large number of house-
holds were skipped and the first household under the next street

was taken.

 

6 Unfortunately, no record was kept of the proportion of “names“ to

”occupants" that were sent out in the 200 additional questionnaires.
However, the suns amount of questionnaires were mailed to names
and to occupants as were returned from those groupings.

10
Total Sample

With the exception of these variations, the drawing of the
sample was accomplished by the procedure explained earlier. For
the city of Grand Rapids, the total number of households drawn
was 14,1410. For the city of Flint, the sample totaled 2,782. The
combined total, therefore, was 7,192.

As the predetermined goal was 7,500 names, there obviously
was an error in the estimation of the total number of households.
This method, as was mentioned earlier, involved the counting of
15 pages, determining an average, and multiplying the number of
pages listed to get the total number of households. The goal of
7,500 names was not reached because the average number of names on
the 15 pages counted was actually higher than the true average per

page. Consequently, the sample used was smaller than was anticipated.
Postcard Reminders

In order to help achieve a high return, postcards were used
in the study. The purpose of the postcards was to remind the
participants of the survey, that he or she had received a question-
naire and to request that it be filled out and returned. The
postcards were mailed five days after the questionnaires had been

sent, to everyone who had not replied within that five day period.

11

Time Period for the Study

The total time that was allowed for the questionnaires to

be answered and returned was slightly over one month. On January

21;, 1951, the questionnaires were mailed. Any questionnaires re-

ceived after February 28, 1951, were not used in the analysis.

The time schedule for the study, therefore, was as follows:

(1) January 214.
(2) January 29
(3) February 1 a: 2

(1...) February 6 8c 7

(5) February 28

7,192 questionnaires mailed.
Cerresponding postcards mailed.
200 additional questionnaires mailed.

Corresponding postcards mailed .

End of response period.

CHAPTER III

SAMPLE RETURNS
Percentage Return

‘All questionnaires that were returned were included in the
total percentage return of the survey. Thus, unanswered question-
,naires were tabulated along with properly completed questionnaires.
From.Table 1, it can be seen that the total return of both cities
was 3h~6h.percent. This percentage is based on 7,192 question-
naires that were first mailed and 2,h91 questionnaires that were
returned. However, as was explained in Chapter 2, 200 additional
questionnaires were later sent. .Adding this number to the original
7,192 questionnaires, the adjusted percentage return for the survey
was 33 .70 percent.

The response was better from.Grand Rapids than from.Flint.
Table 1 illustrates that 1,619 questionnaires were returned from
Grand Rapids out of the h,h10 that were mailed. The percentage
for the city was 36.71 percent. The Flint response was 31.3h
percent. or the 2,782 questionnaires that were first mailed, 872
were returned.

However, both percentage returns for Grand Rapids and Flint
decreased about one-half of one percent when the additional 200
questionnaires were included. This is based on the assumption that
82 additional questionnaires were sent to the city of Flint and 118
extra were mailed to Grand Rapids. Therefore, the final adjusted
percentage for Grand Rapids was 35.76 percent and for Flint was

30.h5 percent.

13

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

88m 3.8 8.8 83888 8883
8.8 H335 84.5 8.8 55 N5 :28 98H m3; H33
8.8 84.5 mH. OH 8.8 «5 mm. m 8.8 28H mo. 5 55.
8.8 84.5 8. o 8.Hm :8 8. o 5.8 So; 8. o 55
8.8 84.5 mo. 5 8.Hm :8 8. o 5.8 5; mo. 5 85
5.8 84.5 8. o 8.Hm :8 8. o 8.8 38H 8. o 55
5.8 23.5 8. o 8.Hm :8 8. o 8.8 m8; 8. o 555
3.8 84.5 om. 8 8.Hm 8w 8. mH 8.8 m3; 3. H5 H55
5.8 $3.5 8. H 8.8 m8 8. o 3.8 8m; 8. H 85
8.8 58.5 8. o 8.8 m8 8. o 2.8 mam; 8. o 25
mm. mm 58.5 Hm. R 8.8 m8 He. 5 3.8 mm; min. om 85
8. mm 84.5 8. 0 Ho. 5 m8 8 . o 5. mm mam. H 8. o 35
8. mm 8:. 5 H5 . m 8H Hm. 5 58 Ho. 5 8 5. 8 m5. H 8.5 8H 85
5.8 08.5 8. a 8.5 05 5. m 8.3 05; mo. 5 55
5.8 58.5 8. 8 8.5 :5 HH. m 5.8 84; 5. HH 5H5
8.8 85.5 8.5 85 H.125 Hz. 8.5 8 8.8 58H mam 8H m \m
2.5 58.5 HH. 8 5.5 m2. 5. 5 8.5 2m; 4H. 0 m \m
8.8 80.5 88 555 05.5 H8 88 8 5.5 mHm.H HH.m RH a. \m
8.8 «8.H 5.: 5mm 8.55 8o 8.: Hmm 5.8 81H RAH HHm m \5
8.8 08 8.H 8 8.2 m5 3. 5H 8.3 m8 8.H 8 m \m
8.3 m8 8.H 8H 2.2 m8 mH.H mm 8.3 m8 3.5 8 m \m
oo.oH mos mm.m 58H mo.m Hmm «H.m mm mm.HH HHm am.m moH H m
88 80 5.8 8m 86 58H mm. 8H 58 8: mH.m mo: H H
5. m 8. m 5. m 8. H 5. m mo. H o H
8. m 8. m 8. H 8. H mo. 5 mo. 5 5\H
.coom .coom .voom .coom .coom .coom .uoom .coom .woom .woom .coom .éoom
pom H38 .85 62 .8a H38 .3m .oz .98 H33 .98 .oz
Hapoa Haves Human span
£28m 888 8a pflHa “EHHa 88am 82¢
11 .mNeIQ Hp coaasvom moanagofinosd .H 0.32..

1h

The assumption.made, however, was not necessarily true. The
82 and 118 figures used are proportions to the total return of un-
claimed mail. They were based on 95 and 136 questionnaires that
‘were returned unopened from Flint and Grand Rapids respectively.
This is illustrated in Table 2. 4A3 31 out of the 231 unclaimed
questionnaires were returned too late in the month to be sent to
new’addresses, only the 200 additional questionnaires were mailed.
The assumption, therefore, was that the 31 questionnaires were re-
turned at the same prOportionate ratio between cities as were the

200 that'were received earlier in the month.

Table 2. Questionnaires Returned.As Unclaimed Mail.

 

 

Flint Grand Rapids Combined Cities
Reason (2.782) (n.910) (7.192)

Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent

Not found at this

 

address 29 30.53 h9 36.02 78 33.78
No such street

number 11 11.58 ES 51.62 5h. 23.58
vacant 6 6.52 15 11.05 21 9.09
Outside of deliv-

ery limits 0 0.00 6 haul 6 2.60
Unknown (addressed

to occupant) 2 2.11 3 2.21 5 2.16
Insufficient address 1 1.05 h. 2.9h 5 2.16
Deceased 3 3.16 1 .7h. h. 1.73
House moved (ad-

dressed to occupant)1 1.05 0 .00 1 .b3
Reaflon mm .2.- 1 e05 __O- 000 __1_ all.)

Total 95 100.00 156 100.00 251 100.00

Percentage returned
unclaimed .3.h2 3.08 3.21

 

15
Reasons for Response

It is impossible to accurately account for the above average

response to the survey. The term above average is used, because
most mail surveys usually range from.a five percent to a 20 percent
reply. This study ended with over 30 percent of the sample replying.
nevertheless, some reasons seem apparent.

Perhaps the most important reason was the booster effect of
the postcards. Table 1 better illustrates this. On February 6
and 7, a week after the postcards had been.mailed, the amount of
replies received shows an enormous increase. This increase can be
related only to the reminder the postcards contained.

Another reason why the survey had a good reply was that in
the introductory letter, which accompanied each questionnaire,
emphasis was placed on the writer being a graduate student. Several
of the returned questionnaires contained short comments stating
that they, too, had gone to college, or that they, also, had con-
ducted a survey.

Some of the good response should be related to the question-
naire itself. .A considerable amount of time was spent in trying
to word the questions in such a manner that they were easy to fill
out and were interesting to answer. Furthermore, the question-
naire was arranged so that it was applicable to everyone.

A.final reason which I'will cite is that the introductory
letter stated that partial replies would be satisfactory. This

helped increase the percentage return considerably. .As the

l6

questionnaire contained personal questions, these were often left
unanswered. The questions pertaining to weekly income and occupation
were particularly noticeable for not being answered.

Only one reason, I believe, seems apparent for the difference
in the response between cities. .Although the percentage return from
Grand Rapids was only slightly higher than the percentage return from
Flint, part of the difference was accounted for by sending Grand Rapids
questionnaires to people having occupations listed after their names.
The procedure for this was explained earlier. This belief is held
only on the basis that a number of returned envelopes from Grand Rapids,
also contained return addresses that corresponded to those names that

were under test.

Returns by Names and Occupants

The returns between those that answered as "name" and those
‘who replied as “occupant” varied significantly. In both Flint and
Grand Rapids, there was a better response when an envelope was
addressed as Mr. Howard Riley, 2518 Ford Avenue, than when the
envelope was labeled, Occupant, 2518 Ford Avenue.

Table 3 shows this percentagewise. The response from.those
who received questionnaires with their names enscribed on envelopes
was approximately 55 percent of each city's return. Out of 2,h91
returned questionnaires, 1,381 or 55.hh.percent were received from
"names". Those who received the questionnaire as an occupant of

a specific address responded slightly over hh.percent of each city's

17

Table 3. Questionnaires Returned from "Names“ and "Occupants".

 

 

 

 

 

Answered Unanswered
Questionnaire Questionnaire Total Response
Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent

 

Grand Rapids

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Name 81111 55 ~02 60 70 .59 9011 55 ~81;
Occupant 690 hh.98 23 27.06 713 hh.01
Unclassified --- ----- 2 2.35 2 .15
Total 1.5% 100 .00 85 100.00 1,619 100.00
Flint
Name 1151 514-311 26 61 -90 1177 511-70
Occupant 379 h5.66 10 23.81 389 hht6l
Unclassified -- ----- 6 lh.29 6 .69
Total 850 100.00 h2 100.00 872 100.00

Grand Rapids and Flint

 

 

 

 

 

Nuns 1,295 5h.78 86 67.72 1,581 "55.hh
Occupant 1 ,%9 14.5 e22 33 25 e98 1 ,102 1411.214-
UDCIQS 811’in """"- ----- 8 6e30 8 e32

Total 2,56h. 100.00 127 100.00 2,h91 100.00

 

total. From the 2,h91 returned questionnaires, 1,102 or hh.2h percent
‘were responses from "occupants".
There were eight returns that could not be categorized into

name or occupant. .All other questionnaires were classified by the

 

7 These questionnaires could not be classified into either of the two

groups. All questionnaires were coded by numbers that were stamped
on the back side of the second page. The heading "unclassified“
contains those questionnaires where the code numbers had been torn
off by the respondents before being returned.

18

use of code numbers that corresponded to a name or occupant in the
directory. On these eight questionnaires, the code number had been
torn off. Consequently, there was no way of knowing whether they
were returned from an "occupant" or from.a "name".

.Using the standard T test as a measure of significance, the
variance between the response from names and from occupants was
highly significant at the one percent level. The T test is the

statistical device used throughout the thesis.8
Reasons for Variance of Names and Occupants

Again there is no accurate method of determining the reasons
why the response varied between names and occupants. It is the
writer's belief that numerous people answered the questionnaire
because they wanted to contribute something and feel important.
Therefore, when you asked questions directly of "urn. Meore" and
"Mrs. Black", it aroused more of a feeling of importance from.them,
than when questions were directed in an impersonal form.

4A second reason for the variance was that the postcards did not
always reach the same person who had received the questionnaire
earlier. This was especially true for mail sent to occupants. If
there were two families living in a building, it was very likely for
one family to pick up the questionnaire and the other family to re-
ceive the postcard. Hence, the reminder effect of the postcard was

nullified.

 

8 The formula for the T test using it between two percentages is;

 

- P - P _, ¢- *_*
T-_:sl.:_2. where Sx =npl-1=2=.-V1=1x(100--1=1)+132x(loo-Pa

 

 

x N1 N2

19
Return of Unclaimed Questionnaires

Over three percent of the original sample was returned by postal
authorities as unclaimed mail. This is shown in Table 2, to which
reference was made earlier. .A list of the reasons are included. The
most prevalent reason for a questionnaire being returned was that the
person was "Not Found at This Address”. "No Such Street Number" and
”moved" were the second and third most numerous reasons.

The reasons listed applied differently to names and occupants.
Fer example, if a questionnaire was addressed "name" and the family
had moved, it was returned if no forwarding address was left. But
when it was addressed "occupant”, then the questionnaire remained.

Similar situations held true for other reasons. Whereas a
"name" was returned when "Not Found at this Address", an “occupant”
addressed envelope was received by whoever resided there.

The opposite was possible and undoubtedly occurred. If a house
was vacant and the envelope was addressed "occupant”, the question-
naire was returned.u However, if the envelope was addressed "name",
and the house was vacant, then the questionnaire was forwarded to
its new address.

In general, the reasons for questionnaires being returned
unopened applied more to those sent to actual names than to those

sent to occupants.
Usable Questionnaires

The remainder of this thesis will be concerned with the in-

formation received and contained in the questionnaires. Reference

20

back to Table 3 shows that 2,h91 questionnaires were returned. Of

these, 127 were returned unanswered or could not be classified into

name or "occupant" replies. One of the usable questionnaires was
lost from the Flint "name" group during the processing of the answers.
Thus the analysis of the data is based on 2,363 questionnaires, comp
prised of 8hh.name and 690 occupant replied from Grand Rapids and
h50 name and 379 occupant replies from Flint.

The overall return of usable questionnaires was 32.86 percent.

when based on the original 7,192 questionnaires mailed, and 31.97

percent when the additional 200 questionnaires were included.

21

CHAPTER IV

DESCRIPTIVE ANALYSIS OF SURVEY
Introduction

The tables that are presented in this chapter show the numerical
and percentage distribution of the 2,363 usable questionnaires. .All
of the tables contain the distribution of Flint, Grand Rapids and the
combined total of the two cities.

The city totals include the combined response from.the ”names"
and ”occupants". .Although the survey was conducted by distinguishing
between 'names" and ”occupants", there was no significant difference
in the answers given by the two groups.

For some of the tables, an arithmetical mean was used to stress
information. The method of calculating the mean was accomplished in
this way. Each of the numbers listed under the column heading Name
and Occupant were given corresponding values of one, two, three, and
so forth. These were used as weights. The original numbers were
multiplied by these weights and the new'weighted values were added
together. This sum.was divided by the sum of the unweighted numbers
minus the value of X. This final value was then used to give added
significance to the mode of those tables.

The number corresponding to X was the number of people that
did not reply to that question. Their values are not included in the
derivation of the mean, but are a part of the total number used in

a T test.

22
Number of People Eating Two Meals Per Day at Home

More respondents had a total of two peeple eating two meals per
day at home than any other single category. This was true for both
the cities of Flint and Grand Rapids. (This is shown in Table h).
Fer Flint, the average number of people eating two meals per day was
3.06 persons. In Grand Rapids, the average size family was slightly
larger at 3.52 persons. Overall, the combined average was 3.36 per-
sons. Most of the families ranged between two and five persons.

About 85 percent of the families fell into this category.

Table hm What Is the Number of People Eating Two Meals Per Day in
Your Home?

 

 

Flint combined Grand Rapids combined Flint and Grand Rapids

 

 

 

 

 

Number Name and Percent Name and Percent 2 Names and Percent
Occupant Occupant 2 Occupants

O 2 .2h. 1 .07 3 .13
1 2h 2.90 60 3.91 8h 3.55
2 26).; 31.811 398 25.911 662 28.02
3 201 211.25 53h 21.77 535 22-81
L; 170 20.51 3119 22.75 519 21.96
5 95 11.1.6 207 13.119 302 12.78
6 31. 3.7h 80 5.22 111 h.70
7 13 1.57 32 2.09 h5 1.90
8 5 .60 15 .98 20 .85
9 3 .36 15 .98 18 .76
X __2_l_ 2.53 ‘ _L_1_3_ 2.80 __6_1._|_. 2.71

Total 829 100.00 155h 100.00 2363 100.00

 

How Often is meat Bought?

From Table 5, it can be seen that meat is generally bought

either weekly, or else two to three times a week. As a slightly

23

larger percentage of peeple purchased meat several times a week than
weekly, it is legical to assume that purchasing meat twice a week is the

most common practice.

Table 5. How Often Do You Buy meat?

 

 

Flint combined Grand Rapids combined Flint and Grand Rapids

 

 

 

 

Frequency Name and Percent Name and Percent 2 Names and Percent
Occupant Occupant 2 Occupants

Weekly 351 142.311 615 10.09 966 110.88
Two or Three

Times weekly 392 h7.28 710 h6.28 1102 h6.63
Every Two Weeks 18 2017 32 2.09 50 2012
X 9 1.09 18 1.17 27 1.1L

Total ’ 829 100.00 1538 100.00 2363 100.00

 

Neat Storage at Home

The mechanical refrigerator was predominately the method used for
storing meat in homes. Over 90 percent of the homes store meat in this
manner. (This is shown in Table 6). The home freezer ranks second with
five percent of the respondents listing it as the method of meat storage

in their homes.
Food Bill Per week

The average amount of money spent for one week's food supply was
321.25. On.a per capita basis, this amounts to $6.32 per person. These
figures were determined in accordance with the description given in the

forepart of the chapter. On a per capita average, Flint spent 8.87 more

2h

Table 6. How Do You Store Your Meat at Home?

__

 

Flint combined Grand Rapids combined Flint and Grand Rapids

 

 

 

 

Storage Name and Percent Name and Percent 2 Names and Percent
Occupant Occupant 2 Occupants

mechanical

Refrigerator 756 91.21 1378 89.8h 213k. 90.31
Ice Refrigerator 23 2.77 39 2.5h 62 2.62
Hams Freezer 39 b.7O 78 5.08 117 b.95
Other 5 060 12 078 17 072
x -_Jé .72 27 1.76 52 1.ho

Total 829 100.00 153b, 100.00 2363 100.00

for food per week than did Grand Rapids. The respective averages of Flint
and Grand Rapids were $6.72 and $5.85 a week. The weekly family averages
for these cities were $20.55 and $21.60.

One fourth of the respondent's families spent between $20.00 and
$25.00 a week for food. This class contained more respondents than did

any other class.

Table 7. About'What Is the Average Amount Spent for One week's Food Supply
for Your Family?

1——.

Flint combined Grand Rapids combined Flint and Grand Rapids

 

 

Amount Name and Percent Name and Percent 2 Names and Percent
Occupant Occupant 2 Occupants
Under $5 13 1.57 27 1.76 ho . 1.69
3 5 - 8 9-99 51 6.15 82 5-35 133 5-63
$10 - $1h.99 1h8 17.85 218 1h.21 366 15.h9
$15 - 319-99 177 21.35 315 20-53 h92 20-82
:20 - sah.99 228 27.50 579 2u.71 607 25.70
$25 - $29-99 10h 12-55 229 1ho93 333 1&009
830 - 33h.99 58 7.00 157 10.23 215 9.10.
335 - 339-99 31 3o7h 56 3-65 87 3-68
tho and over 12 1.h5 33 2.15 h5 1.90
I. __1: .8h 38 2.h8 h5 1.90
Total 829 100.00 153h. 100.00 2363 100.00

 

 

 

 

25

Table 7 shows the breakdown of weekly food expenditures at $5.00

intervals.
meat Bill Per'Week

The average amount of money spent for meat per week was $7.13.
More families fell, as a class, into the $5.00 - $7.h9 bracket than into
any other class. The peeple of Grand Rapids, in meat purchases as well
as in food purchases, spent more per week than the Flint residents. For
meat expenditures, the average per week for the city of Grand Rapids was
87.28. In contrast, the city of Flint spent an average of $6.85. On
a per capita basis, the average amount of money spent for meat was 82.12.
For the cities of Flint and Grand Rapids, the respective averages of
meat expenditures were $2.2h and {2.07. Table 8 shows the distribution

of meat expenditures per week.

Table 8. About What Is the Average meat Bill for Your Family Per week?

 

Flint combined Grand Rapids combined Flint and Grand Rapids

 

Amount Name and Percent Name and Percent 2 Names and Percent
Occupant Occupant 2 Occupants
3 0 4 2.119 36 h-3h 5h 362 90 3.81 _
3 2-50-8 h~99 207 2ho97 325 21.19 532 22-51
3 5-00-3 7.149 299 36-07 5314 311.80 833 35-27
3 7.50-8 9.99 lhl 17.01 288 18.77 L29 18.15
310.00.312.19 7h 8.93 173 11.28 2117 10.115
81250-811139 26 3.111 60 3.91 86 3.611
$15.00-$17.h9 1h. 1.69 25 1.63 39 1.65
mac-$19.99 7 .81. 7 .116 1h .59
$20. and over 3 .36 15 .98 18 .76
x __2_2_ 2.65 _5_'_3 3.116 12 3.17

 

 

Total 829 100.00 153h. 100.00 2363 100.00

 

lbekly Income

The average weekly income, after deductions, for families in Flint
and Grand Rapids was $7h.70. This figure was determined from a class
interval of 830.00. In relationship to the food and meat expenditures
per week, the class interfal was greater and so the chances for an accurate
weekly income average was lessened.

Of special interest in Table 9 is the large number of people that

did not reply to this question.

Table 9. What Is the weekly Income, After Deductions, in Your Family?

 

 

Flint combined Grand Rapids combined Flint and Grand Rapids

 

 

 

 

Amount Name and .Percent Name and Percent 2 Names and Percent
Occupant Occupant 2 Occupants

$30 - $59 199 2h.00 3h? 22.62 5h6 23-11
$60 - $89 332 hoooh 570 37-16 902 38.17
390 - $119 123 1h.8h 199 12.97 322 13.63
3120 and over 76 9.17 150 9.78 226 9.56
x _5_9 7 .12 l8_3 ll .93 _2_h_2_ 10 .211
Total 829 100.00 l53h. 100.00 2363 100.00

 

Have You Ever Bought Prepackaged Meat?

Table 10 represents a key to the remainder of the tables. This
question prevented many respondents from answering questions that followed.
The assumption held that if a person had bought prepackaged meat once,
then he or she would have some knowledge in answering questions about pre-

packaged meat, and in comparing butcher service to prepackaged meat. There-

27

fore, if in answer to the question, "Have you ever bought prepackaged
meat‘I', a respondent said "Yes', then all of the remaining answers on
his questionnaire were used. On the other hand, if a respondent replied
'No' to this question, then part of the questionnaire could not apply
to him and was not used.

Those that did not answer (X) were treated as those who had answered
"No‘.

Table 10 illustrates that 72.19 percent of the respondents had
bought prepackaged meat at least once. However, in the city of Grand
Rapids more people had tried prepackaged meat than in Flint. The dif-

ference was significant between the five percent and ten percent level.

Table 10. Have You Ever Bought Prepackaged Meat?

 

 

 

 

 

 

Used Flint combined Grand Rapids combined Flint and Grand Rapids

Prepackaged Name and Percent Name and Percent 2 Names and Percent

Meat Occupant Occupant 2 Occupants

No 233 28 . 11 386 25 . 16 619 26 . 20

X 15 1.81 16 1.011 31 1.31
Total 829 100.00 153k. 100.00 2363 100.00

 

Belief of High Prices

Of the 1,713 respondents who had bought prepackaged meat at least
once (as shown in Table 10), 51 percent believed that prepackaged fresh
meat did not cost more than did comparable meat that was not prepackaged.

(This is illustrated in Table 11).

28

However, there were significant differences between the views held
in the two cities. The Flint response indicated that they did not be-
lieve higher prices were a corollary with prepackaged meat. However,
the replies from.Grand Rapids were more uncertain about comparable
prices being paid. The views were split evenly in Grand Rapids between
those who felt higher prices were charged on prepackaged meat, and those

who felt that higher prices were not charged.

Table 11. Do You Believe You Pay More for Prepackaged Fresh meat Than for
Comparable Meat Not.Paokaged?

 

Flint combined Grand Rapids combined Flint and Grand Rapids

 

 

 

 

Belief Name and Percent Name and Percent 2 Names and Percent
Occupant Occupant 2 Occupants

Yes 218 37-52 52h. h6.29 7&2 h3-32

I 22 6.02 _6_5_ 5.711 120 5.811

Total 581 100.00 1132 100.00 1713 100.00

 

Preference for meat

Buying directly from a butcher was still the predominant method of
shopping for meat. This was borne out in the results of the 1,713 res-
pondents. In Table 12 it is shown that 6he98 percent of this group pre-
ferred butcher service. Only lht9h percent preferred purchasing meat
prepackaged.

However, Flint and Grand Rapids differed significantly in their
preference. The people of Flint, percentagewise, had almost two persons
to every one person in Grand Rapids preferring to purchase meat pre-

packaged.

In Grand Rapids 71.30 percent of the 1,132 respondents preferred
butcher service to prepackaged meat. Even if those that had "no pre-
ference” between the two methods were included with the group that pre-
ferred prepackaged meat, there would still be approximately three persons
out of four in Grand Rapids, that preferred butcher service. Combining

the same groups in Flint, the ratio would be about one to one.

Table 12. Overall, How Do You Prefer to Buy Your Fresh Meat?

 

Flint combined Grand Rapids combined Flint and Grand Rapids

 

 

Preference Name and Percent Name and Percent 2 Name 3 and Percent
Occupant Occupant 2 Occupants
Prepackaged 126 ‘ 21 .69 130 11 .118 256 111.911
Butcher Service 306 52 .67 807 71.30 1113 611.98
No Preference 1311 23 . O6 167 111. 75 301 17 . 57
I _1_5 2 .58 _2_§ 2 .117 A3 2 .51

Total 581 100.00 1132 100.00 1713 100.00

 

Favorite Types of Prepackaged Meat

Lunch meat, sausage and roasts were the favorite types of pre-
packaged meat. Bacon, steak and chicken followed in that order.

The method of determining what cuts were preferred over others was
accanplished in a different manner. In the questionnaire, an open end
question was used to ask what was the respondent's favorite type of pre-_
packaged meat. The question was worded as follows: "What is your favor-
ite type of prepackaged meat? (e.g. roasts, sausage, lunch meat.)

." Because it was an open end question, questionnaires

 

were returned containing from one to five answers. Most of the multiple

30

replies had three favorites listed. Consequently, a weighted scale of
preference was computed. For the first answer given, three points were
awarded. The second favorite was worth two points. One point was given
to the third choice. If only one reply was given, it was worth three
points.

The points, corresponding to each meat out, were then totaled.

The relative importance of each can be seen in Table 13.

Table 13. What Is Your Favorite Type of Prepackaged Meat?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Flint Grand Rapids Flint and Grand Rapids

Type of Weighted Percent Weighted Percent Weighted Percent
Meat Points Points Points
Lunch Meats 377 22 .59 1077 37 .71 111511 32 . 13
Sausage 1105 211.26 6118 22 .69 1053 23 .27
Roasts 392 23 .119 383 13 .111 775 17 . l3
Bacon 135 8.09 219 7.67 3511 7.82
Steak 1214 7 oh3 15h 5 ~39 278 6 . 11;
ChiCkOn 89 5033 139 11.87 228 5cm
Fish __g_ .112 _l_g .112 .22 .112 -

T otal 1669 100.00 2856 100. 00 11525 100.00

 

A note of warning must be mentioned with respect to the results.
Probably the relative positions of lunch meat, sausage and roasts are
not accurate. This belief is based on the fact that a number of question-
naires were answered with only lunch meat, sausage and roasts in mind.
In other words, many respondents may not have understood what the term

e.g. signified.

31

Surprisingly, Grand Rapids and Flint respondents differed sig-
nificantly in their rankings. In Grand Rapids, the preference was lunch
meat, sausage and roasts. Percentagewise, the relative positions were
distinct from each other. The preference for Flint, however, was sausage,
roasts and lunch meats. Also, the demarcation of preference between

them was slight.
Percentage of Meat Bought Prepackaged

The percentage of total meat purchases which were bought entirely
prepackaged, was small. Sixty-nine percent of the respondents replied -
that the amount of prepackaged meat they purchased was under 25 percent
of their total meat purchases. The average amount of meat that was
bought entirely prepackaged was only 23 .75 percent of the total meat

purchases. (These results are shown in Table 111).

Table 11... What Percentage of Your Meat Do You Buy Prepackaged?

 

Flint combined Grand Rapids combined Flint and Grand Rapids

 

 

 

Percent Name and Percent Name .and Percent 2 Names and Percent
Occupant Occupant ' 2 Occupants

Under 25% L111 70.73 771 68.11 1182 69.00

25% - 119% 67 11.53 1111 10.07 181 10.57

50% - 711% 1.5 7.75 65 5:71; 110 6-h2

75% 400% 26 h.h8 7).; 6.511 100 5.81..

x

_33 5.51 £32 9.5g m0 8.11
Total 581 100.00 1132 100.00 1713 100.00

 

32

Length of Time Meat Has Been Bought from a
Self-Service Prepackaged Store

From Table 15 it can be seen that approximately h3 percent of the
people who had bought prepackaged meat at least once, had been buying
prepackaged meat six months or more. An equivalent amount had been
buying prepackaged meat less than six months. The main difference in
the replies between the two cities was that in Flint a greater amount,
percentagewise, had bought prepackaged meat less than six months, whereas,
in Grand Rapids, there were more respondents who had bought prepackaged
meats for a longer period. This difference was significant at the 1

percent level.

Table 15. How Long Have You Bought meat from.a Self-Service Prepackaged
Store?

 

 

Flint combined Grand Rapids combined Flint and Grand Rapids

 

 

 

 

Length Name and Percent Name and Percent 2 Names and Percent
Of time Occupant Occupant 2 Occupants
Never 3b. 5.85 55 b.86 89 5.20
Less than one

month 80 13.77 136 12.01 216 12.61
One to three

months 9h 16.18 130 11.h8 22h. 13.08
Three to six

months 95 16.35 139 12.28 23h. 13.66
Six months or

more 217 37-35 516 h5o59 733 h2.78
X _6_1_ 10.50 _1_5_6_ 13 .78 311 12.67

 

Total 581 100.00 1132 100.00 1713 100.00

 

35

Consumption of Total Meat in Relation to

Prepackaged Meat Buying

Prepackaged meat has had little effect upon.meat consumption in-
creasing or decreasing within a family. (Table 16 illustrates this point).
Six out of ten peeple who have been buying prepackaged meat said
they were eating the same amount as before. Only 2.39 percent of the res-

pondents said they were eating more meat after purchasing meat prepack-
aged. .A slightly higher percentage, h.09 percent, of the respondents
felt they were eating less meat since they started buying it prepackaged.

The response between cities did not differ significantly.

Table 16. Since You Have Been Buying Prepackaged Meats, Has Your Family
Been Eating:

 

 

Flint combined Grand Rapids combined Flint and Grand Rapids

 

 

 

 

 

Quantity Name and Percent Name and Percent 2 Names and Percent
Occupant Occupant 2 Occupants

Eat Less 18 3.10 52 h~59 7O b.09

Eat More 17 2.93 2h. 2.12 bl 2.39

Same Amount As

Don't Know 9h 16.18 192 16.96 286 16.70

X. _JEL 13.9h. 33:2 18.h6 £§fl2 16.93
Total 581 100.00 1132 100.00 1713 100.00

 

Why'Prepackaged Meat Is Purchased

"Can shop more quickly" was the number one reason given for purchas-
ing prepackaged meat. This was indicated in both the responses of Flint

and Grand Rapids, as shown in Table 17. .Approximately one out of every

5h

two persons checked it as a reason why they bought prepackaged meat.
The nest reasons listed the most frequently were: (1) weight and total
price are given; (2) Convenient selection of sizes; and (3) Can examine

the meat.

Table 17. Why'Do You Buy Prepackaged Meat?

 

 

 

Flint Grand Rapids Flint and G. R.
Reason Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent
Can Shop More Quickly 336 57.83 h99 hh.08 835 h8.7h
weight and Total Price
Are given 295 50.77 393 3h.72 688 h0.16
Convenient Selection
of Sizes 229 39.h1 308 27.21 537 31.35
Canisxamine the Meat 22h. 38.55 2h8 21.91 h72 27.55
Only Kind Sold in Store 97 16.70 262 23.1h. 359 20.96
More Sanitary 1h0 2h.10 175 l5.h6 315 18.39
Larger Selection of Items 98 16.87 137 12.10 235 13.72
No Particular Reason 58 9.98 1h? ' 12.99 205 11.97
1688 Bone 67 11053 76 6071 1’43 8035
No Talking with Butcher 61 10.50 75 6.63 136 7.9h
No Other'Way to Buy 31 5.3h. 101 8.92 132 7.71
Meat Is Fresher 27 b.65 39 3.h5 66 3.85
Based on 581 1132 1713

 

.A number of variations occurred in the respective rankings of the two
cities. Ranking fourth in Grand Rapids was that, prepackaged meat was
the only kind sold in the store. This reason was listed seventh in Flint.
Ranking fifth in Flint, in comparison to sixth in Grand Rapids, was
sanitation, .A higher percentage of peeple bought prepackaged meat in

Flint because of sanitary conditions than in Grand Rapids.

35

In nine of the twelve reasons listed, Flint had a higher percentage
than the equivalent figure of Grand Rapids. Only in the categories of
(1) only kind sold in the store, (2) No particular reason, and (3) No
other way to buy, did Grand Rapids have a correspondingly higher pro-
portion than Flint.

.As these are rather dubious reasons to debit to prepackaged meat,
it is clear that Flint residents were more cognizant of all the advantages
that prepackaged meat offered, than were the residents of Grand Rapids.
This fact corresponds to all the information that was conveyed in Tables
11 and 12. They showed,in retrospect, that more Flint consumers, in
direct contrast to Grand Rapids consumers, believed that higher prices
were not charged for prepackaged meat, and in addition, that they pre-

ferred prepackaged meat service more in Flint than in Grand Rapids.
Why Prepackaged Meat Is Not Bought

The uncertainty of not knowing how long meat had been packaged,
ranked as the number one reason why meat was not bought prepackaged.
(Table 18 shows this). This conclusion was based on the entire sample,
irregardless of whether or not they had even bought prepackaged meat.
The next three most important reasons were: (1) Consumers wanted to see
both sides of the meat; (2) Advice from.the butcher was missing; and (3)
Excess bone and fat were hidden in packages.

Both cities' replies were more in unison, although the relative
rankings of two were exchanged one position in three instances.

All the percentages for the reasons given as to why prepackaged

_meat was not bought, were higher in the city of Grand Rapids than in

36

Flint. One exception noted was, "No particular reason".

The results in Table 18 are the opposite from those in Table 17 in
this respect. Whereas, the reasons favoring prepackaged meat purchases
were dominated by Flint in Table 17, the reasons for not buying prepackaged

meat were dominated by Grand Rapids in Table 18.

Table 18. Why Don't You Buy Prepackaged Neat?

’
_;-

 

 

 

 

Flint Grand Rapids Flint and G. R.

Reason Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent
Don't Know How Long It

Has Been Packaged 253 30.52 62h. h0.68 877 37.11
Like to See Both Sides
Like Advice of Butcher 155 18.70 h75 30.96 630 22.66
Excess Bone and Fat.Are

Hidden in the Package 156 18.82 370 2h.l2 526 22.26
Like to See the Meat

'Weighed ‘ 122 1ht72 277 18.06 399 16.89
Too Expensive 109 13.15 287 18.71 396 16.76
No Particular Reason 93 11.22 161 10.50 25h. 10.75
Does Not Taste the Same 65 7.8h 165 10.76 230 9.73
Too Impersonal 31 3.7h 116 7.56 1&7 6.22

Based on 829 15% 2365

 

Proportion of meat, Fruits and Vegetables and Other Groceries
Bought from a Self-Service meat Store

There was less meat bought entirely from self-service stores than
were the relative amounts of fruits and vegetables, and groceries. 0f
the respondents, 3h.62 percent bought all of their groceries, aside from
meat, from a self-service store. Nearly 20 percent bought all their

fruits and vegetables from a self-service store and only 9.06 percent

37

of the respondents bought all of their meat from a self-service store.
(This is illustrated in Tables 19, 20, and 21).
Flint had more consumers that bought most or all of their food

from self-service stores than Grand Rapids.

Table 19. 'What Proportion of Meat Do You Buy from a Self-Service meat

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Store?

Flint combined Grand Rapids combined Flint and Grand Rapids
Proportion Name and Percent Name and Percent 2 Names and Percent

Occupant Occupant 2 Occupants
.All 85 10.25 129 8.hl 21h 9.06
None 16h. 19.78 3h9 22.75 513 21.71
X 100 12.06 211. 15 .71 3111 111.113

Total 829 100.00 153h. 100.00 2363 100.00

 

Table 20. 'What Proportion of Fruits and Vegetables Do You Buy from.a
Self-Service Store?

Flint combined Grand Rapids combined Flint and Grand Rapids

 

 

Proportion Name and Percent Name and Percent 2 Names and Percent
Occupant Occupant 2 Occupants

.All 307 37-03 395 25-75 702 29.71

Most 166 20.02 29h 19.17 u60 l9.h7

None h6 5.55 173 11.28 219 9.27

x ._8_8. 10.62 180 11.73 _2_6_8_ 11.311

 

Total .829 100.00 153h. '100.00 2363 100.00

 

38

Table 21. What Proportion of Other Groceries Do You Buy from a Self-
Service Store?

 

 

Flint combined Grand Rapids combined Flint and Grand Rapids

 

 

 

 

Proportion Name and Percent Name and Percent 2 Names and Percent
Occupant Occupant 2 Occupants

All 307 37.03 511 33.32 818 3h.62

M08t 195 23.52 315 20.53 510 21.58

Some 197 23-77 393 25-62 590 2h-97

None 3h. h.10 130 8.h7 16h 6.9h

X _JZé 11.58 .185 12.06 I281 11.89
Total 829 100.00 153h. 100.00 2363 100.00

 

Preference of Meat Cuts

Customers had the following preferences when buying prepackaged
meat: (1) The preferred thickness of beef steak was one-half inch; (2)
They bought either four or six pork chops in a package; and (3) The pre-
ferred weight of a beef chuck roast was three pounds. (These results are
shown in Tables 22, 23 and 2h.)

Four out of five respondents preferred their steaks to be between
one-half inch and one inch in thickness.

The best explanation for the preference of having pork chops in
two sizes probably relates back to the number of people eating two meals
per day in the home. This was shown in Table h where two people at a
meal was the most common number.

Three persons at a meal was the next most numerous family size.

If the housewife bought two pork chops for each person, then four and

six pork chops would become the favorite package sizes.

39

Nearly 50 percent of the respondents preferred to have a beef
roast weigh either three or three and one-half pounds.

The replies between cities did not differ significantly.

Table 22. How Thick Do You Like Steak from a Beef Round Cut?

 

 

Flint combined Grand Rapids combined Flint and Grand Rapids

 

 

Thickness Name and Percent Name and Percent 2 Names and Percent
Occupant Occupant 2 Occupants
1/L.Inch 56 6.76 95 6.06 1h9 6.51
1/2 Inch 522 58.8h. 559 55.1h 861 56.hh
5/L.Inch 225 27.1h. hls 27.25 6h5 ,, 27.21
One Inch 128 15.hh 2h8 16.17 576 15.91
I-1/h.Inoh 22 2.65 62 h.0h an 5.55
1-1/2 Inch 22 2.65 50 5.26 72 5.05
Two Inches 8 .97 31 2.02 39 1.65
x 1.6 _1_1_6_ 5.55 _92 6.06 _1_52 5.88

 

Total 829 100.00 153h 100.00 2565 100.00

 

Table 23. How Many Pork Chops Do You Like to Buy at One Time?

 

Flint combined Grand Rapids combined Flint and Grand Rapids

 

 

Number Name and Percent Name and Percent 2 Names and Percent
Occupant Occupant 2 Occupants
Two 26 3.1h 87 5.67 115 h.78
Three hh. 5.31 139 9.06 183 7.7h
Four 216 26.06 h09 26.66 625 26.h6
Six 2h2 29.19 362 23.60 60h 25.56
Seven or more 116 13.99 213 13.89 329 13.92
X _§_9_ 8.32 _911; 6.13 ' 162 6.90

 

 

Total 829 100.00 153h. 100.00 2565 100.00

 

ho

Table 2h. What Weight Beef Chuck Roast Do You Prefer?

 

 

Flint combined Grand Rapids combined Flint and Grand Rapids

 

 

 

Name and Percent

Name and Percent

2 Names and Percent

 

 

 

 

weight Occupant Occupant 2 Occupants
1 Pound 2 024 2 013 ’4 017
1-1/2 Pounds 11 1.55 56 2.55 1.7 1.99
2 Pounds Lb. 5.31 123 8.02 167 7.07
2-1/2 Pounds 98 11.82 186 12.15 2811 12.02
5 Pounds 211 25.115 585 25.09 596 25.21
5-1/2 Pounds 178 21.117 508 20.08 1186 20.57
11 Pounds 1111 17.01 222 111.117 565 15.56
11-1/2 Pounds 55 5.98 66 11.50 99 11.19
5 Pounds 5b. 6.51 10h 6.78 158 6.69
x 57 6.88 102 6.65 159 6.75
Total 829 100.00 15311 100.00 2565 100.00

Family Meat Buyer

__4L

The wife or homemaker usually did the meat buying for the family.

For every ten meat purchases made, the wife or homemaker made seven of

these purchases.

(This is shown in Table 25).

The husband ranked second in meat purchasing.

time for every five times purchases were made in the family.

Both Flint and Grand Rapids were similar in their response.

Mode of Travel

He bought meat one

The automobile was the principal travel source used in shopping

for meat. Seven out of ten persons replied in this way.
The other chief method of transportation was shopping on foot.

out of every five meat shoppers walked to the stores.

(Table 26) 0

One

Table 25.__In Your Family Who Does Most of the Meat Buying?

 

Flint combined Grand Rapids combined Flint and Grand Rapids

 

 

 

 

.Person Name and Percent Name and Percent 2 Names and Percent
Occupant Occupant 2 Occupants '
Son 9 1.09 13 .85 22 .93
Daughter 6 .72 25 1.63 31 1.31
'Wife or
Homemaker 562 67.80 1073 69.9h 1635 69.20
Husband 186 22.hh. 282 18.38 h68 19.81
Single Adult 22 2.65 61 3.98 83 3.51
Other 6 .72 21 1 037 27 1 0 11.].
X _3-8 11.58 _5_9. 3 .85 _91 1.1.10
Total 829 100.00 153h. 100.00 2363 100.00

 

Table 26. Do You Usua11y_Shpp for Meat by:

 

Flint combined Grand Rapids combined Flint and Grand Rapids

 

 

 

 

 

mode Name and Percent Name and Percent 2 Names and Percent
' Occupant Occupant 2 Occupants

Automdbile 621 7h.91 1020 66.h9 16h1 69.hh.
On Foot 150 15 .68 590 25 .112 520 22.01
Taxi ~ 7 .8h 5 .33 12 .51
Bus or Street

Car 28 3038 19 102,4. 1.17 1099
Bicycle O .OO O .OO O .OO
Delivered _2 .211 __l._1. .26 __6 .25

Total 829 100.00 153h. 100.00 2363 100.00

 

The other methods of travel used in shopping for meat were neg-
ligible in comparison to the two previously mentioned.
However, the proportion of shoppers that traveled by automobile

in Flint was significantly different than those shopping by auto in

h2

Grand Rapids. The difference was significant at the 1 percent level.
A similar significant difference was noted in the amount of people that
shopped for meat by walking.

The only explanation which might be the reason for this difference
is that Flint is an automobile manufacturing city and more people may

own cars.
Type of Store from Which Meat was Purchased

Only seven percent of the meat shopping in Grand Rapids and Flint
was done at a prepackaged meat store. Fifty percent of the shopping
was carried on at a meat market. (These figures are shown in Table 27).
However, one-third of the shopping for meat was being carried on at both
types of stores.

The relationship in patterns between Flint and Grand Rapids did

not differ significantly.

Table 27. Type of Store from Which Meat was Purchased.

 

 

Flint combined Grand Rupids combined Flint and Grand Rapids

 

 

Type Name and Percent Name and Percent 2 Names and Percent
Occupant Occupant 2 Occupants
Prepackaged 55 6.63 11h. 7.h3 169 7.15
‘Meat Market 399 h8.1h. 786 51.2h. 1185 50.15
BOth 291 55.10 508 35012 799 33.81
x 8h 10.15 126 8.21 210 8.89

 

 

 

Total 829 100.00 153k 100.00 2363 100.00

 

1+3

Distance from 8 Meat Market

The average number of blocks that the respondents lived from.a meat
market was h.h blocks.9 The people of Flint, on the average, were h.9
blocks from a meat store and the Grand Rapids residents lived h.2 blocks

away. (Table 28 shows this).

Table 28. How Many Blocks Do You Live from the Nearest Meat Market?

 

Flint combined Grand Rapids combined Flint and Grand Rapids

 

Blocks Name and Percent Name and Percent 2 Names and Percent
Occupant Occupant 2 Occupants

0 - 9 67h 81.31 1332 86.83 2006 8h.90
10 - 19 69 8.32 92 6.00 161 6.81
20 - 29 9 1.09 16 1.011 25 1.06
30 - 39 5 .60 2 013 7 030
110 - 1.19 6 .72 3 .20 9 .38
50 - 59 1 .12 0 .OO 1 .0h
60 - 69 l .12 O .OO 1 .0h
70 - 79 0 .OO 0 .OO O .OO
80 - 89 O .OO O .OO 0 .00

Total 829 100.00 15311 100.00 2565 100.00

 

The average was determined in the following manner. The number of
replies listing a distance of ten blocks and over were separated from the
others. For the one in ten, the two in twenty, and so forth, a weight

of ten was given. The sum.for the second digits were then added.

 

9

Some questionnaires were answered in terms of miles. In determining
the average, the equivalent of eight blocks per mile was used.

hh

The total for the first digits was the arithmetical sum. By adding
the weighted second digit total to the sum of the unweighted first digit
total, a combined total was derived. This total, divided by the number
of respondents that replied, not including the I value, gave the average

number of blocks.
Distancd from a Self-Service Meat Store

The average number of blocks the respondents lived from.a self-
service meat store was 9.2 blocks. In the city of Flint, self-service
meat stores were, on the average, 11.7 blocks distant from consumers'
homes. In Grand Rapids, the average was less, as only eight blocks
separated self-service meat stores from the homes of consumers.

The tabulations of these figures was accomplished in the same
manner as the results in the previous section. The results are shown

in Table 290

Table 29. How Many Blocks Do You Live from.a Store Which Sells Pre-
packaged Meat?

 

 

Flint combined Grand Rapids combined Flint and Grand Rapids

 

 

Blocks Name and Percent Name and Percent 2 Names and Percent

 

Occupant Occupant 2 Occupants

0 - 9 527 59.56 887 57.80 12111 51.57
10 - 19 181 21.83 338 22.10 520 22.01
20 - 29 63 7.60 69 h~50 132 5.59
30 - 39 20 Zehl 11 .72 31 1031
no - fig 22 2065 3 020 25 . 1006
50 - 59 5 .60 l .07 6 .25
60 - 69 3 036 0 .00 3 013
70 - 79 0 .00 O .OO O .OO
80 - 89 O .OO 1 .07 1 .Oh
I ' 228 25.09 _22_3_ 111.514. £131 18.

Total 829 100.00 15511 100.00 2565 100.00

 

h5

As can be noted, the closest self-service meat store was, on the
average, twice as far from consumers' homes than was the closest meat

market.

Delivery in Prepackaged Heat Stores

Fourteen percent of the respondents indicated that they did know
of self-service stores that accepted phone orders and delivered meat.

(Table 50 illustrates this).

Table 30. Do You Know of Any Self-Service Meat Store'Which.Accepts
Phone Orders and Delivers meat to the Home?

 

 

 

 

 

 

Accepts Flint combined Grand Rapids combined Flint and Grand Rapids

Phone Name and Percent Name and Percent 2 Names and Percent

Orders Occupant Occupant 2 Occupants

Yes 112 13.51 215 1h.02 327 13.8h

X 6h 7.72 I128 8.3h 192 8.12
Total 829 100.00 153k. 100.00 2565 100.00

 

Miscellaneous Cuts

In Tables 31 and 32, the preference for miscellaneous cuts are
shown. These cuts are those that ordinarily are not asked for. It
was felt that some customers would want more of these cuts prepackaged.
Spareribs and liver were the cuts that respondents requested be pre-
packaged more often. They requested that kidneys and sweetbreads be

prepackaged less frequently. (These are shown in Table 31).

116

The consumers of Flint requested that more of all the miscellaneous
cuts be prepackaged than did the consumers of Grand Rapids. Exceptions
to this were brains, kidneys and sweetbreads. However, this is not
indicative that Grand Rapids wanted more of these cuts prepackaged.
Rather it implies that neither city wanted more of them prepackaged.

In Table 32, the cuts that consumers wanted less of prepackaged
are listed. The converse of Table 31 is almost shown. When asked what
cuts would they want less of prepackaged, the consumers checked brains,
sweetbreads and kidneys the most. Spareribs, liver and beef bones were
checked the least.

The percentages in the two tables, were arrived at by dividing the

number that checked them by the total number of respondents.

Table 31. ‘Would You Like More of These Prepackaged?

 

 

 

 

 

Flint Grand Rapids Flint and Grand Rapids
Cuts N Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent
Spareribs 1L7 17.73 198 12.91 3h5 1h.60
Liver 109 13.15 18h 11.99 293 12.h0
Beef Bones 76 9.17 10h. 6.78 180 7.62
Hearts 6O 7.2h. 82 5.35 1h2 6.01
Pork Liver 59 7.12 81 5.28 1hO 5.92
Pigs Feet 35 h.22 63 hall 98 h.l5
Pork Neck Bones h6 5.55 52 3.39 98 h.15
$116+; Of Fat ’42 5 007 51 3 032 93 5 09).].
Sweetbreads 23 2.77 h6 3.00 69 2.92
Kidneys 19 2.29 h8 3.13 67 2.8h
Brains 2h 2.90 25 1.63 h9 2.07

Based on 829 153h- 2363

 

h?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Table 32. 'Would You Like Less of These Prepackaged?
Flint Grand Rapids Flint and Grand Rapids
Cuts Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent
Brains 11h 13.75 189 12.32 303 12.82
Sweetbreads 105 12.67 172 11.21 277 11.72
Kidneys 1011 12.55 168 10 .95 272 11 .51
Pork Neck Bones 90 10.86 172 11.21 262 11.09
Oxtails 98 11.82 163 10.63 261 11.05
Suet of Fat 105 12.67 155 10.10 260 11.00
Pigs Feet 77 9.29 11.17 9.58 2211 9.118
Pork Liver 68 8.20 138 9.00 206 8.72
Hearts 68 8.20 137 8.93 205 8.68
Beef Bones 65 7.8h 132 8.60 197 8.3h
Liver h8 5.79 86 5.61 13h 5.67
Based on 829 153b. 2363
Education

The educational background of the respondents is shown in Table 33.

Thirty percent of the respondents had completed high school.

presented the largest category.

_ Thirteen percent, or one out of eight, had completed college.

This re-

The replies from Flint and Grand Rapids were not significantly

different.

Religion

The education levels of both cities were the same.

The major religious followings of the people in Flint and Grand

Rapids are similar.

Table 3h.illustrates that approximately three out

of four persons living in these cities were Protestant; one out of five

were Catholic; and one out of 100 was of the Jewish faith.

&8

Table 33:_ What Is the Last Grade or Year in School That You Completed?

 

 

Flint combined Grand Rapids combined Flint and Grand Rapids

 

 

 

Education Name and Percent Name and Percent 2 Names and Percent
Occupant Occupant 2 Occupants

Less Than

Grammar 27 3.26 &6 3.00 73 3.09
Completed

Grammar 90 10.86 197 12.8& 287 12.15
Some High

School 1&0 16.89 271 17.67 &11 17.39
Completed High

School 271 32.68 &&5 29.01 716 30.30
Some College 137 16.53 260 16.95 397 16.80
Completed

College 103 12.&2 203 13.23 306 12.95
X '_61 7.36 ‘112 7.30 113_ 7.32

Total 829 100.00 153h. 100.00 2565 100.00

 

Table 3&. Is Your Family Predominately:

 

 

Flint combined Grand Rapids combined Flint and Grand Rapids

 

 

 

 

Religion Name and Percent Name and Percent 2 Names and Percent
Occupant Occupant 2 Occupants
Catholic 155 18.70 313 20.&0 &68 19.81
Jewish 13 1.57 12 .78 25 1.06
X _&_9_ 5 .91 _'_7_l &.63 E 5 .08
Total 829 100.00 153k. 100.00 2565 100.00
Age

The ages of the respondents in this study are given in Table 35.
Nearly 50 percent of the questionnaires were answered by people whose

ages ranged from 30 to &9 years. Three out of ten respondents were over

h9

fifty'years of age and three out of twenty respondents were under

thirty years of age.

Table 35. In What Age Group Do You Fall?

 

 

Flint combined Grand Rapids combined Flint and Grand Rapids

 

 

 

 

Age Name and Percent Name and Percent 2 Names and Percent
Occupant Occupant 2 Occupants
Under 30 years 133 16.0& 236 15.38 369 15.62
50 - h9 years hoo &8.26 769 50.15 1169 h9.h7
50 years and
over 260 51.56 &68 50.51 728 50.81
x _553 11.51. _gg 3.98 _31 1.40
Total 829 100.00 153h 100.00 2565 100.00
Nationality

Two out of every three respondents were either of Northern'European
stock or were of British Isles ancestry. (Table 36 confirms this). The
Northern European group includes the countries of Germany, Netherlands,
Austria, and Switzerland. The British Isles group includes England,
Scotland and Ireland.

An accurate recording of a respondents nationality was not possible,
however, because of mixed marriages. A determination of the predominant
nationality was impossible. For example, a reply of Swedish-Italian-
Russian listed as the nationality of the family, could not be accurately
distinguished from any of the three. But for the purpose of the study,
the first nationality listed was used. In the example above, Swedish
would have been used. It further would have been classified under Scan-

dinavia.

50

The grouping of countries into the categories of British Isles,
Scandinavia, Northern Europe and the others found in Table 36, was done
on the basis of including those countries where eating habits are similar.
Fer many of the countries, physical boundaries narrowed the number that
were included within a group. For example, Finland, Sweden, Norway and
Denmark were included into Scandinavia.

Visiting foreign students also helped in classifying the European
countries. mr. Onno Van Teutem of Holland gave his personal observations

on comparative eating habits of European countries.

Table 36. Of What Nationality Origin Is Your Family Mostly Composed?

 

 

Flint combined Grand Rapids combined Flint and Grand Rapids
Nationality Name and Percent Name and Percent 2 Names and Percent

 

 

Occupant Occupant 2 Occupants

Scandinavian &0 &.83 55 3.59 95 &.02
North American 85 10 .25 116 7 056 201 8 051
British Isles 3&1 &1.1& &17 27.18 758 32.08
Northern

European 1&7 17.73 6&5 b2.06 792 33.51
'Western -

European 119 5.91 111 2.67 80 5.81
Balkan

Countries 21 2.53 &. .26 25 1.06
Northeastern

European 37 hmhé 105 6.8& 1&2 6.01
Negro 16 1.93 6 .39 22 .93
Mbditerranean 8 .97 2&. 1.56 32 1.35
Other 2 021.]. 11 072 13 055
x _83 10.01 11_O_ 7. 17 192 8 . 17

 

 

Total 829 100.00 153&. 100.00 2363 100.00

 

51

The countries, aside from those already distinguished, that are
listed under each of the groups in Table 36 are: (1) North American -
America and Canada; (2)'Western European - France, Belgium and Spain;

(3) Balkan Countries - Hungary, Rumania, Bulgaria, Albania and Yugoslavia;
(&) Nertheastern European - Czechoslovakia, Russia, Poland and Lithuania;
(5) Negro; (6) mediterranean - Italy, Syria and Greece; and (7) Others.

Some significant differences were shown between the replies from
Flint and Grand Rapids. Grand Rapids, which is heavily p0pulated with
Dutch, dominated the Northern Eurcpean group. Flint had a much greater
percentage of residents with British Isles ancestry than Grand Rapids.
Both differences were significant at the one percent level.

Because of these strong influences of one nationality group in
each city, Table 36 does not have as normal a distribution as would be
desirable to work with. However, the tabulations are used for some

cross analysis in the next chapter.

Occupation

The occupation returns of the respondents are shown in Table 37.
The highest response was from semi-skilled workers who were mostly
factory workers. One out of four respondents were classified as a
semi-skilled worker. Unskilled workers, most of whom were factory
laborers too, were second as a group in responding. Together these
two groups made up &0 percent of the occupations.

The main significant difference between the two cities was there

were more semi-skilled and unskilled workers in Flint than in Grand

52

Rapids. This difference was significant at the one percent level.
The difference was probably accountable by the presence of the automobile

industry in Flint.

Table 37. Fromehat Occupation Does Your Family Derive Its main Source
of Income?

 

 

Flint combined Grand Rapids combined Flint and Grand Rapids

 

 

 

 

Occupation Name and Percent Name and Percent 2 Names and Percent
Occupant Occupant 2 Occupants
Professional 95 11.86 . 150 9.78, 2&5 10.57
managerial 39 &.70 116 7.56 155 6.56
Clerical 35 &.22 115 7.50 150 6.35
Sales 62 7.&8 159 10.37 221 9.35
Service 37 &.&6 77 5.02 11&. &.82
Skilled 66 7.96 111 7.2&. 177 7.&9
Semi-Skilled 232 27.99 352 22.93 58h. 2&.72
Unskilled 152 18.3&. 199 12.97 351 1&.85
Unemployed 0 .00 7 .h6 7 .50
Retired 19 2.29 58 5.78 77 5.26
Unclassified 2O 2.&1 27 1.76 &7 1.99
X |_Zg 8.69 '16: 10.63 225 9.9&
Total 829 100.00 153k. 100.00 2565 100.00

 

The occupation analysis, however, is subject to this severe crit-
icism. Almost all of the occupations listed in the questionnaires were
put into groups principally on a judgment basis. If a returned question-
naire cantained an occupant as factory worker, there was no way of knOWb
ing whether that worker was skilled, semi-skilled or unskilled by trade
terminology. Consequently, the final result was then based on the

weekly income of the worker. If he had a $30-$59 weekly income, he was

"r’b‘ B.

u.vv-

I ' A

In...

1.3.1.... ‘-

zr‘ :5
.-.."
-.

53

listed as an unskilled laborer; if his income was $60-$89, he then was
classified as semi-skilled; any wage above $90 became synonomous with
skilled'worker.

The same hold true for other groupings. Many replies were so
vague, that only a judgment placement was possible.

Regardless of this criticism, some cross analysis is presented in

the next chapter from the results that were obtained.

5h

CHAPTER V

CROSS ANALYSIS OF FACTORS AFFECTING CONSUMER PREFERENCE

This chapter deals with some of the economic and sociological
factors that affect consumer preference for foods. Their relation-
ship here is with an emphasis on consumer reaction to prepackaged
meat. Some of the factors analyzed are not generally included within
such categories as economic and sociological, but for the purpose of
this analysis, such a distinction is made.

Composing the factors that are economic in character are: (1)
the amount of money spent for food per week; (2) the amount of money
spent for meat per week; (3) the weekly income; (h) the mode of
transportation; (5) the distance from.a meat market; and (6) the
distance from a self-service store.

The factors comprising the sociological group are: (1) the per-
son who does the buying in the family; (2) the size of the family;
(3) the age of the respondent; (h) the level of education attained;
(5) nationality; (6) religion; (7) occupation; and (8) preference.

In the analysis of these groups, each factor was held constant
while the question being analyzed was subdivided into it. Each
table, therefore, contains the constant factor across the top of the
page and the question under analysis at the left margin of the page.

.All the tables, from which the statements in the following
sections are based, are found in Appendix.A in the same order as

referred to in the discussion.

55

A. ECONOMIC FACTORS
Amount of Money Spent for Food Per'Week

The following observations were noted in the analysis of the
amount of money spent for food per week: (1) The consumers that had
spent more money for food per week had tried prepackaged meat more
frequently than those spending lesser amounts per week; (2) The con-
sumers spending different amounts of money for food per week did not
differ in their beliefs that prepackaged meat cost more than other
meat; (3) Butcher service was preferred more by those respondents
who spent more for food per week than by those who spent smaller sums
for food per week; (h).As the amount of money spent for food increased,
the percentage of meat bought prepackaged decreased.

At the $15 and under food expenditure level, 67.16 percent of
the respondents had bought prepackaged meat at least once. Of those
families that spent $25 and over a week for food, 75.73 percent had
bought prepackaged meat at least once. This difference was signifi-
cant at the one percent level. 1, {$1

No significant difference was noted between the people 05 varying
food expenditure levels who believed that higher prices were being
charged for prepackaged meat. For both Flint and Grand Rapids, however,
there was a slight trend for those who spent more for food per week
to believe that higher prices were charged. The difference was not
enough, though, to be more than an observation.

.A significant trend was found in the increased number of people

who preferred butcher service as the method for buying their meat

56

when the food expenditures increased. However, this statement was
true only if the preference of both cities was combined. The number
of people that preferred butcher service in Flint was about the same
at all food expenditure levels. In Grand Rapids, butcher service

was more p0pular with those people that spent more money for food per
‘week.

There were 63.5h percent of those respondents who spent $15 or
under a week that bought less than 25 percent of their meat prepack-
aged. Of the consumers who spent over $25 a week for food, 73.59
percent purchased less than 25 percent of their meat prepackaged.
This difference was significant at the one percent level.

A significantly larger number of people at the lower food ex-
penditure levels bought from 50 to 75 percent of their meat prepack-

aged. The trend decreased as more money was spent on food.
Amount of Money Spent for meat Per Week

The analysis of the people who spent different amounts of money
per week for meat showed the following conditions: (1) Families who
spent five dollars or less per week for meat had tried prepackaged
meat as often as those spending more for meat per week; (2) A belief
was held by those consumers who spent more for meat each week that
prepackaged meats cost more than other meats; (3) The popularity of
butcher service increased with higher meat expenditures per week;

(h) Less meat was bought entirely prepackaged by those who spent more

for meat per week than by those spending less for meat per week.

57

At all levels of consumer meat expenditures, approximately
seven out of ten persons had tried prepackaged meat.

‘A slightly significant difference was noted in the belief that
higher prices were charged for prepackaged meat. At the zero to five
dollars level, h0.lh.percent of the consumers felt that prepackaged
meat cost more than comparable meat that was not packaged. An increase
in this belief continued to, and included, the final meat expenditure
bracket. Here at the $12.50 and over category, h9.56 percent of the
respondents believed that higher prices were charged for prepackaged
meat. For both cities of Flint and Grand Rapids, this same trend was
observed.

The trend for preference of butcher service over self-service
meats increased from 58.50 percent at the lowest meat expenditure
level to 73.h6 percent at the highest level. This difference in
preference was significant at the one percent level. Flint and Grand
Rapids both responded in the same manner.

Sixty-five percent of those consumers who spent five dollars
or less for meat per week, bought under 25 percent of their meat
prepackaged. .At the $12.50 and over level, 7h percent of the con-
sumers purchased less than 25 percent of their meat prepackaged.

Another method of illustrating the percentage of meat bought
prepackaged by different consumers, was to observe the consumers who
bought all, or nearly all, of their meat prepackaged. Those who spent
zero to five dollars for meat each week bought more of their meat
entirely prepackaged than did those who spent $12.50 and over a week.

This includes those consumers that bought between 75-100 percent of

58

their meat prepackaged. In the former group, 7.03 percent of the
respondents bought 75-100 percent of their meat prepackaged. The
latter group contained 1.77 percent that bought all, or nearly all, of

their meat prepackaged.
'Weekly Income

The study of‘weekly income illustrated these points: (1) The
consumers with higher weekly incomes had tried prepackaged meat more
than those with lower weekly incomes; (2) The people with higher weekly
incomes also preferred butcher service over self-service. At the
lower weekly incomes, butcher service preference still was dominant,
but to a lesser degree; (3) When the income of consumers was larger,
a greater amount of their meat purchases was divided between pre-
packaged meat and other methods of meat buying; (A) No significant
difference was found in consumers increasing or decreasing meat con-
sumption after starting to buy prepackaged meat.

For both the cities of Flint and Grand Rapids, there was an
increase in the number of peOple who had tried prepackaged meat at
least once, as the weekly income rose. This rising was rapid from
the under $30 income group to the $60-90 income group. After that,
for both cities, the amounts tapered off. Overall, at the lowest
income level, 56 percent of the respondents stated that they had
bought prepackaged meat at least once. At the highest level, the
percentage figure was 75.22 percent. This difference was significant

at the one percent level.

59

At the lowest weekly income level, 5h.28 percent of the people
preferred butcher service over self-service. This percentage increased
to 70 percent at the highest weekly income grouping. This trend was
significant at the one percent level.

The rise of Flint was more certain and covered a greater percentage
range than did the rise of Grand Rapids. For both cities, however,
butcher service was still preferred.

Sixty percent of those consumers who made less than 30 dollars
a week bought under 25 percent of their meat prepackaged. In contrast,
72.35 percent of the respondents who made over $120 a week purchased
less than 25 percent of their meat prepackaged. This difference was
significant at the ten percent level. The trend was the same for
both cities.

Regardless of what weekly income consumers had, there appeared
to be no pattern of more or less meat being consumed because the

family was eating prepackaged meat.
Mode of Transportation

The investigation of the effect that transportation had had on
prepackaged meat showed these facts: (1) Those consumers who shopped
for meat by automobile did so on a weekly basis more than did those
who shopped on foot; (2) Those people who shopped for meat by automobile
had tried prepackaged meat more than had those who shopped on foot; (3)
The shoppers who traveled by automobile had a higher overall preference

for prepackaged meat than had the on-foot shoppers; (h) The automobile

60

shoppers bought a higher percentage of their total meat purchases
prepackaged than did the on-foot shoppers; and (5) More of the con-
sumers that shopped by automobile, compared to on-foot shoppers, had
bought prepackaged meat for over three months.

When shopping by automobile, h6.79 percent of the consumers
bought their meat weekly. In contrast, 2h.h2 percent of those shoppers
who traveled on foot bought their meat on a weekly basis. This com-
parison was true for both cities.

Fifty-eight percent of the consumers bought meat two or three
times a week if they shopped on foot. In comparison, when they traveled
by automobile, h3.h5 percent of the people bought meat more than once
a week.

Of the consumers who shOpped by car, 78.61 percent had tried
prepackaged meat. Sixty-one percent of the on foot shoppers had
tried prepackaged meat. For both cities this difference, which was
significant at the one percent level, hold true.

Although not significantly different at a high level, the trend
sppeared to be that consumers who shopped by means of an automobile
preferred prepackaged meat more than did those shoppers who walked
to the stores. The preference for butcher service over self-service
was more dominant by the on-foot shoppers.

A. greater percentage of meat was bought prepackaged by those
who used the automobile as a means of transportation. Of these shoppers,
2h.81 percent bought over 25 percent of their total meat supple pre-
packaged. In contrast, 15.78 percent of the shOppers on foot bought

over 25 percent of their total meat supply prepackaged. This same

61

observation was made in both cities.

Sixty percent of the consumers who shopped by automobile had
bought meat from.a self-service store for more than three months. The
respondents who walked to the stores had not bought meat from this
type of store for‘as long a period of time. In the latter instance,
only h9.2l percent of the consumers had bought prepackaged meat for

more than three months.
Distance from the Nearest Meat Market

The analysis of distance from.a meat market and the relation-
ship of it to prepackaged meat gave these results: (1) Those consumers
that lived farther away from a butcher meat market had tried prepack-
aged meat more than had those who lived closer to a butcher meat
market; (2) The consumers living a longer distance from a butcher meat
market also felt that prepackaged meats cost more than did comparable
meats; (3) No difference was noted in the overall preference for
either butcher service or self-service.

For both cities, there was a slight trend shown in the relation-
ship between distance from.a meat market and the number of people
that had tried prepackaged meat. Of those consumers that lived from
zero to four blocks away from.the nearest meat market, 71.62 percent
had tried prepackaged meats. Of those who lived from five to nine
blocks away, 76.39 percent had tried prepackaged meat. The same
relationship hold true in both cities.

The farther away consumers were from a meat market, the more

they believed that prepackaged meats cost more than did other com-

62

parable meats. Of those that lived from zero to four blocks away,
h2.09 percent believed higher prices were charged. Of those that
lived farther away, the percentage was still higher. In the five to
nine blocks category, h5.l3 percent of the people agreed that prepack-
aged meats meant higher prices. For those who lived over ten blocks
away, the percentage was nearly 50 percent.

No apparent relationship existed between the distance from a meat

market and the preference for meat service.
Distance from the Nearest Self-Service Store

The study of distance from a self-service store as a factor
affecting prepackaged meat buying resulted in these facts: (1)

Those consumers that lived the closest to self-service stores had
tried prepackaged meat more often than had those buyers who lived
further away; (2) The consumers living the nearest to prepackaged
meat stores also felt that higher prices were synonomous with pre-
packaged meats; (3) Those consumers that lived closest to a self-
service store preferred butcher service to prepackaging of meats at
a higher ration than did those that lived further away.

Eighty-one percent of the consumers who lived from zero to four
blocks from a self-service store had bought prepackaged meat at least
once. Only 76.91 percent of the consumers who lived from five to nine
blocks away had ever bought prepackaged meat. This difference was
significant at the ten percent level.

The people living nearest to stores selling prepackaged meat

believed that prepackaged meats cost more than did other meats when

63

compared to people living further away. Of those living from zero

to four blocks from.a self-service store, h6.25 percent believed that
prepackaged meats were more expensive. Of those living ten blocks
away or further, only 39.35 percent thought that prepackaged meats
were higher in price.

For both cities this trend was apparent. However, in Grand Rapids,
at all distances, the belief was stronger than it was in Flint.

In parallel to the trend of prices paid, butcher service was pre-
ferred more by those consumers residing closest to self-service stores.
Seventy-one percent of the people living from.zero to four blocks
from stores selling prepackaged meat preferred butcher service as the
method of purchasing their meat. Only 56.1h.percent of the people
who lived ten blocks or over from this type of store listed butcher
service as their preference. This difference was significant at the

one percent level.
B. SOCIOLOGICAL FACTORS
Person Who Buys

The study concerning the person who buys illustrated the follow-
ing: (1) The various family members who did the buying for their
families, had tried prepackaged meat as often as had the other members
in the families; (2) The husbands in the families were the strongest
in support of the belief that prepackaged meats cost more than did
other meats; (3) The sons and daughters of the families had a greater

preference for prepackaged meat over butcher service when compared to

6h

the wives' husbands' preferences; (h) The sons and daughters of

the families bought more of their total meat purchases prepackaged
than did the wives or husbands; and (5) The husbands felt they were
eating less meat after they started to buy prepackaged meat.

‘Approximately the same number of persons had tried prepackaged
meat in each of the categories used in this analysis. Overall, seven
out of ten persons in each group had bought prepackaged meat. In Flint,
however, a significant difference was found to occur between the wives
and husbands. Seventy-four percent of the wives had bought prepack-
aged meat, whereas only sixty-three percent of the husbands had bought it.

In both cities, the husbands believed that higher prices were charged
for prepackaged meat. Of the husbands, 51.9h percent believed higher
prices were charged. This figure can be compared to the h2.20 percent
of the wives, the 38.89 percent of the single adults, and the 2h.32
percent of the sons and daughters, all of whom believed that prepack-
aged meat cost more. The difference between the husbands' reaction to
prices and any of the other reactions was significant at the one per-
cent level.

The younger members of families preferred prepackaged meat more
than did any other person of those families. Nearly 22 percent of the
sons and daughters replied that they preferred prepackaged meat. There
was a downward trend for the wives and husbands. Fifteen percent of
the wives and lh.percent of the husbands preferred prepackaged meat.

The preference for butcher service over self-service and pre-
packaged meat was in the converse order. Husbands preferred it the

most and the younger members of the family preferred it the least.

65

However, over 50 percent of the sons and daughters still favored
butcher service to any other method of buying fresh meat.

The percentage of meat bought prepackaged was approximately the
same for the wives, husbands and single adults. However, the sons and
daughters appeared to buy a greater share of their meat prepackaged.
In the older group, about 70 percent of the respondents felt that they
bought less than 25 percent of their meat prepackaged. The younger
group contained 5L.percent that correspondingly felt that they bought
less than 25 percent

.All groups felt that they were eating about the same amount of
meat after starting to buy meat prepackaged. Six out of ten persons
answered in this way. .A significant difference, however, occurred
between the views held by husbands and wives. More of the husbands
felt that they were eating less meat after buying meat prepackaged
than did other wives. or the husbands, 7.16 percent replied in this
manner. The wives percentage was 3.0h percent. This difference was

significant at the one percent level.
Size of Family

The analysis of the size of the family gave these results:
(1) Daily meat purchases were the most common with larger families;
(2) The larger families had tried prepackaged meat more often than
had smaller families; (3) The larger families were more in agreement
that prepackaged meats cost more than did other meats; (h) At all the
family size levels, the preference for prepackaged meats and butcher

service was the same; (5) The smaller sized families bought a greater

66

percentage of their total meat purchases prepackaged; (6) The length

of time that meat had been bought from a self-service store was the

same for all family sizes; and (7) All family sizes had the same results

as to the amount of meat that they were eating after buying meat prepackaged.

Of those peeple that had two people and under in their family, only
6.hl percent bought their meat daily. 'With larger families, the percent-
age increased. The families that had five persons and over, included
lh.92 percent buying meat daily. This difference was significant at
the one percent level.

The ratio was relatively even between the family sizes when com-
parison was made on meat purchases made two to three times a week.
However, a significant difference occurred again, when a comparison was
made on meat purchases made weekly. Here, as it lOgically'would appear
from the previous statements, the families that had two persons and
under bought meat more on the weekly basis than did the larger families.
In the former instance, h2.59 percent bought meat weekly. In the latter
case, only 36.90 percent purchased meat once a week.

In larger families, prepackaged meat had been tried more often.
0f the families having two persons and under, 67.55 percent had bought
prepackaged meat. For the families having five persons and over, the
corresponding percentage was 76.61 percent. This upward trend was
significant at the one percent level.

.In comparing prices of prepackaged meats and other meats, the
response from larger families was that they believed prepackaged meats
cost more. Forty-one percent of the smallest family size had the

same belief.

67

0f the larger families, h9 percent believed higher prices were a
corollary with self-service meats. The trend is more apparent in Flint
than in Grand Rapids, but overall, the difference noted was significan
at the one percent level.

At all the various family sized levels used, approximately 65 per-
cent of the consumers preferred butcher service to self-service and
prepackaging of meat.

The smaller families bought a greater percentage of their meat
prepackaged. 0f the families of two persons and under, 6h.83 percent
bought less than 25 percent of their total meat supply prepackaged.

The larger families had a corresponding percentage of 72.37 percent
which was a difference significant at the one percent level.

In all the family sized group used in the analysis, between L2
percent and h6 percent had bought prepackaged meat for six months or
more. No significant trend was shown.

Regardless of the size of the family, all had similar replies as
to the amount of meat they were eating after purchasing meat pre-
packaged. Approximately six out of ten thought they were eating the
same amount of meat as before; one out of 25 believed thewaere eating
less meat than before; and only one out of 50 felt they were eating

more meat.
Age

The analysis that centered on the age of the respondents showed
the following: (1) The younger consumers had tried prepackaged meat

more than had the older buyers; (2) The younger persons also believed

68

that prepackaged meat was no more expensive than other meat; (3) There

was a slight trend for prepackaged meat to decrease in popularity as

the age of the consumer increased; (h) All age groups bought approximately
the same percentage of their meat prepackaged; and (5) All age groups

had bought prepackaged meat for about the same length of time.

Of those consumers under 30 years of age, 8h.56 percent replied
that they had bought prepackaged meat at least once. In comparison,
of those consumers over 50 years of ago only 60.85 percent had ever
bought prepackaged meat. This trend which applied to both cities,
was significant at the one percent level.

Fiftybfour percent of the consumers under 30 years of age be-
lieved that prepackaged meat was not more expensive than comparable
meat. This percentage decreased to nearly h8 percent when applied to
those persons over 50 years of age. The trend, however, was slight.
Fot the city of Grand Rapids, the trend was more pronounced than in
Flint. Nevertheless, the difference between ages was significant at
the one percent level.

.A trend which was not significant, but which did appear in both
cities, was that, as age increased, prepackaged meat popularity de-
creased and butcher service preference increased. Of the consumers
under 30 years of age, 16.67 percent preferred prepackaged meats to
butcher service. Only 12.19 percent of those over 50 years of age
preferred prepackaged meat. Butcher service preference increased from
63.78 percent of the under 30 years group that favored it to 65.91

percent of the 50 years and over category that preferred it.

69

All age groups bought approximately the same proportion of their
meat prepackaged. Approximately seven out of ten persons bought less
than 25 percent of their total meat purchases prepackaged.

All age groups had bought prepackaged meat for about the same
length of time. Although the difference was not significant, it
appeared that those under 30 years of age had bought prepackaged meat
for a shorter length of time than had the persons from 30-h9 years

of age.
Education

The study of education as a factor affecting prepackaged meat
showed these relationships: (1) As the educational level of the res-
pondents increased, a higher percentage of them.had bought prepackaged
meat at least once; (2) As the educational status of the consumers

\
increased, less of them believed that prepackaged meat was more ex-
pensive; (3) Butcher service was preferred in about the same proportion
to prepackaged meat at all the educational levels; (h) The same per-
centage of meat was bought prepackaged at all the educational groupings;
and (5) All persons, regardless of the amount of their education, had
bought prepackaged meat for the same length of time.

Only 50.68 percent of the group having a grammar school education
had ever bought prepackaged meat. The persons who had some college
education had tried prepackaged meat the most. Here, 81.11 percent
had bought prepackaged meat.

The belief of prepackaged meat being more expensive than other

meat decreased in the replies received from consumers with more educa-

70

tion. Of those having less than a grammar school education, 5h.06
percent believed that prepackaged meat cost more than other meat. In
response to the same question only h0.85 percent of the college grad-
uates felt that prepackaged meat was higher in price.

At all educational levels, the ration between prepackaged meat
preference and butcher service preference was the same. No significant
trends were observed in either city of from.the combined results.

Regardless of the level of education, the percentage of meat
purchased prepackaged was similar. It appeared, however, that the consum-
ers who completed grammar school, bought a higher percentage of their
meat prepackaged than did those who were college alumni. The difference
between these categories was significant at the five percent level. In
the former group, 61.23 percent bought under 25 percent of their meat

prepackaged. In the latter group the corresponding percentage was
71.91 percent.
The length of time people had bought prepackaged meat was approx-

imately the same for each group's reply. No apparent trend was observed.
Nationality

The investigation of nationality and its effect on prepackaged
meat gave these results: (1) Descendants from countries composing the
Wkstern European countries had tried prepackaged meat more than had
any of the other regions that were represented; (2).A wide variation
of pricing beliefs existed between the different nationality groups;
(3) The people included in the classifications of Scandinavia, British

Isles and Nerthern Europe preferred self-service and prepackaged meats

71

more than did the people included within the other classifications;
and (h) The percentage of meat bought prepackaged was quite similar
for all regions.

There was no great difference noted between regions as to com-
parative number of times each region had bought prepackaged meat.
However, between the descendants of countries comprising the North
American groups and those making up the Western European group, there
was a significant difference found. .All the other groups fell between
these two groups. Within the North American group, 71.15 percent had
at one time bought prepackaged meat. For the nationality group of
Western European countries, 82.22 percent had correspondingly tried
it. This difference was significant at the five percent level.

The descendants of countries within the classifications of
Scandinavia, western Europe, Northeastern Europe and mediterranean
all had more persons responding who believed prepackaged meat was more
expensive. In the other regional groups, more people felt self-
service meats did not cost more.

The people comprising the British Isles group were the strongest
in the support of prepackaged meat prices not differing from other meat
prices. Comparing the opinion of this group to the group comprising
countries of Scandinavia, only h1.10 percent felt that higher prices
were not charged for prepackaged meat. The difference was significant
at the two percent level. Over 55 percent of the British Isles group
felt that prepackaged meat did not cost more than other meats.

Prepackaged meat was favored more by the descendants of the

British Isles and Scandinavian countries than it was by those of other

72

countries. However, the differences between these groups were not
significant.
No differences were found in one nationality group purchasing

more of its meat prepackaged than other nationality groups.

Religion

The analysis of religion showed the follwoing: (1) No difference
was found between the number of times Protestants and Catholics had
bought prepackaged meat; (2) Catholics, in comparison to Protestants,
believed that prepackaged meat was more expensive; (3) Catholics
showed a greater preference for butcher service; and (h) Protestants
bought a greater percentage of their meat prepackaged than did the
Catholics. .

There was no difference in the number of times prepackaged meat
had been tried by Protestants and by Catholics. In the former category,
73.53 percent had bought prepackaged meat. In the latter group, 72.92
percent had purchased it. The Jewish people appeared to have not tried
prepackaged meat as often. However, the Jewish sample was small and
consequently could not be tested accurately.

Catholics were more in agreement that higher prices were charged
for prepackaged meat. Over h8 percent believed that this was the
situation. Only L2 percent of the Protestants had this belief. This
difference was significant at the five percent level.

It appeared as if the Jewish people felt that prepackaged meat

was not more expensive when comparing their beliefs to those of other

75

religious groups. Again the number of Jewish people in the sanple
was small, making a comparison difficult to test.

Seventy percent of the Catholics favored butcher service. In
comparison, 6h.percent of the Protestants preferred butcher service.

This difference was significant at the ten percent level. Conversely,
Protestants preferred prepackaged meat slightly more than Catholics.

For both cities, the percentage of meat that was bought pre-
packaged by Catholics was less than that bought by Protestants. Seventy-
five percent of the Catholics bought less than 25 percent of their
meat prepackaged. Sixty-eight percent of the Protestants were in this

same category.
Occupation

The analysis of occupation and its relationship to prepackaged
meat showed the following: (1) Different occupational groups had
bought prepackaged meat more than other occupational groups; (2) The
various occupational groups held both beliefs of differing prices
charged for prepackaged meat; (3) All the occupational groups preferred
butcher service at the same proportionate level; and (h) Skilled workers
and professional employees bought the lowest proportion of their meat
purchases prepackaged.

Skilled workers had bought prepackaged meat more than any other
group. People employed in sales, professional and semi-skilled jobs
followed in that order. Retired persons had tried prepackaged meat
the least. The difference between the t0p group and the bottom group

was significant at the one percent level.

7h

A.majority of the workers included in the groupings of sales,
service, managerial, professional and retired felt that prepackaged
meats did not cost more than comparable meats. On the other hand, more
‘workers in the clerical and skilled classes felt that prepackaged meat
was more expensive. The difference in the views held was significant.

For all the different occupations the relative amounts of people
who preferred butcher service to prepackaged meat was the same. The
skilled workers, containing an 18.31 percent preference for prepackaged
meat, was the highest group in this category.

Skilled and professional workers bought the lowest proportion of
their meat prepackaged. In these two groups, 76.06 percent and 7h.h8
percent, respectively, bought less than 25 percent of their meat pre-
‘ packaged. However, no trend was apparent except that possibly the
higher income occupational group bought less of its total meat pur-
chases prepackaged. For both cities, the trend for skilled, semi-
skilled and unskilled workers followed this reasoning. As these
groups were selected partially on an income basis, the conclusion
seems valid.

For the most part, no large differences were noted in the percent-

age of meat bought prepackaged.
Preference

Separating butcher service preference from prepackaged meat pre-
ference, and analyzing questions that may have affected consumer re-

action toward prepackaged meat, the following results were found: (1)

75

Buying meat once a week was practiced more by those persons who pre-
ferred prepackaged meat than those preferring butcher service; (2) The
per capita food and meat bill per week was higher for those persons
preferring butcher service; (3) The weekly income for those who pre-
ferred butcher service was higher than it was for those who favored
self-service buying; (h) A large majority of self-service shoppers
believed that prepackaged meat did not cost more than other meats, while
butcher service buyers held the opposite viewpoint; (5) A variation was
shown in the types of meat to be prepackaged favored by each group;

(6) Those people that preferred prepackaged meat had bought a greater
percentage of their meat parchases prepackaged; (7) Those persons
preferring prepackaged meat had bought meat from a self-service store
for a longer period of time than had those preferring butcher service;
(8) Prepackaged meat buyers felt that they were eating more meat than
previously; and (9) Regardless of the preference for the method of
buying meat, the relative amounts of the miscellaneous cuts they
wished to have prepackaged were the same.

The people who preferred to buy meat prepackaged, also preferred
to buy it once a week. Fifty-four percent of the consumers in this
category answered in that manner. In contrast, only hl percent of the
persons who preferred butcher service bought once a week.

'When consumers bought meat directly from a butcher, they also
bought more frequently during the week. Comparing the two groups,
9.16 percent of the people that preferred butcher service bought daily,
whereas only 5.08 percent of consumers that preferred meat prepackaged

meat bought it so frequently. This same type of difference was also

76

shown in the comparative percentages that bought from two to three
times a week.

The daily purchasing difference was significant at the two
percent level. The difference of two to three times a week purchasing
was also significant at the two percent level. The weekly buying
difference was significant at the one percent level.

The average per capita food and meat expenditures were higher for
the consumers who preferred butcher service. The averages for food and
meat were $6.26 and $2.12 respectively. For those consumers preferring
prepackaged meat, the averages were $6.12 and $1.91.

The weekly income was slightly higher for those that preferred
butcher service. The per capita average was $22.26. For the peOple
preferring prepackaged meat, the average per capita weekly income was
$21.89.

A very striking difference of view was shown in the beliefs of
prices paid for prepackaged meat. Eighty-six percent preferring pre-
packaged meat did not believe that prepackaged meats were more ex-
pensive. In contrast, of those consumers who favored butcher service,
only 37.97 percent thought that prepackaged meats were no higher in
price than other meats. The opposite picture was illustrated by those
who believed prepackaged meats were higher in price than comparable
meats. The percentages here were 11.33 percent and 56.91 percent.
Both sets of differences were significant at the one percent level.

The order of preference for packaging the various types of meat

was different for the two classifications being compared. Those

77

that preferred prepackaged meat listed roasts, steak, and lunch meats
in that order as their favorite types of prepackaged meat. Those who
preferred butcher service listed lunch meats, sausage and roasts as

the favorite types of prepackaged meats they desired. The differences
here were significant.

Logically, the percentage of meat bought prepackaged by the con-
sumers having preference for butcher service would be smaller than by
those preferring meat prepackaged. This proved to be true. Over 82
percent of those that preferred butcher service bought less than 25 per-

cent of their meat prepackaged. Of those consumers preferring prepack-
aged meat, approximately one-fourth purchased meat in each of the four
25 percent levels. These were under 25 percent, 25—h9 percent, 50-7h
percent and 75-100 percent.

Consumers who preferred prepackaged meat had bought it over a longer
period of time than had those who preferred butcher service.

Over ten percent of those persons preferring prepackaged meat felt
they were eating more meat after starting to buy their meat prepackaged.
In contrast, only 3.13 percent thought they were eating less meat. Of
those who preferred butcher service, only one percent thought they were
eating more meat after buying it prepackaged. However, L.98 percent
replied that they were eating less meat.

The consumers who preferred butcher service and self-service both
agreed that of the miscellaneous cuts, they wanted more spareribs,
liver, and beef bones packaged. They were also in rather close agree-
ment that they wanted less brains, kidneys, sweetbreads, oxtails and

suet or fat packaged.

78

CHAPTER VI
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

Summary

This study of constmer reactions to prepackaged meat was con-
ducted with the aid of a mail survey in the cities of Flint and Grand
Rapids. The sample for both cities contained 7,192 families. This
nunber included 1;,th families in Grani Rapids and 2, 782 families in
Flint.

Although the response was higher, only 2,363 questionnaires were
used in analysis. This amount constituted a 31.97 percent return
from the total mmber of questionnaires mailed.

The questionnaires were addressed to both "names” and "occupants".
The response from "name“ was higher. Approximately 56 percent of
each city's return was from those who had received questionnaires ad-
dressed to them by name rather than occupant. Only hh percent of each
city's total was from ”occupants".

Over three percent of the original sample was returned by postal
authorities as unclaimed mail. The reason "Not Found at This Address"
was listed the most frequently. This is one of the inadequacies of us-
ing a city directory. However, the city directory is the best source of
news and addresses, and generally speaking, pmvides an accurate list-
ing of than.

The percentage of families who had bought prepackaged neat was 72
percent. Grmd Rapids families had tried it more than Flint families.

A majority of the people of Flint did not believe that prepackaged

meat cost more than other meats. But the residents of Grand Rapids

79
were evenly divided in their views.

Overall, 65 percent of the respondents preferred butcher service
as the method of blaring their meat. Only 15 percent preferred to buy
meat prepackaged. The remainder didn't know or amwer. Flint fam-
ilies were more in favor of prepackaged meat than Grand Rapids families.

Sixty-nine percent of the families said they bought under 25 per-
cent of their meat prepackaged. Only six percent bought between 75
and 100 percent of their meat prepackaged.

Two out of five families btving prepackaged meat had done so for
six months or longer. The people of Grand Rapids had bought self-
serviced meats for a longer period of time than Flint customers.

Most families felt they were eating the same amount of neat after
buying it prepackaged. Six out of ten replies were answered in this
W.

The four outstanding reasons why customers Jihad to buy prepack-
aged meats were: (1) Could shop more quickly. (2) Weight and total
price were given. (3) Convenient selection of sizes, and (1;) Could ex-
amine the meat.

The four most comon reasons wiv families did not buy prepackaged
meat were: (1) Didn't know how long it had been packaged; (2) Liked
to bee both sides of the meat: (3) Liked advice of the butcher; and
(1;) Excess bone and fat were often hidden in the package. 1

The percentage of fruits, vegetables and other groceries bought
entirely from a self-service store was much higher than the percentage

of mat.

80

The preferred thickness of beefround steak was (me-half inch.

Buying four or six pork chops in a package was the most common
practice. The preferred weight of a beef chuck roast was three pounds.

In both ‘cities only seven percent of the meat shopping was done
entirely at a prepackaged meat store alone. Over 50 percent was car-
ried on in a meat market and 3h percent was done in both types of
stores. Sore did not answer this question. _

Of the miscellaneous neat cuts, spareribs, liver, beef bones and
hearts were most requested to be prepackaged more often. Brains, sweet-
breads and kidneys were the cuts which were requested the least.

mly nine percent of the families bought all of their meat from

a self-service store.

Conclusion

The first general conclusion that was, formed after andyning the
data in the study was that the mcre money consumers spend for food or
meet each week, the more they prefer butcher service to self-service.
Furthermore, they bW less of their total meat purchases prepackaged.

As the amount of money spent for food increased: (1) More con-
sumers had tried prepackaged meat; (2) Only a slight difference, however,
(not significmt) was noted in the belief that prepackaged nests were
more expensive; (3) Butcher service preference increased; and (h) The
percentage of meat bought prepackaged decreased.

is the meat expenditures per week increased; (1) No difference

was found in the nunber of families that had tried prepackaged meat;

'81
(2) Butcher service was preferred more; (3) Loss of the meat purchases
were divided between prepackaged meat and butcher service; and (it) No
significant increase or decrease in meat consmnption was fomd after the
family meat was bought prepackaged.

A second conclusim was that the automobile had performed and will
continue to perform an important role in the amount of prepackaged meat
bought by comurers.

When fandlies shopped for meat by automobile; (1) More purchases
were made on a weekly basis; (2) More of them had tried prepackaged
neat; (3) There was a greater preference for prepackaged meat; ()4) A
higher percentage of meat was bought prepackaged.

A third conclusion was that the distance from self-service stores
or service meat markets and consumer's homes was a significant factor
in determining the number of people who had tried prepackaged meat, and
the views held by those people. relative to meat prices. Furthermore, it
indicated the effect on meat bwing preference.

As the distance from the nearest service meat market increased: (1)
lore persons had bought prepackaged meat; (2) A. greater number of people
thought prepackaged meats were more eaqiensive; and (3) No significant
trend, however, was found in the preference for prepackaged meat or
service meats. .

As the distance from the nearest self-service store decreased; (1)
More persons had tried prepackaged meat; (2) More consuners felt tint
prepackaged meats were costlier; and (3) The preference for butcher ser-

vice became more pronounced.

82

A fourth conclusion was that much of the difference in the views
held against prepackaged meat were correlated to the person who did the ‘
bwing and also to the age of that person.

Although all the different members of a family, such as husband,
wife, son or daughter, had tried prepackaged meat abort the same number
of times, husbands were the strongest in belief that prepackaged meats
cost more. The sons and daughters, in comparison with other members in
the family: (1) Preferred prepackaged meat; and (2) Bought more of their
total meat supply prepackaged. Husbands felt they were eating less meat
after starting to bw meat prepackaged.

As age increased: (1) Less families had tried prepackaged seat
(2) More families believed prepackaged meats were more expensive; (3)
The popularity of prepackaged meat decreased; (h) The same percentage
of total meat purchases was made; and (5) No difference was found in the
length of time prepackaged meats had been bought.

A fifthconclusion was that larger families had not greatly influ-
enced prepackaged meat consumption. Although larger families bought neat.
more on a daily basis and had tried prepackaged neat mare often, they
felt that prepackaged meats were more expensive. Furthermore, as the
size ”of families increased: (1) No difference was noticed in the pre-
ference for meat buying; (2) A small percentage of their total neat pur-
chases were prepackaged; (3) It was found that prepackaged seats had
been bought the same length of time; and (h) The same amount of neat was
being eaten after purchasing neat prepackaged.

Another conclusion illustrated that people with higher educational
backgrounds had tried prepackaged neat more than those with less years

83
of schooling and also, that the more educated consuners did not be-
lieve prepackaged meats were higher in price. However, the relative
preference of butcher service over prepackaged meat was the sane, the
same percentage of meat was bought prepackaged, and prepackaged meat
had been bought the same length of tine for both those people with high-
er educations and those with less education.

A further conclusion was that Protestants favored prepackaged
meats more than Catholics. The analysis of religion showed the follow-
ing: (1) Both Protestants and Catholics had tried prepackaged meat the
same number of times; (2) Catholics, in comparison to Protestants, be-
lieved that prepackaged neat was more expensive; (3) Catholics {referred
butcher service more than Protestants; ard (h) Protestants bought a
greater percentage of their meat prepackaged than Catholics.

An additional conclusion was related to the nationality of the re-
spondents. It was concluded that there were variations between nation-
alities in the beliefs of prices, the preference of neat buying, and
the number of tines people had bought repackaged neat. However, the
percentage of neat bougrt prepackaged by all groups was the sane.

As nationality was analyzed: (1) A variation in the number of
peoplewro had bought prepackaged neat occurred between the descendants
from different countries. People of the Western European countries had
tried it the most; (2) A variation in pricing beliefs was present among
the different nationalities. The people of Scandinavian and Western
European countries believed prepackaged neats were more expensive; and
(3) The overall preference for neat buying varied greatly. The people

814
of British Isles and Scandinavian ancestry preferred prepackaged meat
the most.

Skilled workers had bought prepackaged neat me than other grarps.
It can be said, however, that no occupational groups preferred self-
service more than any are other group. Skilled workers, along with cleri-
cal workers, felt prepackaged meats were more eacpensive. The proportion
of meat bought prepackaged by skilled and profess ional workers was the
lowest.

Another conclusion was that many of the reactions consumers had
toward p-epackaged meat were related to the length of time they had
bought prepackaged meat. Those people that preferred prepackaged neat
had bought neat from a self-service stcre fcr a longer period of time.
More of them also bought meat once a week.

As this study is visualized in retrospect, it must be stated that
the general population preferred the older nethod of buying meat, that
is, selecting a particular cut of neat and watching a butcher weight,
price and wrap it. However, many of the sociological and economic factors
that were analyzed, indicated that segments of that general population
favored buying self-serviced neat.

Emphasis, in the writer's belief, should be placed on tie reactions
given by the younger people. If more meat is to be marketed prepackaged
then it would appear logical and beneficial to use the younger consuners
as a nucleus from which to work. The sane pattern resulted throughout
the study in new ways. Consumers who were younger had tried prepackaged
neat more often, believed the cost of it was not greater, and preferred

it more than older consumers.

85
It is also the writer's belief, that more thought should be
given to eliminating the reasons why families did not purchase pre-
packaged neat. The study pointed art several reasons which certain-
ly could be improved with better marketing practices. Any improve-
ment would help consuners to have a more favorable feeling toward pre-

packaged meat.

AE‘PEICD IX A

SUH’LSQJQE‘I‘ILY TAELFB :r‘EFEHR‘rSD R) IN CFAPTER V

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

E 9%.”;qu E DEA ND DHCQH ”PM Amid.
4 mm. m am. 2 ac.m HH a
mad H~.4N oma H£.mm mma Om.om 00H on
mam. :3: mm: me .Q. mom Bab mom - so»
modem cameo
one unflam
2.3 we FL .I at H. Ea
mm. m mu. m mm; o x
om.Hm mm om.mw NW mo.mm mm oz
mm.mm 4mm mfi.o~ oew wa.mo hum . mow
woeomm datum
mmhmbH mwm. DDHDDH New. 00.oua NAN Hmwoe
mm.H m on. fl em.m m x
mm.mm so 4m.mm mm m4.mm a z
mm.mo nma mm.mo mma mfi.qo wma mom
psflam
u assume emnfiez u pcoocmm heeerz ” pomoami emnfioz pawn
ecmuromnmpm
mmw I ohm 0mm I maw homes new .maw _ new:
«I; «use: anmxommmai pmmrom poem so» m>mm .«A wanes

ea; mes sage e2 Emma 9233

l.‘.'¢. .«d o .37.. ull’

L}.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

snhmrw mwm ms...a was om.nme om as.ooe mom Hence
u... a u“. 5. mm and mm 9;... cm a
W. .. saw Nm.ma ace mm.me awe ea.ae see see
me a. mum um.eu new em.em ems Hm.mm a; oz
med... .. E USES
Banana
.mwwwre mew nw.sqe muw Pa.:.a new oo.ooa ohm Hesse
as r em ma.m we .m.: 0H ma.o se a
a...; was mo.ms mas -e.se «as as.es Hos mm»
m_. : woe sa.me nee 0H.me was ma.me HHH oz
noaimx fiasco
nu. .H and o .saa mas so.s H mNH co.ooa OmH Hesse
m..~ e mm.o OH ma.w as mm.» OH x
..,_...__. 3 as a. .R am a .3 ms mama 3 as
r. H. om mmom mm mm.mm we omém E. oz
peaae
verancrrmll rimmfignz u I vcmoemm Buchaz « primohmm .Hoflmdz » eureka.“ umneMBz
e.so,erm mew mms u on 0m“ n mew seems as. .maw Manama
a.rma u:m .04 + - .:sec;meoo nmwiqsse a...u .masa sew: mmceaa acne mam sow wsseems now on .am ammww

mqua.mdg Donn xom HZAmm Babies

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

_...,.)e)..b.H E .3.7..)H WNW. 5.203.)...“ .J\ Home... 09
oo.e a nm.m m ec.m as a
mm.a em He.oa am ar.ae Na semesters; oz
mm.mo new os.oo enm ms.mo mmm mossesn assuage
ma.ee ma efi.ea om mm.ee em emm.eoosmca
mefissm eases
ens passe
as.>oe .mmm no.9qa mum 09.30H .mwm Hmpoe
o~.a m mo.m m me.m e a
mo.ea me mm.ms Hm ow.om we southwest; oz
oe.os New me.H~ use mm.mo one sunsets creases
sm.ma an mm.ma mm Ne.oe em assessments
moaumm cameo
mhmhmw .ma os.osa mmw eo.sea mmw fleece
m -m.m a me.m m mo.m m x
mm ma.mm He ma.e~ mm mm.sa mm accentuate oz
mm oo.om mp no.0m :0 mm.mm o» moH>aom hedoedm
ms m.em em ma.ma we so.mm om emmsaosamta
passe
a pcwopwm hmnidz « pzmoawm panama « aceoemm hmpsdz
.II mocmaowmpm
mm. u can owe n ma» amend use .mee
“perm nmmnm know New op amusem sow om aamnm>o .«m mHAmH

xwma mam Q03; woe HZMAm BEDDEd

 

 

’\
l

.4
._‘\.

 

J ‘
r
I

. [\-.0:T [‘- (‘7
-3 (‘J N ~

 

 

 

ma
OHH

s7.a.4
c~.a
00.0
no.0
mn.aa
w>.~0

f

 

mnwan
mm.>
ae.m
om.e
o~.oe
me.~o

new

new
Hm
me
:4

— 0'

mm
moH

o
m
m

0N
mm

3.3. o _. ,4.

. .wl

mm.¢a
m0.o
mm.:a
em.m
em.mo

 

ea.ooa
mm.aa
wo.>.
om.~
mo.oa
mm.mo

 

03.09H
m2
H4.m
em.na
No.3
as...

 

OH

ma
NH
mm

woos u ema
new u mam
Ram I.wmm
mm N .HMdUC:
moaesm ocsao
one ecaae

Hesse

meofi I amN
we... r .05
was: t emm
«mm have:
meadmm oqsao

Hesse
un
moss I .
mew u. a
was n.0mm

emm sees:
ssfle

m

R ‘Q' .Q
U\D~

 

 

 

hearse

pumoemm

 

CAL I ma;

.H a nu ... .. H...

scooped

 

press ore

vamoumm

 

 

 

 

«numexosmmnd hem sow om pawn ezow Mo

T mam anm mom B

researched was;

822324

 

 

 

)p.:am MMM. en.moa
”w.m m re.
mm.uu ma om.mm
n-.aw mma 0m.mm
-...,M use se.oea
uNhMI. ms: .

 

us.” a on no..qa
”5.; N em.H
r~.nm NH Ho.>m
ca.ma om mm.os

'0
‘0
O
O

O
O
0
I‘d

 

r4
f».
H
In r4 .5:
IR 0 3')
e
-3 0:3
[\- N

433 3303?...
r _ F.‘ I I 'l

H em.
AHA um.nm
mam mo.m~

m4. \J. _\J
"N bk n<H

a so.
as ma.mm
Hma nm.ms

 

[3
v\
0

O
“f?
l...
H
(\J
b

—+
.-._.

rdU\F--
C. .
‘Ocv
r‘°*
0
Eu
raoxm>
N .
-ara

mmm os.osa mam
mm.e m
ems so.mm mm
Hoe Ho.m~ mew

\

 

E 00. Goa 4......
m mm.a m
as oa.mm ms
omm No.00 med

 

House
x
oz
mm»
nsdned vanes
Use usaam
Adena
N
02
no»
meflmmm eases

Hesse

 

 

 

 

heeesz earners

 

1’1..." .‘ib..“l'll." ll {I’l‘

 

mvmrm nmmwxuuMWAL pxmsom germ new msmr

 

parched emfifidz

 

nan; :QL Buflfl xvh Human Bx:3%¢

pmmm
oswmxomamam
now:

.am seems

 

”N

r

O \Q [5-
U'\ 1.4".

 

 

 

 

92.00H 03m as.s>a ems so.oea as Hesse
om.e em mm.e Hm Ne.m mm a

om.ma cum mm.m: OWN na.nq NNH mm»
00.0m 0mm mm.flm ow 0H.:m mmm oz

('3
re
0
r‘»
C)
H
m
N

Hopes
me x
. mow
NJH oz
moammm ecmao

Oé.eed mam “£4.00H an:
quwr mns. germ; a.
ma.ss see mo.ss Has
mm.ss Nos ma.se mas

 

 

OKMCO
COD-m
Q
(j mlfx
In:
N
(\l
H

 

 

 

 

 

 

no.see Hm“. .:.ooa mwm os.ooe mmw Hesse
sm.m o em.e as Ne.o ea x
oo.ee No as.mm ms mm.mm mm as»
sm.em me me.» ems mm.mm am oz
usage
somehow arezau pcmoemm pretax acronmm Lepudz

 

 

 

 

 

 

. . assess
swims» - Qw.e. om.ss . me me - as
mean.ucmm pom pram mflnrnsmmou new gene pee; emoem newsxowcmcm hem same and new e>mHHmm new om .mw randy

gas: was seq: sue again 92.02:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

P6P E P BBB P MB d3 09
ss.e m we ms.H a me x
hm.ma mH me NO.NH OCH om.ON mm mocmhmmth on
os.ms me ohm ao.eo mam om.©m new suescmm steeper
om.HH ms mm mm.sa woe ac.ae we emmseosamnm
meager scene
was passe
myhmmw we: mo.oaa mmm mpumha do oo.oaa mew assay
.m.e H ss.m NH mm.a m am.m a a
sm.oa m mm.ma we Hm.ea am as.ma mm mouthwash. oz
mm.am mo om.es cow mm.a~ mam mm.eo owe moa>cam ceases.
ma.s o mo.oH mm N~.NH Hm om.mH am nmmssosmocm
weeds: 93.5
no.2ua mm: we.aoe HMH no.33H ohm oo.eoa mww fleece
mw.m H mo.m a mm.H a o~.m o x
a... a are R 5.3 .3 6.3 R southwest oz
.m.sm Hm oo.mm om oo.om oae ma.ae ms sunsets smasher
en.se a m~.me om aa.mm am Hm.mN as newssosesna
cease
{twmflwuthwflit prefixes pmwmmfl. amnesia prance $59.52 patched aenEé
ill»; - .3 monogamous“
nape es. nu.mau 0m.mhw : om.se 0m.~h n mm mm or
.1?! 2. 1.34 .2 emeam adore. bowls. creme.“ new on .4?ng u auras canoe

v3.93, man 945...... :31. Banner. biopsied

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

mww mHHmDH mmm. ao.oeH Hmw oo.mCH Hum Hseoe
cH om.. He on.o Ha mm.m am a
N an.s gm no.0 He mo.s Hm eOOH n {ma
m ow.o Hm oa.m om sa.a mm see u mom
m. and. m 332 He. 8.3 mm. was I 4mm
ea Om.ma Hem sm.me mm; Ne.se mam smm have:
mengm usage
Easeflm
.wru 03.33H .sn ow.oo Hmu mew Hence
a mo.n mm mm.s mm so.CH em a
H as.m mH ma.s Hm ae.s NN u ems
a om.o mm as.m mm ao.o NH u mom
m sw.w Hm m~.m am oa.NH em 1 emu
a. om.Hs mew so.me New mo.mo esH noes:
meHemm ecweo
mm: os.ooH Hmw 09.13H mm: om.ooH wmw Hspoe
H Hove .mH moi m om.m m x
H Hm. m mm.e 0H om.m a mooH n.mm~
e om.m a om.o 4H HH.HH mH new u.aom
s ma.s NH mm.sH mm as.OH sH as: u mmm
om NH.es NHH me.oa mmH mm.so moH mmm asses
ecHHa
Masai; u pfiwohmm LmQHiBZ u pcwohmm hmficrdz. u pcwokm . .HmnFBZ
. . pcmohmm
Ju.mHa om.mHa u om.sm ow.sm a me ms t or
meommxommoai hmm 50% on some asow mo )mwpcooamm pose .am oHnwe

and; rum aaflfi tom azMLn HEDOfld

.
B11. 4. .1. (a!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Mwmwhw mwm ba.asH Nsm mm.ooH Nam co.ooH osm on.omH mww Hesse
00.. a Hm. H mm. m Na. m co.m s x
mw.;m em om.NN we mm.HN mmH on.om 00H 33.nm r: o?
mm.ms CNH mn.- mam N®.N~ NON 90.no men no.0m aw mom
newmmm emmer one chHm
a..rrH amH mb.nrH mmH oo.osH cum m..o¢H a ow.QOH mm Hesse
0..a o ca.o o as. 3 mm. N He.: J a
as.eN am N0.MN as nm.HN MNH ms.mN as aN.mm on 02
es.os sHH em.os NmH N~.ss meg ss.ms OmN oe.oo Hm . as»
mUHcsm verso
.r.aeH as s...qH NH os.osH Nq no.30H mmH 05.9HH an Hesse
_r.c a Hm. H 9N.H e Hm.H m om.~ m x
Nm.oN mm mm.oN mN n~.oN so so.mm as oo.rs m on
mm.mN on 0m.r~ am «0.35 .mm ow.mm mHH 0m.~a mH mew
chHa

Nfirrti hairiz QC®0hml thFSZ Pcmokmm Hmfiffih PemOAmL hmpfidz WWWWLGW hwfifififi an E
5|} nommxomqmem

n;sc em. mm a mHHm u see are u cow mme u ems one have: new:

 

hub...“ mm W. mmxxumghm n...

I}
Q
ru
Lu
(1)

flHDOzH HAxAMZ

>m now spam

1 "

.rm wacme

Ell-I aflit ...fl.,\hlr .v.

 

 

 

 

 

 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

thhh. new ao.aoH mwm oo.ooH New mom no.acH .mwl Hosea
mu.m o Ho.H e mN.N oH m eH.s m a
Hs.:H mN oo.eH mm oo.oH emH 9N.mH Na oN.eN NH ooeocoeocm oz
oo.oa onH No.oo NNH oo.Ho mms as.mo mmN nN.sm mm ooH>som nocossm
or.HH 0N mN.mH mm so.oH NHH mm.oH No mN.sH 0H oowonooeonm
meHmoz scram
one pcaHa
mHMWMH mww oo.ccH mmw .. mmw oo.ooH mmm oo.o0H umm. Hoooe
.m.e m ao.H m mo.N m on. H nm.m m x
:m.s. aN eN.s HH os.oH es No.oH He sm.HN HH monosoeotm oz
Ns.a. he oN.m~ mHH o~.oo mom Hm.os omH ow.om mN oosscom cocooom
mo.o HH om.NH oH Hm.HH Hm QN.MH em oe.mH m oomoeooooni
monmm porno
mMUJaH mm1_ nhhbe son. o..osH omw nHH mo.omH owl. Hopos
os.H H mo.H H ON.N a N mm.oH N x
mo.x m ea.sN sN NH.MN on Hm mm.Hm o ooooooeonm oz
HN.ms He ao.em mm mo.ee oNH mm om.se o ooe>com eonopom
so.oH o om.mH oH me.mN so mN mm.OH N osmosooooea
poHHe
mwon-i L L952 pcmoaqi Ampere ucmoamm hmnfisz pamoami pmprrz perched honeez
III. . . oomoammoam
roso new omen oHHm n cos mew u cos om. u 0mm 0mm coon:

 

”pom: adOMIMdm op pummel 50% on «HHmem>o

.dnH masmh

 

 

 

Ert“: Satin)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

arm on.o H hum mmwme mmw No.an mew oo.ooH me: Hope?
HH Ho.m m NN.m Nm NN.m m HN.mH HH x
HH No.o 4H is.o me No.m NH HN.n e wooH a ma
HH No.m 3H Hs.N Nm Nw.m NN oo.oH N was u om
3H 3N.N NN No.oH NN oo.NH mo Nm.o o so: u mN
mNH Hm.oN ooH ao.oo Ho: NH.No NmN Ho.oo Ne NmN coon:
oonom ocsno
ego oeHHa
www wwwme .mH oo.ooH mum. oz.ooH mmm o:.ooH HMI. Hoooa
a Hora N Ntm 4N no.3 wN mod: N x
m Nm.o 0H ms.N mm oN.m mH 4N.N e mooH u ms
o Na.m o Nm.. NN om.s HH om.o m NeN u om
o eN.N HH HN.o m: om.NH Nm 3N.N 4 nae : mN
N. mo.mN mHH OH.HN mHm oh.oo oNH NN.om oN smN coon:
mpHcmm .ofioao
rmume we: mmwwnH mmm. o .qu mHH oo.ouH mm: Hosoa
oo.N N No.m HH om.N m mm. H N x
NH.e 4 No.4 NH oa.m 4 00.0 o «OOH u mN
NH.m m NN.o sN 4N.o HH m.oH N NQN u om
em.HH HH HH.mH em No.0H mH mm.OH N so: u mN
mm.NN mN mm.No oNH N .no Nm He.mo MH mmN coon:
ocHHa
.«ceoflflmm nemesiz acmoeom .Hmenaz pcmeawi. .Hmleledz pcwcemm “35:2
aria: Na - 0...... a... - a... a... t... 2......
III NemMoxoWuwwam. 1.9m new on use...Hs.H..:.oM «Ho owepcgami page... 23H 3nt

H.430 a H Haxmmz

 

 

 

 

 

I‘lll‘lu‘lfll .

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

mmner mww mmwhmH m.u mmnmmH mph. oo.an mnm mmwooH Imp Hdpoe
NH.:H 3N wo.NH a; om.mH mo oa.eH oo 4H.NN NH x
«m.mc mm 00.0H OJ om.:H moa m.oH mo oc.o~ :H roux p.com
mN.Nm mm o.H NmH No.go am: ,N.mm :NN 0N.:4 Hm pcsoaH mama
no.N m HN.N N mm.N HN mm.H m 0N.N N whom
fl .N m No.4 0H NH: 4N 3.0 N cum 4 - $3
mvwnmm undue
new chHm
a .miH mww mwnme NMH oo.ooH man oo.omH omN an.ooH HM: Hmuoe
NL.JH NH N4.NH NN NN.4H mo NH.NH a: mq.NN :H x
om.HN mN NN.mH 3N No.3H mo Nm.NH on mo.NH a hoax p.:oa
mm.am No mm.n mm NH.40 :NN mo.Nm 04H 0H.ma mN pcdoad mamm
mod m mo.m : 370. HH :4 m 34 H 8%
mN.H N Ho.4 N Hm.g oN 45.0 NH am.N : mmmH
833 23.6
nunhww mMI. ao.qu man. no.9mH mmw 00.:QH mww mnnmmH _mw HmHoe
Hn.q m Nm.NH NH Hm.mH mm m;.mH 0H Nm.sN m H
nr.NH 0H NH.0H 0H :N.mH on mN.qH NH Nm.oN m goax p.coa
mm.mg om om.go mo mo.mo ONH q..mo mN 0H.mq w undead mamm
Rum N 2% m DNA NH 8.H N oNfi H 89.,“
oa.m m No.m m Hm.H : go.m o 00.0 o mme
HCHHN
Luau u meFsz gcmppma pwwfisz pcmopmm pmpndz pcwohox prEfiz pcmohmm Mcpfidz
.i. n. I. NpHpqmsy
Napc aNHN NHHN u can aw n cg” mmu u 0mg amp “was:
chHumm cmmm hHwamm Adow mm: «awe: vwmmxowmmmmjwmwmdm sown mpwm sow mocwm .«NH magma

mgOOZH NAxmma

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

mmnme mo 0N.00H 0Hm 00.00H quH Hmpoe
gm.H H mm. 0 m:. N x
00.0 0 00.H 0 00.N 00 mxmmq 03H NNN>N
Hm.hm 0m 00.0w Nom mg.mg NHN Nam: m mmeHa
mmpna go 039
Nh.0m 0m mq.nm . NNH mN.nq mo haxmm:
00.mH 0H mm.mH 0: 00.0 MHH >HHm0
monmm uqmpc
00m chHm
mmummH mm: .mb.00H mum 00.00H HNHON
u.m H Wm. m 0m. %
30.0 o mN.H N mm.m mm mxmma 03H hhm>m
Nm.mm mH :0.Nm dNN mm.N0 N00 xwwa.m mmeHa
mmhne No 029
00.0N N N0.NN 00 om.Nq m00 hmxmm;
00.NH m 0H.NH N0 m0.N 0N >HHN0
m0H0mm 00NN0
-wll. 00H m. m 00 . 00H 00: H 0,). 00H H10 H3 0”,...
9A.. 0 Pd 0 64AM o 0 m3 0 m x
00.0 0 NN. H 0N.N NH mxmma 0:9 Npm>u
mm.Hm NH 00.00 0N mN.m0 HON 300: m NNEHN
mmpna no 039
0H.mm mH mN.NN 0m Nm.m0 mmN NHNmmm
Hm.mH m 00.0H 0H 00.m Nm NHHN:
psHHm
caonmu Mchdfi pcmoumm pmywsz pumohmm illlmmncsz
fir ..

 

 

 

o.
.p
(U
(D
h«
‘4 4

 

ZDHQEBfiDLOZdH%

0-mwm 50» 0Q ampuo xom

qme.mH0NH

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

mml mww 00.0QH HumH H0009
00.0 0 m 0N. mH x
No.00 mN 00.0H NNH 00.0N 0mm oz
mm.mm om om.00 NHm H0.NN omNH mmH
mqumm ncNuo
00m chHN
mmumbH mm: mmnbmH mmm 00.00H 0NOH Hmpoe
00.0 0 Hm. N 00. N x
HN.0H m mm.Nm 00H Nm.mH NmH 0;
0N.N0 mN 0m.H0 00N 00.00 HNN mm»
mngmm uszo
mhnmmw hm: 00.00H mmw 00.00H Hmm_ HNHON
00.0 0 Hm.N 0 N0. 0 x
NN.0N 0N 00.00 0m Hm.mN 00H oz
mN.N,N HH 8.3 NN Nm.mN 03 3N
pqnm
vcmpflfl.m .HQQLHHZ uroohmm LOLFH..Z vcmohwm hmDHfiSN/H pmmfl
vmmdxommwpm
mpmnp0 HHH pooh 00 0H 0mm:

 

 

 

Hd 3

Npmm> mewxcmumpm prr:om pm>m no» m>mm

23H849m3mn2dme

 

. «42” 2“ £0. a

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

00.00H mm: 00.00H NHM. 00.00H bmmH HNNoN
om.m N HN.N N N0.N 0N x
00.0 m 0N.NH Nm No.NH NNN oocozozozm oz
00.mN NN 00.0N NNN mm.mo mN0 ooH>oo0 aozopsm
HH.HH z mN.N Hm 00.0H HHN oomozommooz
mfiflomm Ugho
09... quHz
H0.00H mm: 00.00H mum mmHMHH Hmm Hmooe
00.0 H 0m.N o mm.H mH x
00.0 N 00.mH om 00.0H MNH oooooozoum oz
00.0N 0H NN.NN mNH mm.0N Nmm ooH>zon Nocopsz
00.NH m 0m.m 0N om.NH H0H nomozomoooz
ooHomz 00oz0
00.0 H HHI 00.00H Nb: awn Hmooz
00.0 H 0m.H H HH x
No.0 H NN. N HN m0H oozooozozm oz
mN.NN 0 00.Ho N4 NNN ooH>pom uozoooz
mo.m H mm.0H 0 0HH oowwzomoozz
0.st
unmopmm mefisz unwopmm hmnfisz pccopmm hmpfidz
mocmpmwmpm
moozz0 HHH zoom :0 oooz

 

 

 

"pwmu 2mmzm know ham on pmmmpm so» on «HHmzm>o .4ma mapme

onedemOmmzdxe

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.,...I0...H HI FISH Fm RhH H38.
£4.0H N om.HH @m cm x
mN.N H 4w.m m No.0 om Nona I mN
0N.N H 2.0 NH NNN .3 EN .. 0m
HH.HH a mH.m mm mm.oa 04H was I mm
mL.mo mm om.mN Hmm mm.mo 0mm &mm hows:
mvflomm vqmzo
Eapfiflm
00.03H MMI 00.3QH mmm Hmw Hmpoe
00.0H z mN.NH mm mm x
00.0 H mm.m w No.N mo wooa I mN
00.: H mN.m m 00.0 mm WEN I 0m
00...: m NHN NN 00.0H 00 0:3 .. N
00.00 0H 00.0N 00H 00.00 How mmN $000
mvawm qunw
00.20H HHI 00.03 .NINI 00. 00H E H38.
NN.NN m 00;. m 00.0 NN x
00.0 0 RH H 00.: MN ”N03 I mN
00.0 0 004 m 2N5 .3 EN I 0m
SN H 00.0 N Hm.HH 0m mg I mN
so.mo N Hm.am mo 0H.0N amm mmm Nova:
unflam
pcmozvm zmmfisz pcmozmm umnfizz pcmozmm ngfigz pcmozmm
mpmzpo HH¢ uoom so ovum
Nvmmmxommmzm him 50% on pawn know mo mumpCmozwm pmxfl .zoa anme

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

20Hhxezoamz¢me

 

no.0mH mmx. 00.00H hwm mnnmmH mmmH Hopoa
0 .NH N mm.N mm om.0H 0m x
HH.om mH am.Nm mHH 0H.mz 00m mzpcoz ozoz po HHm
mm.0 m No.HH Nm 0m.zH NzH oopcoz me op oozes
om.mH m 00.0H 00 0o.NH moH ozpcoz oozzN op oco
HH.HH z 0m.mH m: NH.NH NmH zpcoz oco ooze mooH
HH.HH a mo.m 0H NH.m 00 popoz
msfimmm 98.5 05.. 0.93m
mm.00H mm; Dawan .nmm ImnmmH wa Hopoa
0c.NN o mN.zH m: 00.0H om x
00.00 0H 00.Nm o0 HN.N; 004 ozpcoz ozoz no xHo
00.NH m 00.0H 0N 0N.mH 00H ozpcoz Hm op oopzz
00.NH m mm.zH mm mN.0H 00 ozpaoz moose op moo
00.0 N mm.mH Nm Nm.HH mm spooz ooo cone mooH
00.: H Nz.m mH Nm.z oz - poooz
moHooz ocozc
00.00H HHI 00.00H mp: nwummH zomw Hmpoe
00.0 H 00.3 0H T0 .3 x
NN.NN m om.0m 0m NH.nm oNH mzpcoz ozoz No me
00.0 0 0N.oH HH m0.oH 0N ocpcoz sz op oopzN
0H.NH N mo.HH m 00.0H 0N ozpaoz mouse op moo
03H N oN.zH HH NN.mH No opooz 20 52:. $3
NN.NN m 0N.N o am.m oN No>oz
chHz
unguzmm .. ,N_w._.)..§..z ppmozmm .Hm._§_z puwofiwm uwnfisz mag. mo
ozap+0 HHH pooz a0 cpo< upmaop
II Nwzouw Hommoxomowmhm m Eon.“ umwu. pflmnom so» 98:. used 30.: QNHIIMHMMH

"V .- 'Mr' V "7 H‘ ' ' I . . - , ~ . ' c. O. a" .
DJ. Dido‘L'L f fink/.41 C‘o—J‘M .LJUi L-Jan l‘ p-.}'.x:;'s-AT

Have qu_Ever Bouwht Pregeckgged Heat?

 

 

 

 

 

 

Used 0 _ h Blocks §_§lgcks - 9 B1°EE§ 10 Blocks and ngg
Prepackaged '

Hggt *__ Number Percent Number Percag§_ Number Percent
Flint

Yes 356 69.12 119 7h.8h 63 69.23

No 153 29.71 39 21.53 27 29.b7

x 6 1.17 l .63 1 1.13

Total 3:? 133235 “E? 150153 ‘§T 133:33

Grand Rapids
Yes 7hh
No 271

x 0
Total 1521

Flint and

Grand Rapids
Yes 1100
No LZL
x 12
Total 1336

72087
29.5b
.59

*firfif
lJU . ‘4‘0

71.02
27.60
.78
130.00

7r{01.7
21.5h
1.29
165:35

76.39
22.55
1.06
lOJ.OU

79.65
0.35
0.30

”

l\)U.OKJ

'7'" fl.
('2 ovk)

2Q.§1
.MQ

103.90

 

m "‘7_"—7—7”7fim$

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

L): 3T:‘.;‘:C."4‘ 51‘“; _.;.T 1 141‘
Table 191. Do You Believe You Pay _ore for Prepackaged meat Tnon for
Co:parable Heat No Pagk9goc?
. U - 1 Ch“ C blo¢<~ - ll“ 18 1“ blocks and Sver
Eellef h B o no / :0 9 LCN J . I
Number Percent Nnmtr kerhpnt Number kernent
Flint
No 202. 57.30 73 55.32 33 52.39
Yes 129 30.21. m. 3.5. 97 28 1.1.11.
x 23 b.bo S h.20 2 3.17
r ?.-:-_I- --—‘-_- 6*", , .— ~ , 7—
Total 30 100.JU 119 100.00 03 luu.dd
Grand Rapids
No 3:1. to . 93 110 2; 5 .83 110 1.1.1.1.
Total 743 160.00 2n? lflJ.JU 90 lo .0)
Flint and
Grand Rapids
No soa 51.oi. 160 50.13 73 14?. 71
Yes L13 L2 .09 1&2 1.5.13 75 2.19.1").
x 69 6.31 17 b.7b 5 .2127
Tctal 11" To 1.1.1....) 1175, 1"“oo'. To‘ 1'53 13.3.53

 

“-p ‘v‘ ‘ .. .—. 7 . .--.
j. '\ . F‘h‘ . J -' -..h‘!‘ h‘. g. . 'r‘
é—A‘Jklla‘ -’A.J . -bva th.sa~ 4H;-‘...4.~

‘I .

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Table 20A. Over5111_Do You Prefer to qu Your Freed poet:
0 - b Blocks 5 Elocks - 9 Blacks _9 blocks and thz
Preference
Number Percent Fumber Percent Number Percent
Fiint
Prepackaged 76 21.91 25 21.01 13 23.03
Butcher Service 195 55.77 52 3.70 3’ 53.32

No Preference 75 21.07 b0 33.61 10 15.3]
x 8 2.25 __g 1.§§ 2 3.1?

w- Its»... g, - _
I P, ’

Total 3.0 155753 13.9 103.5.) a 15.1.55

Grand Rapids
Prepackaged 81 13.39 23 11.67 13 15 L
Butcher Service 533 71.0h 17h 72.50 63 70.31
No Preference 113 15.19 35 1h.58 10 11 1
x 17 2.23 3 1.25 h L..h
To ta]. uh 1015.05 233 15.3 .L'i :15 "273 15.3

thtmm
Grand Rapids
Prepackaged 159 1b.h§ S3 lb.7b 26 15.99
Butcner Service 728 66.19 226 62.96 01 00.02
No Preference 188 17.09 75 20.89 20 11.07
x 25 2.2 S 1.39 2
Total 1I3'5 100.150 ”559' 155565 IE.-

.‘, T':' ,1 . 4“ :-Jr.-U‘:'lr‘:" 'N...'I'- L_'—1.‘~-.~‘
L1.-.) Llhkbfl 115.1%. 1. lLLJ A‘Lv.‘1x1‘YuI} s) -.L.'c'.'.o

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Table 21A. Have You Ever Egurht Prepackaged rest?
Used 0 - h Blocks 5 filccks - 9 Flasks 13 Flocks and Gver
Prepacxaged
Meat Humber Percent Number Percent Runner Percent
Flint
No 29 1?.20 36 22.78 65 22.11
X 1 ob‘») 1. 053 h 1.9,?(3

Total

Grand Rapids
Yes
No
x
Total

Flint and
Grand Rapids
Yes
No
x
Total

158

506
115

62h

 

h“
c)
L)
O

k)
L,

80.70
13.8b
.ub
100.50

332
97
11:71

hSB
133

,4 r
59

155.65

77.03
22.51
.hb
100.30

 

75.91
22.58
.121
166.05

.3—1" '37-.
154's} 0 ‘J 3

77.50
21.h5
-fl

arr—f:- .
1L1») . \J‘k)

i?ol'b
21.73
1.1.}-

 

“an-Km

\
'm ,_.n..‘.‘_ " 3"" ‘.—?‘.-__:

 

 

Table 221.

D1 STAN CE

; I . ‘3‘- ' V n"'hw" “”0, ‘ 3.‘
”u... 1 fi.Lf;;pI‘.h‘_71..lJ died 1;.

Do You Believe You Pay Kore for Prepackaged Fresh neat

Than For Congarable Heat No. rackgsag?

 

 

Relief

0 - h Blocks

 

Namber Percent

5 Elocks - 9 Blocks

10 Blocks 6.

 

 

3!"; mt er

Percent

 

7... I- -.
1...? ’LL

 

Flint
No
Yes
x
Total

Grand Rapids
No
Yes
x
Total

Flint and
Grand Rapids
No
Yes
x
Total

70
00
8
I373

173
17h
21

J... .‘
JV'J

22.3
23b
29

./

50.72
L518
5.5.)

34.1%.) . )5

h7.01
5.71
103.55

227
198

Sh.SS
35.8u
b.o1
155755

13.50
15.13
6.32
150.50

50.11
b3.71
_6 o 13
100.00

 

 

— ‘- "I I .“ r1 '1‘: ‘ >1“ ) ‘ ‘
ULDLILC‘bJLJ f.L\~.1 1114111‘. 1114.17.11) DibuL

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Table 23A. Overall. 00 You Prefer to Ruz Your Fresh "Pet:
0 -_h filocks S Hicchs — 9 blocks 13 :-10<:ks 3::d L :ezr
firei‘er ence
Number fiercent Ngmber Percent Number rorcelt

 

Flint

firepackaged 23 10.67 16 13.22 ,5 ;;.,3
Bitcner Service 85 61.59 71 58.03 9h b1.28
Ko rreference 28 20. 29 30 2&.79 53 23.;0
x 2 1. LE __3 3.31 “2 1 3‘

,2 ~

[\3
II

Total 3; lSUOLU 121 le.JJ

Grand Rapids .
Prepackaged h2 ll.b1 30 9.0h b9
Butcher service 275 7b.?h 230 71.05 217
No Preference h} 11.68 60 15. 07 5h 1%.
9

(j.
\j“
0

’ 1“ O \0

.-Q I.“ \{l

 

x 8 2.17 b 1.812. b
Total ”EC-8 12" moo 3'3}? 10.1.30 ”5"? 1o - .17
Flint and

rand Rapids

CPrepackaged 65 12.85 be 10.15 12h 2.3:

Butcher Service Boo 71.1b 307 67.7? 311 5o.11

No Preference 71 1L.03 9D 19.87 107 19.31

x 10 1.95 10 2.9“ 12 2.17

Total 00 1’? .00 '23? 55:55 F33. 133:3)

 

 

 

”Egg 3"»: -..-A -

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Elisha; _fripltgr

9.. .93. m m 9L...99H men 99.9% Mama 93.93 mm .9309

90.0 o 40. m ow. ma 09.0 o M

am.qm mm mm.hw oma H~.4N no: ma.0m GM 02

99.mo 9m 9m.H~ mmm 99.95 9999 99.99 pm mm»
wUHmm: fithc
9.3 pcjm

mmwmma Hm! mb.OhH mam 09.90H mNOH .;.00H mm Hmpoa

00.0 o a». m me. p 09.0 o M

No.0m mm mm 9 mo 00.:N mom Hw.:m ma 02

mm.mo mm mm.ofi NAN m~.9~ ~99 o~.mo mm mow
333. 9929

9,.9na mm DO.90H 09H 30.99H m 3m 09.33H m4 proe

3.9 9 99.. A SA 9 .9m. 9 9 x

mmém N moém 3 1.39 9.: .9m m oz

w~.mo ma :J.mo baa No.3» wan 9>.0J NH mww
uafiam

unmohom umvna:z unmopmm p9.::7 pcmohmx pmnfidzs armommm 9MHdm pmmfl
1i: vwmaxowuupm

2:3. 399$ Efi £4. 39..., $99,959 95 com 989
wpwnm c? $.00mopx paw sow umbm sow w;9m .<Jm magma

mwbm an...» zanm

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

g; 3.W9H HMI 90.03H WWW 99.50H mIMH no.00a WWI H9999
9. 94% m wn.m ma mo.m oo 9.m m x
mm. Hm .. m 45H 0N.mn .Nam mm.nm a mm»
99. m. 99 99.94 999 ma.mm mmo 99.99 cm . oz
mafinwm Unmhc
6cm pcwam
WWHDW .mml .mb.ooH wwm. .b©.9©H 09 wo.dma mml Haves
0m. AH : H9.4 OH m£.m a; 00.: a K
mo.H: 04 9H.wm nma ga.m: mom 90.3w 0 mm»
H9.9g ma mm.9m mm 9m.mq 9mm oo.mp ma . oz
$93.39 996.5
3.24 L... 99.93 E 9.9.93 B 9.99.93 HI H38.
mmém m 9m.m m .36 mm mi H x
mm.nm m :53 cm amém mma 9.3 m 99%
mm.mm m 99mm mo maém 9mm 3.99 9 oz
pcflam
pcmopmm gapsgz pcmome Lq.:5 21 p299HMMJIpmmezz pamogmm Amflfifiz
umHAmm
04904 mamcflw Ucufimdm 99H? nmpflmsma Ucw com
II womm9xomL pox pmma wanmhummou
pom care puma nwmwxooompx now who: >wm Sow m>maamm 50» 0Q .«mm magma

mwbm 0:; 2039mm

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

mwnbmfi mm: nmhbrq mmm as. :N mme no.¢oa pm: H3909
:c .o o co. m 9N. N mm HN.N m x
no.NH N mo. 4H m: HN.NH mNN NN.ON o mocmhmmm9m oz
m~.- N4 9H.om mmm mm.mo NNN mo.:m om moH>pmn pmcopsm
9N.m m mfi.aq N4 mH.mH mma No. 3N N nmmm3omcmgm
muflomx namgs
dam ch-m
ma.nna mmn. mmnbwq N :.A:H mmm om.aca mm: Hmpoa
.au39 o No. N :M. N NN 30.: H x
9N.oa : om.ma mN me.m NNN ,.N4 m mocmpmwmum oz
mo.Nm Nm no.9N moa 0N.NN mom no.99 mH mON>Nmn pmchnm
mo.N m mo.m NN No.HH 93 30.4N o Ummmxommmum
mUHmmm Usage
‘ 9 why. mmnhwu mHH_ 30.29H mww nbnbba mw: Hmpoa
me. o 0 mm. H :c.N H4 No.0. N x
co.oN m mm.9a oN Nm._N NNN ac.mN m «03999 9:3 oz
No.39 0H Nm.mm 3N ma.am nAN oo.H4 m mofl>9mn pmgopnm
mm.ma N mm.NN NN mm.NN an No.9H N nmmmxomqmpm
pCNHN
ucwcpmx LmLFsz acaotmm paxrzz pcqopmm hmgfisz pcmopmm hmnvdz 1
moSmLmMmhm
3H:3. mHmcww ncmpmsm me: mvpgwnmo 6cm com

Ill! 1'

‘31

 

 

- i .l“-lil -u'

.39N 930mg

 

Nunez nmepm yd om NF9 op .m4m3 - Now 0 ”HHn9m>o

mman any zommum

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

mwhmwa mws hwhmm mum N.saH .NNN hmmwwu mm: gape?
‘0.94 a c«.N 4N Jo.N mo HN.N m x
0N.m N Nw.o mN mm.m mo Hm.oa a wood : me
0N.o m No.m ma 0H.o mN 44.m m «3N u mom
HN.N a mq.:N mm m4.oa NNN Nm.na N RN; u NmN
0¢.No 2m mm.mo NNN NN.3N mmw mo.:m oN NmN “was:
mcaamfi despm
can Naaam
mwnhfia mm: am.oaa nww n:.oaa mwm 93.9ma mm: Hmpoe
mo.Na N mm.N NH MN.N 3N 33.: H x
OJ.N H mm.N NH 0m.o Hm oo.NH m wood u me
mN.N m ma.q m 4N.m on oo.m N «3N u mom
aa.N m 00.0H mN mN.m mN 00.4N c was s mmN
Ha.go mN mm.mo ama am.mo mmm 0¢.Nm ma «mm pmucp
mnflcwm UCMpw
mwhmba mm: hwnhwu n4 hmnhmn mHm. nnnmba NH: Hmpoa
mm.mH N mo.m N Nm.a NH No.0 N x
No.0 H no.m 0 No.3 NH mm.n a mama - me
mm.ma N Ng.n NH No.0 mN mm.m H msN u Nam
No.0 H N4.oa NH mN.HN N4 mm.n a wag u NmN
03.30 m mm.oN mm om.NN Nam am.mm N me nova:
NCNNN
smegma thEfiz pcmoumm &mmESZ pcmomw; pm2Edz pcmopmm hmpfidz
pcmohmm
p~sc< mamcwm mwnpms: mafia. pwunmzmm vcm com
mvmumxcmmvpL Ms; so» 00 puma afio mo mmmvcmopmm pan? .«wm wanme

nwan ark zonfiam

-m. 1
.pd ’ ALI-“El I .0

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

IL I. .I. I1 .I FL \I 12-
.m.Cm HIP. mm.3 mm m0.\..-_. mam m0. r...#. N am
ON. a . m am.oN 0N om.oN HcN NN.9H o scam p.:oq
Q .NO Jm O». «m GCN 0.00 mm .13; m3 NH asses}. mfimn
om.m m m.N N ma.N 0N Hm.04 a maon
mm. a um.w 4m go.m pm m.oa a mama
mdam1u scmhw
93 e.g.-Hm
b. . m 3 WI] PIMP-m E .8be No.0- P. 3 ma mlml 1.. #09
HN.N-N Z 2:.A Q 8.? fl: 00.0H a x
mL.N m 4N.3N m: HN.NH mma 0A.9N m gong p.com
mm.mm MN m.um NNN LN.Nm mo: oo.Nm ma pqaoem mama
am.N H Q®.H : 4N.N NH 00.: N when
om.N H NN.N Na Nm.m NN oo.m N - wmwg
mafia-mm 6930
0......wa MIA-I .0053 E @wHWH NE Dbe 1m}... Hag-om.
7r. C O Nair, 04 303: Ho 6.0.me m N
mm.ma N «23.8 mm «WT-ma m0 mm.n H H$99 arson
:-.MN 44 NN.No MN fin.mo qNN mm.mI 4 pages: 051$
MIR-\H N mm._\ 3 mm...” L No.0.m N whom...-
30.3 O mo.m 0 0:.m OH 505% N wmmq
pcflam
.-M_m-M.WMMmIIMpHflNN.P..H pconIHi NNN-“.53“. I #9551 pm..#..m.m..,m M59351“ .Sn-fidmz I
mpflpcmsa
wax-J 2m m mmfl: wamgéI: 95 com
"ma-Em swam wag-m d; .58.» mUImgm...“ @941 9131 ran-w mam 93: now mocwm .«mNIIM-Eg

aw: on: asnxnm

 

'III' ‘l‘ll1“!v1|‘-II

\

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

mmhku mww mnhhra mnra mhhbha mmw 41409
4c.4 m ma. a N@. m x
NN.N 44 Nm.4 94 Na.N 1N mmmws are Na¢>g
wm.44 mNN 4:.N4 mam co.N4 Nm 1112.1 m¢a4h m L39 No 015
om.om M14 Nm.44 0mg mm.N: 04m N4xmma
No.44 4N Nm.m mm 44.0 N4 N441m
muNamx ucwuc
cam pc44m
K .714 Pb 3.33. Mg I353 .mI-mh 41.1409
mm. m MN. m :4. N x
NN.4 o 04.4 04 mm.N m4 mxmma 03% Ngm>m
am.m4 mma oa.m4 OHM mo.m£ mam xmmm.m wmeaa mwgne No 039
am.mm mmH Hm.mq mam mo.oz :wH haxwoz
N¢.o4 mm n4.m4 mo No.0 Nm - N441:
mowfiwm Ucwpm
muumun4 wmw 13.114 me 30.994 .mmm .Hapsh
on» .H N maJ. a 9% m. x
04.m m mo.H o H:.m N mxmm; 039 zuw>fl
4m.m4 no 4N.4m 0N4 w4.44 NN4 411: m mms44 mmN44 No 03%
mw.ca on No.mm mma om.oq mma h4xmm:
NN.O4 o4 N4.o 4N Nm.m o4 N441:
4:44m
pumopmm Loafinz pcaouwm LwLfidz pcmopmm umLfidz
I. .IIIII III hocmSUmLm
ho>3 ccw m a I m pwwc: 6cm N
II Npmmg as; SON om :mpmo mom .mmN m4nmw

M4H2¢h ha mNHm

 

 

 

 

.W,\..on)s H OWJ
Am. a

w:.mm NHA
4;.UN on

44.71. .11
. r a

3 o? O
Ow om . Nw
Om.3m Nam

 

 

man-.44 .5
mw.m :
HUon N

. f0 on

Mm.n~ maa

11.134
mm.
No.NN
m:.mp

(
— C
s
FL

mm.HN
m:.NN

a». .s o w) 4... JP.

91.qn4
mm.4
mm.oN
c~.am

 

3a 94.

4m.

mna mm.
mNm Ha.

 

OOH .y
0

on ma
no q4n

rfiomma 0mm

am.

304 mg.
CON 4N.

4 4
Nm am
so NN4

4140N

mmm
mjammx UQNNQ

41499

N

on

mm»
4c44N

 

 

«cacamm

ii

a I m

Lapurz pcmop

wm LmDFdz

 

Nmoc: 1:1 N

pwma
UmmwxomqmpL
new:

 

 

Nymmr Ummmxommwhm ucmsom pm>m sow o>wm

wqajdm m3 HNHw

.mom manme

 

 

 

 

 

‘3‘ II

1.1.."

waagxunx 4o: 4..

 

 

 

. . IIII ILE
4wnca4 ,4m 14.394 mmh wm.am4 com 41404
:N.N 44 mm.u mm mn.o mm x
mc.94 0:4 05.41 mmm 4m.fi4 NON mm»
No.1: mx4 0N.4m 444 Nm.mm mQN - oz
md4cmx UCALO
Us» 4n44m
4.4.4.145 IR RPS PI 94-2 4.44- 43 p4
mm.4 a No.0 mm m~.m r4 x
m.4a NM4 No.n: 4mm 01.04 044 wmw
44.44 4&4 4N.14 mom NN.N4 om4 . oz
mdwcnm vampn
mmehH m44 IvnbMH mww bm.cm4 N14 41409
NN.4 N mm.c N4 mm.x 94 x
em.m4 m4 pm.mm 404 54.4m 4o mmw
Nm.4m No 40.:m 044 99.1m m44 ox
pc44m
pcmcpwm LoLe:z pcwopvh pmgfidz vvpmm 423532
IIIIIIIIIII II .I “@44mn
pm>a flaw m n I m Lwfic: wcw m

Hqufim mo

mmHm

.ou mom cmrI 41mm sm444 94414.1Impx pom ego: NNN so» m>m44mm new on .m4m m4nwe

.vH _.

‘I1

 

{:1
IV’\

q1uquO»
(\J

K
. \mj

 

“Gomfia
nu.m
mm.w
mN.mo
90.44

 

35.:04
woN
mm.m4
UGO-HF
N~.44

4...).049

mu.m

a O

:0 mm

m3.fin
.1

om.x4

 

 

III.-.‘ ll.l.fI“

m4m
N44

I(\
C‘vJ
ll\

.3.—‘4‘»
[\rfi

mwm

N
mo
324
am

u-II4
N4 . N
40.04
mm.mo

00.94

bbwhbH
Hm.4
mm.:4
Aooww
4m.04

hHrkh4
oc.N
4N.N4
m4.mm
ow.om

{

s'\

N 4': Ln IN

'\O¢"\
,4.

41409
x
mocmumwmpm on
mow>4mm Amn.pdb
vmmmxowmmpm
mdamux nauhu
new pc44m

41409
x
mocmummmpm oz
mo4>umm umnousm
Ummmxommmpm
mU4mmw mamgw

41404
x
mocwhmvam oz
m04>pmw pmcopsm
womayomampm
p244m

 

 

ammonmm

 

J-

LrLESZ

pumohwm

 

mocmpmwmhm

 

 

 

NmA camp; 450M 5:» op pmmmpm sow

wqwfiflm m3 Hum,

om 444143>o

.4Nm @421,

 

15.114 man 4.. ,4 H 4 an..-4 1.\ 4-419
III“! .IhLI luff.” 110)....“ ll hIII Isl lv-I .1 null ‘Clll I.
nmru QN HI.N nL 1N.» N4 x
mN.m NN oo.m m4 N...o Nm 4994 I mMN
NN.I NN 04. 1 44 44. N m4 44N I we.
4N.c mm No.44 mo Nm.o4 mm 134 I mmN
Nm.NN mNN om.-N 40m No.4. NNN 4m. I-cm;
wmficmm 4cwgw
n11 4a444
m4 mm4 mmm_ 09.904 NNN bb.no4 , mmu 4140B
N4 4N.N 4 04.44 0m x

NMoQ ON HOOH I me
mm.~ mm man I AN.om
4m.04 mm 9m: I m..mw
amoda NON wm. awn-D
muwmmm flange

N4 44.0
QH HN.N...J

mN 34.94
om4 nm.mo

£10103
4M?“ r—i Fifi.
—IO:U‘h-h-.
[\4
P-U\%)43r~
~)U\GIN\

c:
&\

Hfig mHH wnumm4 me nmnmhw wmw 41404
o4.c N Nn.4 m4 4N.m 44 x
mN

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

mn.N m 4 .4 44 .0 N4 4094 I eJN

mo.N m so.m m4 03.44 NN waN I 29m

mm.w O4 4:.m4 mm 02.44 mm fix: I oIm

mN.mN mm NN.N 444 o4.mo mN4 umN Nmucm
4:44m

proogmm pmxhsz .cmogmm pmpfisHII pcmohmm ham 2
.III pcmopmm
km?) vcm m a I m thS: 6cm N

.tc. Maw” mmdm 50% ca pmmz 450% M0 mumpcwupmm pnga o<mm m4nwb

>4H§£m no wwwn

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

L¢P0 nfiw m

 

4-4

 

 

Pun... .. -4 P4. .......1.....,......._4 P... 4.4....
1.....44 4.4 .4184 44. 1.4.4 4... .4
.4.14 444 4N.N4 omm NN.N4 44N 4444 4o mzpuom 44a
rc.m. m: N:.:4 mad m@.NH no wcwcofi xam 0p wmhd9
4N.44 m4 om.N4 MQ4 mN.44 NN m44404 mmpae op .40
NN.N4 N4 4m.N4 404 mo.N4 40 44404 mag 4444 mmw4
44...... 44 419m N4 441.4 mm - 121......
mU4¢wm wanna Ucm pG44m
4TB .41 4.11.214 4.4... 4.4.4.1.4 44.4. 4......
44.44 0N 41.44 44 04.44 44 x
24.0: 2N4 04.04 saw 4m.44 14 whofi ho magnom an
44.44 mm m4.44 mm N4.N4 mm m4pn 4 x44 op .4444
m4.n4 mm m.44 4o Q4.m4 mm mgpcofi mmpzw op mno
NN.44 mm 44.44 4m 44.N4 04 44404 was e.ga mmm4
44.4 m4 mm.m NN 44.4 m4 . 4m>mz
m44amx 444.4
mmnmm4 mww mmmmm4 wmm oo.mm4 mmw 4.409
01.44 44 4N.4 NN om.N4 4N x
4 .44 om mm.mm om No.44 MN @404 go 444404 444
4m.44 m4 mo.4N om No.44 mN mnpcoa 44m op mmpna
4o.m4 44 m4.m4 N4 44.44 4m m44404 0.444 op mac
m~.m H4 54.24 mg 0m.m4 4m npqoz mus :mza mqu
4N.N N Np.4 m4 mN.o N4 4m>mz
pc44m
prmuuam hasfizz pcmopmm hmzfidz pcmnpcm pmpfisz @643 mo
spmcmq

 

' all" II.

 

 

“S H.144;

r

V

O

m

:4
F4

.444 @4444

 

 

a PU.” P... P. - u m... MEL 1...... U.
sh.na om r..UJ Cma va.ma #0 x
0U.NH 3U so 9H mma Hm.oH mm scam p.c:g
mm.nU amm ow.oo mun mo.mm mmw pusoax mawn
mo.m OH noom Hm mm.H OH ®.~oi
MU.U NH mU.m om 35.: am no
moflnax cquw
flcd VG...” 5m
0.1ww.a bwm .DNUDPH mwx .DDHDMH Kw“ HJUOB
3a.:fl on .NH 0 gm.am No x
.U.HH » mm.HH mm N..ma om xoux p.non
co.mu 00H 00.nm OHM msomm mma pcdos: wage
NU. N N n3.N Ha Hm.a 0 who:
m. U ma mm.: mm oa.m UH - mqu
mowamm vamp:
«Hhhra mww ..-uHHH www oodnma mmw Haney
U.~.U~ UH mm._~ wm U.ma mm x
mm.ma Hm ou.wa om 50.0H mm Rosa p.20m
Ur.ao mo mo.mo mUH m\.:o UNA pages: m3 m
LU.m m om.m OH n©.m a who:
2U.m a UN.N U HH.: m me4
UCHHU
UUUUUm gmxfisz .. meUqu p;pezz ccoomal pUxfidz
HwHRCUSN

 

pmbmlvcm m

 

7m

 

mvvc: cam m

 

 

 

 

.mc LH+UM Emmi

H4H3:h m3 MAHm

hilllJWn
marada L33M mum 4mpmmfi Ummw .Uuwnmpm Luahsm cwmm m>wm

 

so» moaflm .qmm Uflmmw

 

H

‘.
“F.

5

\J \

5
\J
.

J\-3H
1
TIN-P4

‘0‘“

PHMWDH
{Ya
rm.wm
m .3

fin..meH
mooH
ogomm

0....

we on

 

um»
AH

JHN
man

3. .Udl.

, n

00H
mma

 

memsa
m5.
oo.mm

mm.3~

mw.qaa

x; O
”L

mo.4H
om.qm

 

«3.1.0

  

mm.
4H.ma
Ho.om

dvoota
\NUo
mm.ma
om.am

 

mam

Hmpob

x

on

www
mUfimmm Usapu
dam pcfl;

Hmpoa
K
oz
mow
wUflUmm cc.UU

fldpoe

N

oz

mm»
unflam

 

.' "ll’

pcwcLuL

pULEflz

 

pmbo cum

mhmww Om

pcwopmx

 

harms:

‘1'!

mhwmw as I Cm

pcwohmm

 

mgwmw om hmucz

drug.“
umwuxowmmpm
meb

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

«puma vuwwxowmmpm pnmmom pw>m mow m>mm

J lfifl
cc.

.Uom mapwe

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

«n.95H mum oo.ooa mnm nmwmmfl mwm Hmpoa
he.” mm NH.U mm cm.m w x
on.q: moa so.ma mpm Hm.m: mmq mm»
ma.HU AHN mm.fim Ho; Nfl.nm mca 0U
mcflmmm Usmpo
Ucw pcflam
pruwm wwm mwwmma mmm Us.: a mhm Hmpoe
4U. mm mic pm $4 a x
-m.»q mma Ho.oq NNN mm.qg Hm mmw
£3.34 mmH mm.wg mam om.mm 30H oz
. mUHQflm Unmpc
no.3:a MUM anLbH bmm oo.maa mmw Hmpoe
MH.H NH oc.U ma HU.m a x
HH.Hm on mo.mm 00H pm.om a: mam
mm.mm mm mm.nm mHH om.mm Ho oz
pcflam
pcwopmm hUDfi z pnmopmm LmnEdz pcwuhmm pmnfldz
mmflflmm

LU>O Umw mhmmw om mmwmw an I om mummw om meCD

 

 

 

\IA

UJUUUU #02 meg oAQUUJQmmo

NU.
qfixoammum how whoa me so» m>mflamm so» on

new case ame can

'

.fiwm magma

as:

 

 

 

 

 

pUbQ U23 mpwmw mm

 

 

 

mpmww Um pUUQD

mqhnma mum .:.u H mmm 3:.mUH mqm
:5 a Um. . ............. M... ..
4U.-U NU Hm.ca «ma 40.; mm :EUU :9 0%
H_\..o Nam om.30 dmm mw.mo m§a moa;hqnp QUdem
qU.mH Um m..ma 42H No.2H NU Uq:::ouqapz
, mUUcmx vague
UCU pcflam
a .2.H mum Us.mmfi wnw HHHHHH mnm prow
MU.“ N n.m NH m:. H x
\U.J m4 U>.Ua mm UN.JH om mocmpmmmpm .a
mw.a~ Ham «U.om mm: H3.m~ baa wowbamn pmcopsU
05.0H 4m m>.HH AN mm.m~ mm Umwuéoanmpx
mUm.w m as ho
m . pa MHH on.ofiq WWW .DHMDHH me Hmpoe
r~.u m nU.H m no. a x
oq.mm mm am.am no mo. UN mm mocmummmpm oz
1,.4. mm Um.mm mma OU.U: mm UOprwn UUEOUsn
Um. UH mm Hm.mm ow -.Um UN cmmmxommUUU
unflam
#Ucogmu LULfidz chUpUL LUUfid: pawopmm pmpfidz
mocmhmmeL

 

 

”pUm

nmULm

know my; now 03.4HHUUU>O

 

 

fim.®0a

Um...
mm.m
mm.a

MG 5.. 5H mpw PHIH NH
«U NU.m Hm m9.m NH
Hm mh.m mm mo.~ gm
UN om.o mm mo.~ N~
m mo.m Hm om.oa 4m

mmm Hm.m~ omo Hm.ow 0mm

.. .. 03.9ma mmm
m... Ha m3}... OH
OH :o.o on mm.~ UH
mm a GM 0m.o 3H
m am.m om Um.oH m
MHH ~m.- mm: mq.mo HUH

 

it
5

..V

" 33"»
O

N
--¢ 1P;
‘3
,3
’“)
H
(‘l

' 3

U)

C .

Ama mmnmmw “5.0na mmw

 

mm.H N
qm.w U
Um.~ a

H

(~\

0

m
N 0 '1‘“-
H H ‘Ch
0)

C) (\m'x.
o ‘ ,
(x
O
3\

Z‘\
N

pm>o Ucm mmw
mg» n 55m
«.2 .. www.mm
mmm gang:

mUHQmm Uudhw
Ucm pnwam

Hmpoa
um
hm>o Usm «mm
ma» 1 flnm
4a: u wmm
wmm hdeD
mUHnmmvfi. USA)” 0H6

«mace

x
hm>0 qu mmm
may c mom

 

 

 

 

 

 

mw.mfi H 4:.OH am HU.HH NH mm: a mmw
mm.ro 00H mm.mm mam m:.m~ aw mmm Umcca
pcfiam
wchhUL pomsdz pcmopam kmfififlm pumopmm Luanda
vamommm
mmwy Una mummw om mpwmmwwn : cm mwamw on guys:

 

 

[1‘1

wUUcmxosamUL may sow om 9mm: use» mo www.coopmm pmcg.

.mmm mammm

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

D: U 5 5...! w... H............,4 33.
cm. H or mm.UH NUH mr.~ mm x
Um.m: H H $4.3: baa mm.aq Hma whoa no meaoA xaq
Wm. H mm am.aa Uma m~.ma mg magnum an op ngme
ac.mfl nu 35.9H pea mo.UH om mapcom amuse 0U Us»
UU.UH Hm Uq.ma Nqa NU.UU m apnea mco qmca mmmq
m.U mm :n.: z: m~.o am . Um>mz
mUHUmx Usvpv
Uuw pcflwm
h..wfia mum 3w.0m .fio mmm ampow
:4.na cm ou.+m mp mm. ma x
aw.mn UNH om.>q 0mm :m.mq 9m whom ho mzpcom xfln
m~.a mm mm.na w; mm.ua mm mnpco: an op amuse
mw.m UN OU.CH mo @N.3H om mupcoa QULCB Op mcs
om.mH om om.aa mo m~.na mm apnea mco :mse mama
ow.g UH mU.U mm Hm.m NH . Um>mz
mUflomm ucwpc
P5 PM RE m... U32 PM 33
mm.wa 4m $3.0 mm mq.U w x
og.mm mm mm.rm 34H mm.mm NU whom ho mnpcom xfim
MH.UH mm UH.nH Um UU.NH 4H mnpcoz an op mmUCU
Uo.ma mm :a.qa m3 mm.UH om mcpnom mmpce op Uso
no.3 ma 4m.aa a: oo.ma NH canon mco :mca mama
U..m m mm.m UH Um.a m gw>mz
pcflam
pagopwm harEUZ pcmopmm UmpEd» . pcmopmm pcnmsm Una? mo
1!! :pmcmq
U>3 UCm mpwmm om mpmm» m: I om mymmw om pmapm
«muoym Ummxmommwmm mcfl>pmmnkamm m menu Unuwom sow m>mm.Mmoa 30m .«on mamme

(:1
(:5
-<

~oq—.-

..h “ 4
4.). am. L I «4:.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

m, -_1.. )1 r'. .,_ v.-. ....,. “Wt _J' .U 7-..--81 .-+')
I .4 . .~. 4 , 1 V‘. .V' . "‘9 , _. V " .
_ ‘,*.L.',‘_"3 l “X. :;{L‘= ". .1 JO. ¢.- V 'C‘r LJJ'A: A. l s - 9-"? ‘. 5| {-3 '. (A r. 94'. fr
-_ _‘_- -_- — ”fin“ .k ‘ “ h.- - -s q
“”4“” “.0 “Mn“ ——‘-— m—-——-=W“w-~m_ -‘-H.‘-A~I~ 7””-.A—D m.“ 9_.--,—'
~-—“Q—-~ ‘ -—-.--o-—. -‘*--Q‘ ”AW—“F."M dua—n—an...-—-— - - —-— .- -
, -
r~oo L ~ ~~ “ r 9 - n - ‘ - . .. . z -- —
9‘ ". F‘ :V‘.'. - ‘~ ~' "- ‘ ,I . 'U'v'rfi. ‘v"-".5 .' “W "i‘ " -5
u “' ~“--\‘.') :..’L-.-. '- l‘uf‘. 3"}? 4"»)..701‘9.‘ “1.31 .F ;--~-.‘~.3Y‘ -~‘= "1”» J Kw ...' L..~‘...:\"‘.,-_o.
J‘ ‘ ' —w—d—.‘~”-_n ‘ 4" .-_.~~—J—‘ u-“i-'lmMm
r ' v" -: 'Ir r. _~
A L 8..)u-C:’udvrxbd
. i
75 ~ " - . - - ., . -
l L' 1", ‘3,“ - ‘0‘...“ ".‘....l. ‘t. L},\ -2 t ‘-‘.v¢-.'v- _‘T‘ .J.—.s~ -o.._y: ‘-
u-,:1 uLUQg::; ffia- txiixu A..V.JrfL . t-FZ.GT1 ‘--.HLJ L A "a 5‘15.u

-4 H’-.

 

Flint

Yes 1' 57.26
x O :
iotal 2

\ I.) C
O

90 CV.S?
ME g'.?d

O

[Lo-T'
j, Kuxn
LMF‘Vif'

LU

 

 

o-
(.sz" U; L)
CAF‘WDC.

--T;I-. I-A‘n‘m .1!" T2.
1L“) 1.x! V5 0 \JV

—4
:5
L2
C),
«5
H
U;
(4

Grand Rapids
Yes 21 55.05
No 25 5h.35 7 37.06
X 0 o :50 .00
Total "LS louJJJ y 153T33

H
50

OK»..-

02.95

DJ
O:C:
IUJO'R)
1.1
t
“‘5 K!)
H

5

Afl
,;
y...
;,

thtami
Grand Rapids
Yes
No
x
iotal

_‘
J

50.63 78 62.02
b9032 106 37003
.00 1 .33
133733 2&7 £33753

‘ \1

C“-\}
ham
k4

‘Q‘ L!) \J.)
'0
Ham 0; (3.)
1...:
0
‘ 3
UV

\'.

c1
5"‘1

7’: 'r~(~ - ,n‘r ,
5.1JK‘KaAtJ. .L'~Il'.‘

 

 

 

 

 

m.‘ ‘ H gr. ', z a n" J P. a-“ ' ..n+
.ahla 55A. (cout'd) U~ne ion ‘V9P ‘OU-Jt ;?Gfiafimd:efl homo?
w—W.—— ' w - ’ Ah— _- m
a- Cl .—.——-.W “Cu—4'— *”#—-'-‘—_.- .... ' _._.“._,—-..._..._¢M‘
A-” -- — ’ T ' __ Imag—M-- I

U3€d Com119ted Hifih f.chool Same Cullere C~nfl~ 710d C015vfle

v “r 1"”.
finyaCfiabe

A‘.‘ '—

 

 

 

i m m w no...‘ *‘wmn

 

1 . ~ - . . p
.eat 5umrer Percant Nlnb~r Bereent 5u rwr rawrent

— ~— —-’——.-

 

               

73.36 107 75.13

.I , ‘
L 7) fl?
t.- O s, I-

5 T)

l 26.20 29 21.17 25 23. 25
X g ‘?h 1 073 2 ].Qh
M l

 

u—_.—-- “I! awn-c .9“ .— m u.f\.—‘

19o..) 37 110.013; 1&3...

-rand Hatids
Yes 355 75.10 215 82.70 loo 7?.
No 97 21.93 42 15.15 32 2:.
x O .00 1.15 1
Total 333 136:35 2oo 13o.33 ‘JE 1T}.

*‘f‘ r: (.9

I.
:wab V; [V

 

FLint and

Grand hayids
Yes 55 76.19 -
No 103 ~53 7

\U
‘3‘)

81.11

I‘)

K A)
.vi

“H!

1

o
.g

C

 

2

l 17.8d @b .:f.33
X 2 .2: h 3.. .ml 3 .'5
Total 7E3” 179733 377 1FJT .ou 3:3 12;.;*

 

 

 

 

‘. ‘-',... d ‘ _). .,. 3.. ' 1 . ,.. 1-. --..‘ '1 .. ..
1.0 luzl I 6;le 12.211 J- :13 .m/I'E E or I I z; 13(1Cncgk‘3‘: 2‘ I‘ “ah * v11
1“. d. I.‘ . ' P‘ . . - r :I. aI-c' —* “
Taole h:A. 1n~n ror bom)crable j¢t but iafinc’fih?
. _ .1 . .,

 

 

 

 

 

Belief

.- . 1 r' ". . .- ~n .p- " . ,x -. V I . . ~ ~. ‘ -. - --» a .
5Wt: r r rfivz* N1? er rerewnt Nuxnwr Phrv~uf

 

Flint
No
Yes
x
Total

62.50 20 37.05
15.75 1 1.55 __; 3.13

. a

111)., K) gi' l "3013")

b)?
rotd

.1 .4
O UJCDU)

\ I-
‘—
C
H
(.1
C.
O
L.
k.

“rand Rapids
No
Yes
x
Total

52.50 E? 5?.S3 &h 51. &
h7.02 Ol h9.l9 lJJ ufi.5l
9.?2 h 1 d- 18 a ym
‘. -—=- “Y- W'- ---—- ---— ——- ‘-

luu.03 114 lJu.uJ 2&2 30.))

H
POCDVD

/6(- L o‘

 

PO
’4

r1)

lint and
:rana Rapis

“)

(

No 12 32.53 92 ~1.c8 15’ 19.55
Yes 23 E..00 61 L .51 IE3 Lh.33
x 5 14.;1 5 2.n1 21 7.5.
Total '3? 1772}? TTS 15575? TEE 13????

——-———w— II: whfl—fi

DO Yuu

(Cont'n}

I
T .

H,
.4‘

elieve You Fey
nan fur Ca

. 'F'ir 1;?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

._H __ - 1.1..
— .— -- u- ‘- --fi m.» ' dwm—W ' n w. '.'h‘_ ' ' “mg-“ '— ~‘
u.-..,.. ‘: ——-— m———- H..— "v v- “‘C —
-..-‘. +~ '~ .- ‘.,,._. l -< - C ‘. .._ rm“. ~+ a 1'»!
CU 1141': wt?! d.LLrl 13‘. 1.140 U 7 ’3 C; LEG k. J. L- -J i v'- «A 404.1- . :1
._ _ _. ,
.- ‘ ‘ r
LT'ELle
X's .. —r- I) .“r ‘xT e ‘1_ r- Pr\ (1 ‘ + -‘ no ~ 1’ M. '
magJer .e.:unt aunLJr .r, p u,. r .m? a

 

 

Flint

No
Yes

x

”10 tel

.nd P
N 0
Yes

x
Total

agfiiris

Fli 111; and
Trend Rapids

50
Yes

x
Total

113

m re
{\3 2-.) u";

U’I \O C.)

\‘r-x
I?
c:

5?. 3?
35 30
4317.
lUT. 'J‘J

L%.27
55.55
3.13

11).):3’

51.L7
53.93
51.05.)

m
1.») .15..)

OS
36

107

H
. (J
(Z‘Mo

\I

*—

[Q

(T

5454
m a.) .
L; 1‘.“ (J.

9L2

03.75
33.0u
S.bl
1.5.) . C11)

0.21

m

.?—')
_LUL} Q ‘.- -J

5-4
K)
4‘."

‘r-’ \C
\Juux (1‘

,‘
.:..

[vi

1 3."; . 0;)

 

CL I};
.'J\’ . h’. "
'3 F 1- "
.11"). J
y—r
u. *- «l
.' . V-
-9,.-.u.‘~v
' ’ ‘ I I
l J»: O J .l

v—‘ r7”
5‘"— 0 § 1

. ’ r‘
LN) o : '2
h, 73"»

1 .‘.-’ J

 

U'ferrle, Pg) .

 

ca-

‘?

Oil

., ..
n- 1H,: -' _.r .
‘. ..~ 4 . v A

. ---

I‘ VTI‘t‘SI”

 

 

 

Prefer€.ce

D

 

-—‘.1.c.'.——q ' ,fla.
iinfiu r“...

_...b-~. ”n...

- ‘—._—. _-- ‘m-I-‘U—"

_an. x._ u

._¢-——«—n .

 

Flint
EFEDQCnagéd
batcner service
30 {reference
x
Tota'
rand Rapics
firepackaged
;utcher Service
No Preference
x
Total

Flint and

Grand HapiCs
yrepaahaged
butcner service

-£r\u

3.00
(,2 . :22;
370§O

{).LV)

11730.03

13.2?
60.00
19‘ . 05

3.?1

”‘5.

1.9.;)

5.1)

 

N not-u
U1k4ko\n

f!

'r—
f
a.

t

 

lb.bl
t‘lo‘fil.)

 

No ‘reférence 19 27.03 30 20.2“
X '3 (Jolt) b 3.37
lbtal 37 l)J.JJ l}% 1.4.;;

w “I ‘5 4 "V ’ ‘
x .‘ b.) ‘ ‘_, l— h9§h>_fl - —L
l """" I :‘.$1 '9‘ ' f
‘ L .. . a A s;
',_ i I.) . 3 r"
.4 I
‘— u C , O A ;
fi F ' .r-. 4 '7
v ' I k .
W. '4" . I l
,\ r~ .
C J. I; .1 Q ‘
r) '3! 1
Q L- . _.
-”'- m. _
. '- I
XL. .1 .a x} a I }

 

25 12.2J
15? 07.83
Eh l$.83
0 3.97
L-‘:‘ )3 1 m;

C“ 7 “9
J') l: O {.x’
LQQ ;' :7
\_".. ‘-‘ s . - .
:r 7 2‘
.2 ~ ou~
.' d .f
j C. o ’ x
_ I. ".~-_’.. ’
I \ ’
(174" 1 ,1. 1 I

d—M‘ - .fi-- ’"4-- m" to. .H.‘ -

j -7-;(\ .vr. ‘..
.7. J" ’I )'
_JJ. ‘J-.A .x‘. 5‘

'u ‘ V‘ 3 v ’ ‘ . . _
‘ - ' . ‘ " ' . 'fi"’ 1‘. L)” Y" HID?» rx {.-«~. «115‘. ("A , "j +0
. ‘ - 'J. ... -9") . . o ‘ I \. \ r L . . *2 3., ‘Ju - ~_, .' '— 1 K.’ .3 . g- s- .g ‘4 s . Q
“~—_ Hr~I- *fitw ~-‘M.-'—- " C — l m‘ w...‘

m- ‘F‘h

 

‘F"-‘H fwa-mfl-fi—v—- ,4---

‘_ a. n a... - ‘—~—-——-..__.-_- H‘.._q.-.-_—.._-.—-- ___-—_- o--~—-—- .. .v- ‘.-‘-_‘-—-v- r .- —

 

 

 

 

 

“aw ’w‘wo -——.-_m ——..—-.- ——-.——-—-—a'- 4--.. .‘_ '_.,,._H - fl
"' ' ' I“ ' ‘ " ' ‘ ‘ n’\ 0 ‘A ‘ rad- fir - - 1 I'.."' F .. .1 ' ‘ ‘—
(AMI: LL? ted £11 2 21 .3 C1100]. 0.4.16“ Cu 4.1!: ~ re '- ”3"“ u ‘i fr.) |. a. .21" k
.W \v u”... v- k. ‘ mut—

 

 

 

 

Brcference

-’. . 3' ‘1. _ ",.._,. , . ‘..
yaw: r Hercent hummer fiercent -.2 3r :rrfivzi
_—.—-—H .- m‘ v...— ‘7 —m—-’-C-—-§- m.- -.. a. '*‘--fi—-.‘- - - “—n. 4- -

 

 

 

 

rregackaged Lb 23.23 19 17.76 13 17.33

rgtcner service 110 §U.El OS 00.7b “3 :Y.3:

no freference DB b.2h 19 17.70 7 Ed.u7

x h 2.02 h 3.7b 2 2.57

Total 1,.3 1‘72? TT 173 "T ;,....-‘
Grand Regine

Frepackeqed ? lG.b9 22 d. 2? 13.73

Eutcner bervice
ho Preference
x
Total

Efljnt and
Grand Rapids
Prepackaged
hutcher Service
no Preference
x
Total

(7A.:

[0
.LI’
Nhu)’

-
Q—

L.
.1
C -.

(I)

\A)
\C (T
(rt-4r.-

2'3
:1.

FJO‘P‘
I 1‘ ~
3‘ .

C, p.) O\
C) ‘w‘ H 0’“

0
t3) ‘r-—'\)\O K)

C:

l,--

~—

r0
#4 C" (\J ,'
racprvza

I
i

\A)
N
N

12.73
08.?b

1n.91
3 MO

'1'.L+‘—

150.55

 

n ’-
(V ‘3":
~1_. . I u
A .4
T ._" I l_
L. 0.5.;
v.4 ‘1“
C»... v
- ..._..~

., .an mr
Lut"u.'..t.;.u.‘:

 

 

. | _ ,. . q - ‘. 3 a"

an“ ’..‘ . -W :1 ' 'LY'FQv"? f ‘a '-‘ ,7‘ “ - ..' 4/1 7‘. ‘ ”‘1‘? r-r-m"; ,5». .‘-:.“I
TM"...E) ’¢-...’.. '31-1 r3 .. \.--..- ;,_~ ‘44. -‘.)¢[ “(. 3.1:; 4."..- 15.1 UJ' A .L-.A r"..\,r‘.fi.‘ 3.) 'u
_.—--H—.. A ‘u-w—‘J‘... ‘- -9‘-M——I—‘ M**-w— g.~—v—€A_3-a—- -~ J’.._.-v~—- . w—n- ~ _ 3‘“-
————-—-——— 9....“ “a...” c=~.-—--~mc-C~a—vu———wo-—c __—_. ~——.-_'--vv—--——— ~.——-_—---_. - '—~ -—-..—-c‘ — - PWFC—m— ~>"—_- -‘._’- -‘ I—‘, .
__._ w ~0—.—-—r—--u---~—u—- _~--—.~~L ‘r—p‘- 4.. -

7 - r‘ . m, r‘ .. .-. ...- .. 1..
Less Tngn cramwdr ucmplptwa Graurcr bane ”7,“ can“

 

 

 

Percent

 

“Tu. .m r -' r- V" “I )7 V! I) + 3" ‘.-- ~1" r' Y‘ in .Y ‘ ‘ - '
”.mhcr £5.99rt hum,er ter0;nn .ux.:. .:xrv'
"\~ .m' - "“ _ ‘ Q 4 ~—-‘ _- U." V'— -—

 

 

Flint
Under 253 i
255 - h9%
50; - 7&2
753 — 130$

x
Total

ru
tA-q

 

.1... .. o ..

t—
( 9
F"
(
(.4
o

f
C,
\
I:
p.
E
C4
o
C‘ .
C
\I
.

Under 25; 12 57.1L 7h 59.67 13h ¢~.E:
2%; - '9» 3 1n.29 15 12.10 23 9.4;
533 - 7L' 1 n.7o 9 7.20 8 3.79
7‘; - 100; O 0.00 9 7.26 IL 0.33
x 5 23.81 17 13.71 25 12.&?
Total ET” 1.3.5” 122 133??? E3? iTTT5:

Flint and
Grand fiapids
Unaer 25%

h.)

139 61.23 233 03.13

 

 

1; C534 *5. 7 _.

25; - h9% 5 13.51 23 L2.32 3 11.27
50% - 7&5 1 2.70 lb 7.8? 15 5.93
75% - 100; l 2.70 IL 0.13 LY $.10
x 6 173.22 21 .1]... 3.1 1:62.37
Total ‘37' 100.00 I73’ 130.53 '55E 13;,j?

T3519 th.(v0ht'a) hunt fierceuta"e of
—-—- ”&.—

"—cfi

. ‘
54‘

our xbat no YQ1 any fire; UMT~¢09

1

 

4". — -.'—— -——-. <\m 4—. H

 

 

 

 

-~m-“ufim~u.m-m m .——— —.'- ~ -.- ‘ ~‘ hr-r 7 c...— 4

—__ A “— -- .— ~.— 'v-w.'~~.- I-u-q-.-—-q.-

 

Com31-ted Hiya 503001 Some C011??? 001310101 C011? 9

. .
-- '~.< “4“..— ‘-~_- .-

 

 

rercent

. . ‘ - ,
Numher Frrcart Nuwfier fervent xnmber Horrirf
‘— u— —M .2. “cow—_— -0- ., ~ “ .o-u—m-«q- - .,._ -—,- -‘ . H

 

 

 

'5
Ci
5

t

 

 

Under 25? 13b 68.68 83 7h.77 53 37.73
25%.- 19; 20 10.10 11 10.28 8 13.0?
501 - 712 22 11.11 5 b.67 3 1.31
75% - 1005 9 1.55 6 5.61 h 9.33
X 11 5.55 S h.b7 2 2."?
Total 133 113.99 137 133735 73 173:37

Grand Rapias
[hcer 25% 53 75
253 - 19% 29 8.
59% - ?L% 19 C
75% - 00$ 21 b.
x .? h.t

69.77 111 04.3.
5.05 11 6.35
15 7.bb 13 p.25
1’ 7.&b 13 0.37

Iv\n
C20

.J‘

‘\
O
4) (D 1":- ‘--J H
.71-4 -\1 \0 (IND
L—J
Kn

wwv .TT“<‘ ,g; fif-vf' --—r --~*
Total 320 luu.JJ £15 lvd.uu 1.3 1 0.;J

Flint and

79 230 71.L3 189 71.}:
.Cl 31 9.63 2d 11.93
7.5’ 18 5.59 13 7.9%
5.51 2 6.83 1h 5.50
5.15 21 6.52 12 $.12
" 135:35 :33 11a.:.

\1
k.)

[\3 \M t" 2" NO

1
Under 255
25 3.) "' 2.17.”;
503 - 7bb
75; - '30f
x
Total

coC)k4M3(r

1
‘l

\D
fi~
H
93
t. ..
o
C.
C.
b)
h
N

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.21; -111 3 ‘,J.\'
“3515 L51. flow Lon” nave Yam ran it ¢rcm a a8J?—dflr?ifle fir0"~"”a an fitnru?
- —-'-—'.s- m -~~‘- ‘ ————- ~-— — _- a.—
Loss Tn'n Cranfiar CQfiy eta: “ranfiar Sofia Wfi"n a:"‘
bang t?) m—‘up—nwu—“- .- v- ~_...—_. “0“ *- --- I‘m-AF..- ‘- -—o"' w-.- - c-o “W‘ ..,
“u If I q- \
01 11me N mter f9r“éfit NuwFar Berbevt 334:2r ;«r':
F Lint
‘ , _ ' [J .‘ .1. ‘1 '1
LBJCr 1 o.2; S 9.20 r ;. 1
‘—~ " . " . ‘ " wt. ‘1‘: ._ .
L157. 3 l {16.31 '\."rie .- 01'! 1J1 C 1.2 o 5:.) S 9. t. -1 3,".— " _. g .1'
" ,. , ‘.., 3 r) "’ ,- . r-
bne to xnr¢e ”untus u ¢>.JJ 0 11.11 53 1_.
‘~‘. . ‘ ~ . . :' ~ - - .. ‘ ."\ :4 4‘ 1" . "l .
1nree to 01x ,uutus 1 0.5, O 11.51 1w 11.,p
. . o ‘ . 1" . “ ‘ , b | '. ,3 ’5 ,-
01K “Ont-1.3 OI‘ [AK/148 7 “3075 3U il’JoUi. LI -. o 1."
“I A ' " ' '.
X 1 O.cS h '1.1L 1} 1,. 1
~". ww- "“ 'fi- "adv”. _'__.-_’ a-u— vow -,
LOt-Gl 1.; l .:\.‘../A) :4 ll." o\/) f"... 1 ‘~ 9

.4
JFE‘I‘.

 

bcvcr 0 .SJ 5 2.03 1 5.1
L653 Tnan One nuntn b 19.35 C 21.9? 30 ‘h..
Une to anee nonths 1 1.70 11 8.87 2< 12.:f
anee to Six Iontns b 23.57 12 9.03 11 ~.
cix Months or flore b 21.57 3? a5.9? 87 4,.
x h 19.05 13 11.53 2} 1". ~
. . --r'.- 1'." 1“.” .....- " f “7"" '.
lotal a1. IJJ.JQ 1:; 1.J.JQ gm; 1q'. .

 

 

1 2.70 10 5.62 15 f.-'
Less Tnan Une xcntn O 15.22 31 1?.M2 A” 14._3
One to Inree Lonths 5 13.51 1? V 55 t3 1h.;.
Three to 51x firntls 7 15.92 20 11.3; 35 11. L
oix Lentns or more 13 33.1L El hS.EJ 113 7‘.-
x 5 13.31 T3? 13.J7 lfi1 1 .7{
tau. ’3’? 1???" T)" 12 3" L '3, . 1‘3 27;"? ‘ .

_1-, _ -. -- _————-.-—...-——.—-— ’vv -

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

u k 71 a- \ I
'T‘ If“ r 1‘ v '4 ‘ -fi-' #- -- x 1 0' 03- .- r- '- ~ r-. x N
; ‘-‘ L1,...) 5‘. ( ‘ t .. I Q j!" J-\‘j11 :‘L‘ A j A; , '_,‘ A - I u '_..
—.- .d ‘L —o’—-—. mm _1. .. _
.— ‘ m"-‘-‘ —~“_
'——— -0.‘ — ‘ ~-—-WH . '8“ m.“ “.A u‘_- ‘—.-- m 7‘ 2' '
Pt‘mwj :59‘wfi r5“ "7‘ .“-'-O.)l Carma Ff"1i 195-”f: ’flmww ;' -"+" (' {firn'
' . ~ 4‘ ' ' m - -' - ~-"\ 1’ b .Jl ~,) ‘. I A ‘ '0); .1 - w \- '-‘ A "u .‘ \' ,-' . .. r v J" 1 - ‘w' . .
' h 7" 7“ mi.‘“‘"" ‘-M --".“—O -‘ _R clan-amne. a .9 “‘45-... m-‘-_a"-“ -m~... m 1:.» r -
LEA‘L ‘(O
A P I“ ' r ‘. . ) ~
4. ‘ p I ‘ '7' ))' ‘ ' 'L PK" *4 " ~" v' + '* 'wv r V .4 rl ‘- ‘ '
e1 -13- v¢mwer rere~n~ 91 u”? r r0»¢- w.“ a: -'x-“T
- ' .fi'fi‘ufi- ’-‘e —-M w— “—‘w. ‘._.~1.4..

 

 

7 It».
9 .1 -1
13.03
ll). (3 o ,,' -7

H: 0‘
o
(

{1.}

Less Than Une flcntn ,0
One t3 Turee fwnths 29
' ' ‘ ")

n
FR.) I“
“ H 0»! (13

.T
I

anee to Dix Acntho L; 15 1M.95 12 11.
six Loaths or here 70 . 3 38 36.51 32 ’3.:’
a 17 “.g3 13 ”.35 7 V. ,
$01.1 :35 137353 *3? 150.56 ‘?E :fT14i
“rrjq “defies
Never 19 F.59 13 6.3 T L.
Less T.en see 4enth h? 3.53 12 6.51 12 7.
One to Three Conths 52 12.15 2 11.03 EL .?,
Turee to Six EQHIQS D2 12.1h fl 1&.h? 22 1A.7f
Six Months or more 137 50.33 105 53.3? t2 F.L‘
x 3:0 1.1.2" 2.9, 3.02 23
Tota1 335 131:75 E”? 133:55 '155 131. W

 

Flunt and
Grand haplds
Never 25 h.OU 21 6.52 13 5.;)
Less {man One manta 77 lu.1S 25 8.75 2“ 13.3;
On: to Three Months 71 13.05 be 5.2“ 20 1 ~1
Three to Six months 82 15.07 L? 15.60 EL 1-. ?
”ix fiontns or More 233 b2.Bb 152 55.09 115 L“.f
x 50 10.29 38 11.80 33
Total 1;-':5- 137.33 “3'2"": 113 "'7 23?? 17.. .?

 

— M p ‘~.‘O~-".—‘— * .0.— ~

 

 

 

Gilli}! III! .IIIII)

 

 

 

. .- ,. ...... .... RE ..........W.. ebb. HR 1: H M.......... 32
.... .-. u...... ....» Prqufi “I “.0104- ..M x
..r. Q ....L x A .. C \.
m..wu mm: ou.mm mua 0m.~m mm H«.mm am on
...“ . 1 1.1 11 I- \ O . mm.
5...: 3.. .5..: »:m UH.H. mg. :5 a: m. . a. ..
vvfl LE v.13“...
new pgwam
1 1. .2...) u . 1 . . . 1,1 .. 4
.....H wuu :m.3o. WHM 1wnrfi. sea mhnflaa gm Ampom
Ilia} II. .. a. ..I' 1 . .1 . . Q
r.. u 0m.m m 0:. H CC C o
I ..J 3.) 1 I . .....l n‘ . \I . . \I . . p7."
Hflabr CT . mzo4m H0 CzohN On Om H O m\r
\c 1 \n ’14 .1 . Q \.
a...“ .1: Tm..1 Hm. .:.me my 4: pm as . >

--.. r1 1.. .1 , a. . .3.»: . .m.o.
“111. e: mf;¢fl HF “.25: MP Mewrfi hr 5 .m
a am. A a Cu 0 H
\ J J 7
M:.-u m: m...m m: 44.0N mm so.~m . m;
uw.nm 56A @o.m OWN :m.ne mu Ou.~o 5m max
5:545

 

.10., ID. lullr‘t"

 

 

 

 

- . 1 . . ...... . .... ....1 3 .1... 1. .1 1H 13$ ...H
“.11 wipmrd. Lt... 99M,» .HCGCoinfiH. (“QM/NF. 5...... ‘4...» QCQHQL. (FCC. .197“ PCOHUCHQAM L.(».~F:>K pmwruu»

Umwmxumqmpm

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

'I ‘J ... l ‘ \J
. .1 1 l.. 4. v. ..A 1 .1. I l n 4 ..l. 1 I. .1 ..... - 1 . . i \1 ‘Jwi 4.. I.. j 1‘ _ “v ‘11] 4 .“14 .
tacfctfk CiQIOLCZ m0 WM me¥flta CfoHLQEm E+LCZ Erwbst_onm UQUD

 

 

 

Nemafi .mnvkowfimpm uaUflou pmbm Sow m>mm .dCQ mHLMP

NEHJ¢ZQH942

1*: '.§.J..II

 

 

.35
CC.

.... . .\\
C? u

oo.m~

12
1

(""\ [\- .
’—

H Ci) f’
O O
r428

(‘01

mmuura
we.

05.:m
4m.m

CEEQ
1...

,0
P- (\J

C).

\f..\.
3.. a»).

5G.

P-
1"\

 

~\ .x).

u C
0:.0m

OJU\C)
fllri

 

mw.nA:
so.
P~ A.“ . 1‘14:

 

b—w\¢>
" I) f“
I
:‘f
.4

C' \

o
IAN
(I) r

00.
Hg.am
om.m~

Oz

mam
psaem

ampoa
x

02
may

madame acme.

prou

K

oz

mmw
yceam

 

 

 

 

 

 

pcmomom Laxfirz wuoohc; puprmz «smoke; .Lrwz pmmr
11.... . L

UQL~X03.QIW
crwcwpuwpflvmm adomohsu apmpmmmcpmcz Cmmcopzm c cymm? new:

1"... '

 

 

\Il‘l- Ill-'1. d‘.‘ O‘l "II'II'

 

II. 1111

 

'I. l‘

2.11.4-1... .. 4 .4. p .. .«ys.
L—(Cfxflktf‘ ~A|.r.(~1._

ya44<avfiu1z

.L....v

so» w>.m

 

 

 

 

 

.-...1. . .1. .111. 5...... vb... 1.... 1.1 ...-.1 1.. ._ ......
.:.. N. .m.. MN ...m 3 mm... a .
mm.m4 mmm Hm.mm mmm mg.mq no mm.¢: gm mew
we... wmm ma.gm mam 00.x: 9w 0H.Hg on o;

mowndm Dune:

USN pcwam
3?»... a.“ maummfl Hm“ JohnnH mm- Amheua mm. 4....
, .- mm o..u NH HH.; 4 Ne.:. m x
. ...-uu . \ J ...... \\ ..- . a1. 7‘
...u: NCO mo.w; HJH ONon :3 hcoum rm 92M
.2... cm: ~:.:m m5. mm.m; pm @3.mq _QN on

mvflcwm Ucmhc

 

 

 

....afl uMM 33.:<a 0mm 33.3wa mm $5.31H hm

u¢.m 4 Nsow 44 90.6 A NL.JH a X

1w.n: ma mm.wm mm Am.om Hm ga.zu ma mew

: .3. mm mm.:o wma mm.om wm qc.~m OH 0:
peeqm

......CLJ b.1253... €150me hang-......- -_C..-..G.H¢L. hméhfiz PC15A®L .n...;....._dm.w
“$.42:

 

 

 

 

 

 

II 1", .‘II. il .II a... ...‘l J11... al‘lllall unit's! 1‘ .I' I'll. '1‘ "‘..'i
a - 1 _x -. ac. . 311-1.... 1) .. 1. o . -....u ......Q... .1 4. . I .. .. ...v «1
_1«_...._...........,;H . l... XXVI-HQ?” Wt. .11. w H.wu.4r.~. PLJ {7...UH.)...1F_4 nu Phrxz cm fiuarflwrkfiEFHC UL;-
- . p ... . o I .1 u . u n
V‘.‘ .-ll II . .... 'l 0' ’ li ‘ I .-I‘l‘l‘ ' ‘ 1‘ .1 | 'll’n'lill‘ 1"... it 1"! . ll 1‘ t .' 'ii‘
[)1 4 I. .It D .’ ..ll‘liu" ‘3! III"! In] it 1!!" “I. I'll 1‘ .1 .‘l‘f‘ :‘1'.‘I'i 1|. .}.h'|vlh' vi
\ I! n V I-.. lluillnlli |Iv‘fl-0.l"ll' I1 ‘1‘ ill-Ill! iii 1‘11!
. .

 

 

 

 

.wausxezL veg puma oflgdecaou Lo. :dua
J

wwma swag; cm uxommepx Lcm whom mm; 30% m>mflamm 50H om .mwg maumg

H4H44234912

 

‘.JQ! ""I|.Oill .Ii' -i’h'l‘i‘l“ i ...)“ ' Ill..-" 1"‘I. I ll

qu.qua ama nq.>ea 3» amgca

uIlI‘III...‘ l‘l II' tl. .'ll 'rlll

B... :4

i"\
"04

mm.: H om.m m o~.o m x
mm.am ma Hm.m4 om mo.m4 om may
mH.3m m p.03 53 cm.nq mm 03

mCHumm campc
Ucm pnflHh

mmnmmm wan au.ama .:n.
mmou H Ox.m m mm.m
mw.mm ma om.am
mm.hm a 0m.:u

"\
(x.
'9
‘3
3
r2

4m503

f“

 

:_ (*1 man
K

1.1

I
A
f
\
r4

Ca
2'

.4
(“q .3
av

o

OJ

0

N

m

. H

11‘.

bnnbflw Mil

Tic»... O JUoQ
m
\
U

I?
’_ )
O
T)
"3
H
("J
C‘J
' 3
O

_3
H
Ox
'\
P4
\b
* J
O

‘ E—‘J

 

 

H m
09.0m m.ca m om.mm 3H mmw
30.3u mm.:m NH Pm.mm mm o;

 

ll; I... ll'

prchmL haLLdz pcmuzmx pasuda pgcopmm AmQFJa

 

 

 

II‘III .... .l‘."“ ..3

 

‘5."

.111 .\.4 4;. - -. z...
Qqupr¢¥wcaz rmaaoprm ng+mx¢:p;cz Qa¢COer Lhu4caw.

 

 

 

 

 

 

“II.“ cunt-LR-) I .‘ull t I jilvnllllalllll‘ll.l A" I" ."uuluf’ul'l‘l' |I .-r 1‘ 1 I‘ll! IIH'H d l llth
wuez¢xuqn was pwmfi u«n h axon gun zxzb
wwww nmzug cmq:vuqnmu; pom mgoe an“ new m>vaamm now on «s.¢:oov .dw: mama;

waaqazzdanz

IIIV.‘ I (IIII‘IW‘ULE‘J‘I‘II‘EI’ I I’ll \Il-Ii‘

 

.lu'cl" in!!\ I

...I--. ... ”3.4.4.. VIHILL E Fro...-h._r NEH. “21.11.4434 HH.... H w + 3E
.4 .4 u .u NH m~.m w rm. n x
.w.:H an mm.mm CUM mw.nm Om mw.§m mw managewmpg o:
......“ o 4 - g. H. a... . NL d. M mu . w 0 NJ mi. .m 4. WA $441,733. p.359 5:.
... , m4.34 ma mm.wa ma Hm.wfi ma UmUchmaoh

mdam¢m Ugsgm
flaw wcwqm

. J.

o
r 4
f \
J
‘-)
O
r-Q
J
I
\
.4)
"D
o
,5
M
f\
I-)
‘ I
o
r—l
9

444om

 

 

c r. 44 .. . ..l 4.
4.4 n m4.m c: mm.m m ,.. o a
.44 -4 .p.m N4.44 NH m.~4 w mogmp¢uwpg on
. ..u
,. C

aoa>gmn nchgzL

\" ‘\

t‘\ u
:3-

o
{-1
K“)
(‘\
...;

'N
o
(4 C“ H
5:17
«3 (\1 ml? [-
N
N
—Z.f
o
L)
N
U?
\o
[\4. rx
J“
o
7\

UmmmMC4a¢LL
mufimww uu¢pu

4’“
.9
—.
L)
“g.
-0
v-
H
‘3'

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

”L-up;, wxw wmnrn4 L!“ 4Hmhm. mm: mmnnwa pm. 44409
4¢.4 x mw.w n m~.4 a 49. c x
m.. 4 M4 mm.:m m4 mo.4 m4 mm.wm N mccmpmmopa 0;
«2.4” up mm.cm mma 4x.qJ wm :H.ns ma moflbhmm umuOQSn
4 .sm 4m aw.:m mm 4:.mm ma mm.4m m Umumxomnmpm
4:44m
at .+fiwwmqw Lc~anr pgmopgg L¢4pzz vcaopam pomfidz wcscpmm hwnfifi?
mocmpmmmpm
memmMHM;MHMHMmMH MMIWH.£mwwmm| cmowpmfiu mwaua Cumbncwvtwom
.Jti111 - - "wwwmlmmUpm know pmmmpm 50% mm «Hampmbc 1! .4x4 mammw

x a. .,__ _ g4 25H542

lll'll | I ll lll‘ltlllr ll‘lll‘ll ‘l Ill llllllr.lal l... ll

{:1 llu‘lql‘ollkll.‘

y l l..'lll l.|l-Jll..llllll.lllt

lull \ J! l II llv‘ldllltllll {ill-Ill! II

-x‘ ll. 5:1«lyill. ll. l.4l1l.lll.l

4 .1 O
a 4".
l u . l}
r 4N. Y1...
\.. .. l‘. .l
. ~ .u '1.
r4 (

 

; l. I n!
$1.. L...\

4.: a
1.

 

ll

Q l J

s; ..rl‘hrl r...|..w..... L~.

Illlll’lli llln l 'llll llll'

E

.llvl.

... ...Cci. e... 1.4+ 4.4.64...”

 

 

l ‘3. .I.t|..l ll.nll’llll‘l' -I

fi

T‘-

C“

H'UNH

«.444

Ill.lll. l l lllll

I.

H

I» c G

\v.
a!

Ill-lulu. Fl. l I Ill-Ill.

.y44.4

A)LJ~NHM§~'H

ll ll ulnllll.“ul. ll

C4...,........,.0L:m rampw

 

4.5.0.1)-.- 11.)-1

a r., A. rux‘v

 

\ 4 O .1...»
ON. C0
\ \O . I
w n. 4..- 4
.4) 11.54
am: p.

.4!
L} 0’

I \
l

m 04
H

fin . 4 4

.> o
u: 4

d
o
7:)
'“‘
l
r4

 

o
lJ'x L1\ {3 C"
~ocu

A24“... \nfl
- . .4 .f
“‘l-‘
I . .

_ 4.

‘ \
:\/,O ..J

 

‘. fiq‘ . ¢ .1 .
critirqu r. -4. .74.,“

11)!

..«r.& 1.44 _

 

lv’.ln.. 4
F .....Wr. +'\P

ll- lllllllllllul l 1l‘.la§lll.lllllllll 1

.1. V 'lllll‘. -Il!|ll.'l

...: 8 94.4

 

H-.. 0%

4.4.35.4. .4.

llll‘ll.ll ll‘llrllll.ll I ll.

'll‘

Cu" CVC

v

 

.... 04H“ . ..

we
ma
HH

5"“

(K)

N (7‘. [\— mflfl

A. v) .
. .
'1‘... .A—sr f ”F

4... ‘I “.‘lIl‘-.‘I

PM!“ «...».U .1

 

 

[

ll... . 'Illlllllllll’l‘. -

III I’llllll lilo" "I‘l‘lllll.llllll '1 ll 4:41!!! i

mound“: to“. i

i mam on
LWCU + 4.3.2
mm v: .mL4

4) .44.. 1... .u
07..."..L4M.‘ ..YI.I\ s-gvrm

OH mucwnwuspm 0a

on mm¢ppm- Lmrowu.

m nq;-4gvvmgm
pcflqa
.-liillJiIiZiFIIqil;till:el

 

ll ll" li’l‘ llllll

o: 4.3 3.9.3

Ill-'3‘ ail! '1‘ {ll-.4111"

 

-{I‘in‘ll} 4.. II '34 ’11! 1!. il ft‘ L {n‘4 2"}; «mini: LII I". I’.i‘l’l¥.llllllllil ’filll' ’.x‘|l..l| .n'III..-!\.|’.ni Itl'.. ‘1'."

‘ . l ‘ + \r .4: I Ion w ‘1...4. III. I ‘5? v . v) . \ 4 . a) .1
. 4 ,r 4.- t. 4- ,r :v 4t~ pg. 4» n r mm «up.p
h. 4 .4 IA‘l .l-II. n a 15. '01 . .' 10" "il‘l 4'».’|l|lll‘£f' '0'... I‘I ll; 'l'll- at
_. o. . 3 a-.- o H. . L. o .. .i. 4 I. o. a 41
..L . .1...” fl ....4 \L _ .4 LA. r — ..u. r n1... 7.. 3L 5.
4.1... 4\ To; 4.3. an. 3 .34 . -. .. g.
- .F j . 4...... r; .. a 44.... H a .. _ 4 A a .94
Jul . \ \ .44 .) ‘3 .\«.N. 4| ‘4 . 4 \H. \4 u\
a... .. - .( 0m. 4 mm 0. fr um 3.4.4.._,.H .3 “14:4. ... ... 4 ..4
..Jo. .-. 4.0.4. h ... \.o a 43 1.xd
. .. 4-. -.u 444:4 4 r .....Q at 1.4M 0». m m. .4 4.44 l 4r.
to ...4 W... ....x 3.0-..) ...\ .1. _. 3- ....-.3 4w.)
...; .r... ... no r 4 an . .40 4...... Co a: Tu a .. u x (74:43;
0.444.423.“ 050.44...
[I u... I. 4 ,. 7..

.. .\. \4 O 4 .. .... . .
4M..- ”3; 04;. 420 45.1.0434

ll:- uxil filunl tun..-

m m om mm}: ma. 44.4.4.2

Ne.» w 4m.w
\ -

 

t
O
"K

I
r'“
, r, 2
L:
u.“
v")
...
"D
'T
H

(7

3E

 

|h\'

,
\

l‘
f‘."

‘0 ~13 r". OF}
’1
+3
1')
E44

. ...m m 4H. m Ra .. .4. 9..
m3.d mm mm.h my am.n N 05.0 mam u mom
4...... .3 3.3. 3m .....3 4. 43.3 ”33 u . mm.
mm 4 mm. mmm M4,. .m .4 Ham mm 4mm am m0. my mm ”mum «fludcu

mow.4...m..m «Edy:

.1 .4... .
. m mg 34 u
4.: . 5;.m AH mp.~
N N ma mr.mH

5m no.m
a o~.n~ H04 mm.~o

i o
r...

‘ W ‘ ?
["1

2

2

f':

H

J

J

”“1

,4,

o

H

«\ Fe?
O 'C‘
O ‘.
0' a
‘5‘)
9—1'
) ‘4
F“
H
M
M~0
cO

H
m
m,
0
r’)
,4
O\ b—O) H n
a."
O
7;?
04' H 4:: O C
I )4
41’
IN».
I
b I)
g: m 0 U\
(‘J m (\-

(‘N
Cd
74:
If
N
$4
'I
‘\

g

cw r~- Cf) u

| *3
(.4
L:
[r

 

 

 

' I. t J\ i I 1"... ‘1'! '1! Ii'..‘ 4 ”‘ll;'ll'n‘..'ll|. '1'. 1 I'lIIII. .‘II‘II‘IJII‘IIJ.}I’ '1' tl‘!!1a... ‘Illlll
... s. I. . v. .... I4. .-.4 .4 q... . .1.I . v4) 4 ”44¢.“ I. '9‘... I. 4 4r)... \4 ... \l . ‘. ...-4.1).;
TLCCLQC thfi.frl~;2 PLC(r..Qfi.. (4.0....FrJ/4 QLQQSQL fr...u.L...€:4..a_. +CQCLQL. (rkfé:f. Jan

Al‘ I? I It {I 0.- ’.'.-. 'III'. 1’:a.llu-ilil"4 Illa-l. -fllu '.‘v|.'.|a. ‘IAIEIIIIII

 

I‘ If?“

:.:acL:. Chmc4pc: mqme nmrgwhm cnofinqu cppcz :mwbmcwvfinom

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

. C‘stu In. 44" '. ';‘l..'i|l4 ‘l‘lo ..1!§|[lll‘sllll}l.'l.l. ‘JI'LIV I. t! .--!‘I.II .4! ’pullrl 1 I .III ..'i-!'.l4!: '1'
II. - I‘ I1 ...-'1'! I'll’l-trl.llu - B's. .4. l‘ ‘ ll 4"

1"!" IA 1*. ‘l‘lu.JlI|IV \ \Jlt‘ “ ‘ C .. ‘ i J .4. \T | \n I J.

Il.\... ...... ., .... 4 _ \J ‘. .4 4 ‘1‘ ‘2‘ . \. J‘un4«¢ 14*:«1. . u ‘4. .. q l I. ... . .‘I. .I .4._ .. . _A4l. .

or.w.414 .4 \PL.L(nV'uInM 'PFH.) Orphkr (4. +f4 (k _ ‘4 (V r. q +£aa‘.o\r.fvfim 4.4f. L. .r. ~ — Q {\WKE

44, n.3, 2.3 H95. ,4.

 

 

 

 

ll... val: ifliiigi. I‘ .II .t» .’I} v‘tll} I.) III I- ‘ll" ‘lillil” v.31] ‘l'lf‘ l.l.‘ll.l'.'l4 ...! I... . ... . I'll. .- {Illih‘vlfln‘u {$34! .IIII I ‘1

7m.ua~ mm L .1?M 44M L).fifia my Mung
41. .IIITLIJI. [Hf [ll-"III L ill ‘1 Iyl’x‘ll i .
:C.ww n ,? r j $9.7 v A
. LI \ .| ..a v 4. \. ... : ~ \ .\ -
c~.x m :0. u u ur}a w 2.6; 3 “JP
as. o mo.u L L:.o L wnw n Lam
an. o on.nfi AH c:.m m wag u mmm

\v. a . \ \ x . ... ,
nm. n ma mmomm aw ru .30 Cu Mwa mbap

cam unflam

Hfipoe
N
Quad I rMN
MA» I :m
mi . “,me
Mmm Luv 3
madam? UC L-

’7\
t _
‘3
O
n.)
r“!
1"\
P \

l‘
i‘

 

 

as.qaa mm: mgmmwa

my.ma m

mfi.m a mm.c
o

If

C
O

u’
~§
N

C‘
(‘1
I

fix v. o
CD. ... _y ma
~,.u ma mo.ac

(“—21 H U\

\

C

H

H
U\ 0\ ‘0 UK

m
0

OJ

‘N

m9.DPA mil aquva mu No.7fia an ampoa
d1. 0 CC. v mH.m N X

No.0 H mm.g H ma.m N yum u mm
:a. o m_.q H Ao.m m mg» u w
on. o . m :N.afl 2 mm: . w
mm.mc m A . ”w.qw mm , Mmm Lwocz

 

 

t I ' illiltis Ill"

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

«cqumm 3;;c:a urn LmL Lpgfifix pcmcgmx Lm,»z .4,z
+cmchp
rumzmgtaw cry :achan :memmmawLea nqomoLsm cxa+uua
- 5?“: .1 .. .. I! luv...I..l.. III to! 1"; 1|.1‘I I- ‘11. ..IlIil: HH.HH‘H‘U‘h‘I‘ \ll ‘H‘I'lil‘ul‘ . gill. 3"!
’!-nll'l|l III‘ '1' .1! i

 

 

 

MswVfiy;wqm\_.U\u(vJ.ql PU'PL Krpwl dad.» ONIII-Iq PM (IV‘4 OHMrpxrxr MHV mtmmwmymtw...

U
-s
Q)
Ch
4.:
Cu
{4'
‘w

(a Av.ucouv 44mg mng@

M ,4.qu#.w. .ZJCJ nguvg

a A. mg
n F...
oo.cg

figc.axu

l‘i‘i’-‘l

.+..|M...,.fr\an.w.Hm hm»

I’IIII l‘l‘

Smflkwfi

1| !

3.5

2 .
muoom
mm . N

mmnmma
so.
4N.m
NH.£L

mwmwha
TC C

mg.om
Hm.m~

 

 

 

 

N ‘1‘!“ N [3;
L ”,3
”NF! '

r4

3 m9

(3 0

39mm

\\oMN

,wwwwa
cw.
mafififnm

Nauogdm

.4

.4
O

.1,

.C' b—

*0

“W
43r4

Q3

 

 

ngoa

K

oz

mm»
mvfimmx UQch
vnm pcflam

ampoa
x
cz
mmw

wfifiqmm cchc

Hmpoe

 

 

 

 

x
02
mmw
pcwaw
pawn
UmmwxonauLL
Umm:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

mmnmw mm: mmummH mum .mmnmmH .wmmH HNLOL
”9.0 H NN.N oH mm.o ax x
No.:N a mN.nj mOH NN.NJ mgm mmw
09.0w OH m,.N: NoH mo.Hm Nmu o:
”31.?” Mwfi UHHOaHC
cam chHm
MmmwwH mu. mmwmnH mmw nhwpm mam Hmpoa
H .LH H UH.N m Nh.o L; x
NN.NN N Nu.Nm NNH mm.n Hum mmL
N¢.NU o oN.\q mzH mm.og 0H4 oz
muHomu ogmpc
mwnmrH .mnl mo.an mww nwnme mmm proa
@m.o c mm.4 m wH.o LN x
mm.nm N oc.m m: 4:.Lm JQH mmL
No.00 a om.um No 04.0m NJN ox
ps¢qa
Lzmopam Lch Z; Lcwchm LcLasL pumoLcm LLL::Z
I, LmHHmm
:mflamn UHHOLLNU pcwwmeOLL

 

 

 

 

 

 

Lou swan pmw

0

Ummmmowx pox
smem Low mLo; mwm

Lw3. &HLmemfioo

ZOHQHAML

sow w 0440: new on

.qu mHsz

 

 

 

 

mj.oo
NH.H
o.u
mm.mo
UH.NH

 

DWHDWH
Or...
mwofifi
ma.>~
HN.HH

l
\

L
A
u’

\
r

...I.
--

10 “n Ln
J (YR 'lJ\

N

“(m

I

km

0 O\ 1...". N
N N (\J
H

 

2). _ x H

 

S .N
Hm.wfi
m3“.
:5

moowmd
mm.m
m4.mH
mo.fiw
wo.HH

 

 

HmH
mam
mm

Hmuoe
x
ooCmmemLL oz
onPLma LmLoLdm
flawexuacmLx
moammx Uchm

may chHm

“Low
x
woummemLm oz
moa>Lmn Lmzopdn
UmmwxcmnmLm
m

A1

muHs : scfigm

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

mm.onH ml: mhmme mb.an mmm Hypoa
95.;H H NN.H N mo.N m x
L9.¢H H NN.~N on LN.NN 3m mocmgmmeL oz
Dooom m :o.mm om mw.wm Hmm mUHmen Lmzopsm
Lo.gH H NN.LH NH mm.NN 30H cmngommapm
paflam
anchL LwLHdz LCQUme LmLE92 pcmome LmLEdz
moCNmemLL
.mwkew vHHOCLmo V pcmemuomM
”mea nmeL Lao» him 09 LameL mow om.dHHNLw>o .¢mm mHLwe

ZOHQHQLE

 

 

j

 

i.li . Il'

 

Pt; L... {H ..t PsiH .....- H38.
mp.mN m Ng.g 0L Nm.4 LoH x
NO.“ H mn.m 0N NH.m m» aij : «mp
LN.U H 0N.m CH N@.o mg «aw . wow
HN.NN m om.m m mm.» omH mag . HmN
mm.mm m mm.;N @uN mm..d 02w amN Laban

wvwmwm UnnLc
Gum pcfl4u

.. Ft

mbhmmH “mm wawm mum Hapoe

no.0 Nu.m me x

La.o mH a;.o m wooH . HmL

mo.w mH oo.m 9m Map I mom

mz.m NN LH.:H as am“ 1 Rmm

NL.NN 30H Om.>© mmm mmm Lmvcz
WCHCNP Uflm (MC,

(\zr"\_ r4. “t"
(\1 m C) r—i ‘
o

p—l
N m O H (“\le

.
(\l’flo H‘VI
Cdm

_KWHWHH WHH Dfi.wma mM; HMLOH
wm.H m m mm N
mm.: m L a _ 0N mocH mmN
mm.a m mo.m mm Law u Rem
mo.m 0H Nq.HH om was s me
03.0N be No mo mom mmN “mus:
chHm

 

90.3
Nuooa
mm mm
Os.flm

(“NI—{COVE

 

accuLmL ngydx szoLmL mefisa Lumome LmLEdz
pawome

 

 

 

nmflxmw UHHOLLNU Lampmmpomw

 

 

 

 

1104 .|. film (:\I .....0 ‘o.. \IU.\ 3".I»- .I ll ‘ \ I. ‘
mdmt¢g grain tru flow 9m awe; ;CM mo anw+cuLL¢L pmfi? .mmU mHLmE

'

ZDHCHJLL

f: '1‘; 1'1 UN

v
_I&

Lu

‘. lit,l‘ll‘|5‘h“l.‘r-.".ll {““-r"l

OJ. } no... I
4:“; a. Jim _rmx
3 ML.H a
Yak ...... . . .\I
;p L& %H n.
~\. .. \ .lwwu
_ 2. uh. ..r. 4?.

|r\..
1 \-
l
o
F‘i
’7‘
\
\
r “1

 

C.
‘l
\1
o
P"
N

.... Heomfi v
- ma.qb

h. 1
A J
'1' \J

U\
L.

m
(‘J
r—‘T

 

iii Ill“

 

I. ......

iii! I.‘ U .I ‘I'IIIII: u! .l ...]..l".

 

\ l 1
m4...” fifi.0fip,.fi
Av 1.3.

1‘ IL)..«~\
."J m: . n
to 09.:o

\\ \.\..\..‘-. .
WU F .. ... A.
I

 

Oi.
N Hm.nm
x\.aw

 

Uni-£11

A

.4\
3H

wxrar4un
(V’x ”
H

I IL...

a... .__ .2

 

do.hwfl

{ar‘

mm.a
mm.%w

4m.9~

 

63.1fia
m¢.H
44.ww

said.

n’;"‘.l"l‘l’n {Ei|l.i '7‘!

.. I 4.. j )
‘N _. s 41....
b I: “
Ir!

\
0

.q (j) m'h\
"j? LI
("4

.. nww
ndangu Damhu
tam epaam

I.
i

"d
J \
r"!

>4

\
s

-4<w
A

(0

x.)
>4

Wu) ......» .... L
r , ..

(“Hr—4.
f“'C\J

 

I'IIII‘IIII‘III

.l'l'cl‘,’

$+ «1L an. .tvrlu'fl.....l. 4..

liv' 'II'

.L.m mua;m

 

 

Q cmywknw..~‘

(m nqflntfiuw/

 

 

 

 

 

zgugtuvgua

..«rt

041?: . .| ‘-

.;u a.

Lung;

...!!! {In D I- .‘It.!'

 

 

. II - .51‘0 1’ I II. .II‘ II. i‘.1.1i‘.ul.l.“ai -

 

 

l
I
I
i
i
s
I
i
i

W”_M “MW. "y..d:H uh .3-.d:H mm qu.néa 42m Wu .th. mma .Hwkom
. a M

N
z .y. . 3 N“. . :3; mm 8
Mn £1.5m mH nmaw OJN mwoow Ix: mu.?m NJH mow

mUwaL sszr
cam pcfl4h

Pr»

 

 

 

H mm: mwnmww mMI we.vhm mow mm] 2H my obnwra wa Ange;
: UN.H a an. H mm. a oh. 3 x
m 0;.am ma mu.mm Mg A5.mm Hm b.2m mm o:
n m ..m mm mw.mM Hwa H~.o~ nwm mm.m. rw am»
mvaimm wc.pc

(‘J
_J
O

I

7
r4
?
O
'3
‘1
J
P4
A
i)
O
P
H-
\‘J
,,.
C‘J
3
L)
O
F‘
‘1
:4
L‘
A I
H;
+3
0

 

 

»
'11-. ll ... v-1! ball I...

 

psfiam

 

 

 

 

I I.'|.|' "“ 'I“ i ‘ ‘1' l .‘I‘ I '
.... ... 1 1.. .. 3.... . q \ . .. v) i . u.. . -.. - I.(...‘_ \.J L.
i ... n H. . +.L...LrH®.. Lil... ...; UNLJULQ.) (H). L; _ ...» “£03.; a .m “p.72... J,“ puwaOe LL Mir. .3.,» P..er
. -u. 3. ..4 .
00 C. av. Lyn. L 0:»14
it- -II..I'>"I'I ‘Ia‘Il ‘SI. ‘0' ‘5‘.II. ll.\lll“...l||' 1 y

 

H.211:H chnpcx vaermnr cwaawzna Saw mmafiflxm vmm:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

. I loll. ‘I‘I‘I u-‘ I'll. .‘i'utallllllll I‘ll ‘.‘. (Ill. . .‘I‘ ' I. I. a-lll|l" 0:! I'll L‘ III. ‘.’.“II III‘ ‘1 if t
.. .\c‘ I“|If.u'll‘u’|l.- ' Ii il‘ l 1" ‘I’l‘ .-.‘f-I...‘ -. -n’ I I ‘i ‘ l‘i.l I'-.| II I" OIL-'1'!“ ii.:‘
.1-‘ it; -A‘Il'o- t}. 1‘ l -. Ill “.'.1'! ""“..I.I.’lu.-- -II'I. I ‘3’“: ll .7- \

. .
. J . . .... ... 4 ‘ . a J . 4 - To .. ., .. . 04!. I...) .
0..H.,..«W ... kP,.(.Au...(, .13.»; +.-...(H)..OL aHn».P.~ 3.0x» 0.5.. .H« ”T... Avcpocv .TU .W...L...L.

:gHazusuuu

O .. .
H .H
r
12's .I I I qt.
0 n. J
‘ Q
L ..n\ PX
3 O
J . .3;
. \ r
v I O ..

..il"
I V 4

. \;. ...
..a +-

A Silt-Ii ’l", 1' - i: in - ‘1‘.

.wHH

.1. n . ..
an C
I... \-
«(m H2.
\u\/. I J.
u; 0“

 

 

 

 

 

.a.as ”5H no. :_H mua no.50H mmH Hmpoe

2T.- (U :1

o o 0
('~ <V\ " ;
L? m

 

. m
mm HN.NQ mm www
mm mH.Mm NOH oz
meme can Lg
firm pcflHm

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

L\([CC 0H0 (.r+ CHHHHP 3..

I‘l‘l’ I'D‘IIIII‘II‘l 3‘ I! 1-)-

J

cumszgmcopm pom

ngH:-.

 

mpom

900

ml 50% 05w HHOI SCH

.1u pH urn a..:nH mm“ omnnrH mm: _mwnnm mp: HH.HHH mww anog
- .M H rr.u m mp.m m mm.) N cm.m : x
-N.HH m t-.Hm OJ Dm.mm m4 Dvoom NN Cmom Hm mm»
.m.sp H o.ofiv om m .m: mm us.nm HH m>.mm :0 oz
m HnmvHHy» Ac
-M.+H mil MMthH mu! q,.: H uh! HHume ”NV. .HHHIH mfil Hugoe
.g m HH.; m mm.H: J HH.N m m4.m : x
.mw ¢ HH.Hm ma om.7m Ha wm.rm m ma.wg Hm mmw
.s.mh HH mH.Ho om NH.oz mH om.Ho LH mo.mm m oz
pCHHm
EWJ-HuwW:-H¢AWrzatilmmHhMMMl suHDRHiI pcmoMMMl1MWMHHHII #:mohwm pmpfixgnll.¢auoHMMi.;.fiF:2 4.!
HQHHmm
oyHHMMMI ammmufia IMWUTLQHU -lilWWWWfiHHHflWI: .JflMmmMMmLWMMMI

 

 

 

am .Hmm mH--.

T'N
.Y \.

«~41

I"' x

‘r

O
0"
fl

T

i
;.

Hn.fiHH nuw aw.®wH 01m

J
I .
I‘.

1
i

"N
o
“‘x
I
7‘ ’4
H

 

 

 

 

1. i .11 . 4‘.
n«.? H m;.u NH ow.u Hm mu.m m x
n..qm NH mo.~H mHH NW.HH NHN H~.am mm mmw
.I4. ll. \. I. 1 .
: .... 8.3 HHH Na .3 ...a :5 B . P
mdfladd JQSLC
was HCHHm
.. . .1 . \ .4 I .. 1 IJ : I; 4,\ .. ‘4 \.
wmumwu Hm r..an H H rrwme _pwm 4c.n H r: Hw+19
mm.u m v0. a flu.“ . m x

. r

I'
\"

- O (x-
h" m (\J
.
N (‘1
I”\ ‘J\
...;
U\
(D
‘1)
>4

u u
03.x: OH JO.Mm AL m_.Hn
H w

()O\L1\
‘3“\I—‘.
”1H
‘1“

mUHQNfi

_

waxpw

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

6H.saH m 25.3mH m- do.nw nrH ov.HsH mm H4905
01‘ '111I .l‘ll'll 11.111! ‘I II. 1|." ‘01" I." 141' I .‘ll
ww.mm m oH.: H oo.w a ou.u m x
HH.HH H so.mm NH HH.HH mp Hn.mm Hm mww
>c.qo o mm.mm ML m..mm Ox mm.mm 1m 0%
pcaHm
Hpgcpmg Lugfir; pungaz a;; fix Fiaohmm pnfihzz ppwuLoL n44£rm
HwHHmm
I Ill Ii. 1 111' II‘I'I'D’I'I.
prHH ; tqHwamcr umHHHxnIHFam UmHHHxx
I 4\1 4-114111411111111.” 1) 1. .WI 1W..._I.I..I.J.4. .) .1 .HIJ .1: 4J 4 - v) .4 yflv .4 .. ..u . . q . IJIH1WHNI «J 1.1 \ I. I.. . H4 1 1 O H H. .4 ...I .Ml'IIIH.<.\.. 1111114....”
.. .. ... (I. '1...» .aHvab.b\J.\rg CH(.+ C ......If pv» Q~.- I“. ~.VP0.VH.P)..—£H\AH 0“}: n“ miHJ... 3? 1L oro.> ¢LJQW1HIW4# ...\.> A” I'UO1VCbLONV by“ L \Fm».

:DfiHmC «EH .0

. rx r1.

O .
- n _ r
O J
r. c.
U . ..1 +5.?
.r ., _. r
O .. .
.. ....
.. I 1 1‘. i
o J. m
r .
0 w...
~ . a
o . ...:
..r. m. ‘
O . q. ,
n _r r:
O J
_ L rs
..f‘l r. P}:
. \-
. .

1 F'I‘Hil11111lll‘1'

. . C _. .4,
,. ,. . P
1.1. 1.1.1!

.. O . ..

I ‘

1 . .1

.. .... O .. .u

.1. rl r

I. .0 .

Cw. .. L
\. ...: I

‘ ‘.
1'1!"
.g.
. "w”,

(1:. ~.-

r‘
r”!

o
11‘
F1

‘.'
~14,

uuvh

\ (\J ('\

[\— ‘YW RI)
0
r-pa
.\*

flwnifl Law—1W

.. . I¢ f1l1‘ll‘li

5.!) .
-

..Ih .,

. .
r V
11.41.11
... .y

.. .
.

r l

.1 ‘1'.
JP?

m. m.

.’
I

?\
-' \J
r‘l

I

0 OJ r'\
3‘1 C

H

9:2

 

I

[\— (r. .... n y

‘0

u

+ :1N.(VPM .r.qu.

11“.,va - ‘1 'Li

'1) Ln _3 r-s' it“)

'(‘Q

.Bwncdaw

amcwguag

a- . a
...,. . ...
| . ~
4. . X 9H
J l ‘

9......er

 

...1
.

.

N0.JH
90.3%
No.6H

p. .. ..

 

ll

1...! 4J-I.‘
(P.U.L£\r.d.fi

«‘1' ‘1! 'a '.I11I.I‘ I III I.“ III {II-1" I'll: --.II.‘-lh‘,! I. II. I 1 n. u

I.)
m

rams-r4.

 

 

.l'lll“!

.I! :i.1.1111.§‘i

I! 4‘ ..\ 1.... I .4 1flIvJ.\Jl.u
m. . .. H C r .r +...F
'1. ‘u 111!!! .1“...
1:51.\ . 1‘.
Tr .n 1 ,
1 1i flu-..u_fl.‘~.1.w4.- H 4. .3...
“I? 1o: (.(f .. 1 f,. (1.

\L .
q..mm .m y. .yo. mg;
mlflfifl.“ UC...H.C.
1 4 Nu . . .
1;. prawn

oucmpmamkm n3

muflpgwn hwaopdm

omnonxomhL
wramw: ozmuc

2H mucmhanmua 02
. wq mmfl>umn pmuupfim
o .mfl 3H camsxuummpx

HCHHL

 

 

pumuhmm

aggrnz
nucgflx phmawmw-MGH

HmCOhw .1......MO.M.1..
- (

 

 

1111 If“ ,1 111.15 -.hl LII.

 

a u. m er.” H53.

1“

b. 1. ....

L

y

4‘ ill!

7: .....p....

‘1' 1‘1!

 

I1. I III. '1’! 1lllb111ll'l'11li.

 

1.! 1 Illu- Olll I‘ll-II

0p hmm¢xm row ocxdaampmro

\
.

 

 

Ir...- '.|' 1'..." If 1

 

..3

,.
. .h .. yakv...

 

11.11 al.11!. '1‘: {£1 £1-4lon‘illll'1' -34 ml . r

1 I II . -ii ‘ -.‘1 .’il. - 1 1 ‘1 ' ‘ I.
. \ I , V 9 .1 . 1 . ) . a \1. Ola 1.. . p 1
O u u . .... 1“. \|.4 .. 1... ._ .— .....V A m .fi _ . .... a . .‘N..s., OM ..IJ . fl IW... k .w
4 1 . . F . .. .\ . . _ . _. _ K . _
I I. I!“ r. 1. ll '7'] I LI. 1 Ci" ’1'! -.LI tn-’ 5 v.11} 1.1.11} '9}
. \ . I IJ 4 \14 . «I .u. u A. . _ . . .4 ‘1.
_ . «I ~ ”I. _a L H“ d ...I. W fl . fi. PI ...-9
. a. . l 'J 1. 4 o I) . x x z . .. ii ' 1 .‘1' ~ II ..1 <0 0. 1 a
. _ .\ I. .. u . A a 1 l. .
- 1 _ .1 (v f. cc __ L. H -? zfi r ’0 (2. L z... (T
- . - - . -4 u . - J .3 . ... :H.. .: ... . .M..| H o .. x h 1 _. gm. 1.... J fi
. h. .1 _ .11.“ “Ur\ ’5... . 4 .“ ..u ..nu \ « a “k “v vyL \m JV ...;L WNr... .. .4 I u ..s4...u.
1 C I _\I... . ... 0.1 I. . . .1 I 1|. . l1 .. ,1 . \ . x 4 ..I 1‘
- . o .1 H u c UH No 7; .1 P; 4N. aw ix

. 4 .

j .\\... 1.. .. ....u ... H 1
7‘3th . \.-u» . n .k' u

. - .

‘1 4......4 1.4.. .1
aurtcr rac;c
. r

31...; \ --.. .
«Liv. «u—fi.

1‘ 1.
r1:

 

1'. w 4 x . .I I4 211.. I w c 1 4 \ . I u ~ c I
o. .. . , 70.). Jr. 4.... _Tmow.” 1.x... “.3. ..m b\.\... A“ o...« ....) N$.12...
| I 4 l a 1.1 | t. 4 at {Int-l 1hr“- 11... I'll-III. , ”‘41... P1,I\O I‘ll h.vll10
O C . D \C. . O l .. 1d. .1 .1 )1
. . 6 av _ N z. u m _ n >

4'? .

7"\
0‘ ‘-,.\\ h \

o
u
*4
114‘. (‘\
A
o
L\*
j)
('\ m
t.
o
'\
D
it
If
0
“-1 ’4
r4
rV\ hr
4
0
I

.l

0

-- I
‘5
.
LI

I

r

‘r 'i
I”
_\
J
_\
O
J
‘ W
7 \
7
‘3
O
‘)
r4
I
1"“
I
“I
O
H
)
~u
.)
’3
O
‘ ‘3‘
r1
.3
\
—.‘
U
1~s
‘
-I
1

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

_ _
. , r . . . ...
4 1'. I. ..blL. u . u...l|‘lll illlcllnlllibl ’1!“ 137.3111! E 1......0’F'Ll % O . r:
O . J o O .. . \ O \o \. \ u 0 II ‘u \. \ . .. 1
, rn r~ fl NM u u m? 0 . .r C V
1. \ '4 .. I..al.¢4 + I ..\\ 4.‘ .. ..J \\I ‘\I.\1J H1 )1. 44.1 1. 4-. d ... F
.. U: A.“ _N. _..\ «1n. .\ ~. ‘5‘. _. n. .n. AL v. Cr... .4 fl...» L1.¥.W.+Q(H\1 r. ....
fi 1 \ . U 1 O 1) U _rJ 0 “JAN r433. ax.) 0 HH.. U). H ..1 O. \1 )3 WLA>LQA (HN.N.HQJr .1. _
.. C 4. .. r\ «P. _ a 1.... .I. u rm ... .. ~A .. . . ,
3 . 1 .
. \ I. ... - 1 o I. \\ . .0 . J .\«. 1.x.-.» .013 -...
. . . Mno.u 1 wC.NH 3w an MC 4. :5 5A Jr Wr{.Xc rah:
‘
pnrwh
\ 11.! 11:111.- II I 1.1101 I, 11' I III
I 4 u .. . 1 1 . 1 .4 1 . 1 1 .4 . . .. .I a 4. .fi > 4 A . .
. 4 I‘ .14 ...! .+\..lmlnu ... M1 1H4. A .r 1+ p. ..U‘... 1...- 9“... .14 . ‘1“. . ..«Lffi x.-.» £A4.'.r.._.(_. +-1QAVI"XI_1. (PIM JP._.FL_
macmpmymhu
.I.; '1'! 1"|‘1' Iv..." .III‘I'II'I 3""- 1|:II'
. - - ,- 0 . «r4. .. .1 .. . . s
. v a . .IK 1.“ ”.....‘144 x... 4.....u. Wu/.L_Lrb ..-...J—u— uk. ,l|_.{dv an“... anr.
...:o..I11.HH....,|..H.1...:Ia “III :11“?! .. 1| 11 1 ...... I... II 1411 .1
14 100 I1 11"" I]! I1" I 1 1 I .I. 4 .l4 . . s 1 .All to \ no. bl .J ..
. . 1 4 - i. .. I. . . Q .. 1 t o . .. . <.~ fl . . I . . v fl. .. .wt. .
".1“ ~ HIV u HHIUFM'rrJ $J-./.5V kv.r 1..| A. 1*. .IKI‘ Oak‘. “1F.l>V .(FI — _f..'\r .tzlr. Anu— ¥f§0f\v .. “\U m r4| fur.

.;~Ja_qu.q~_ ...:J

>.wv1\r

. .. H... ..-... um... mt... --.”... .-.. ”...... “PM. PM.
1.. o . .. .. Q o . .1" 9 .. 1..
r. u .... .... . m. . nun :
main 4.. ......z... \. ....m C...“ 3
mm.o a. a... N w.. ms.q a . .
. . . om.. m. cm.§ ma m..HH ma pm.3 DH m»: 1 .mm
..w. x. Mm.m. m.fi rm.fim NF mo.rc a. m..u> mra - m 192::

,. .4 .m.qm. x.. 1.. H .. ...... mp mmuw.. mum. q.«ap
u,. m rm..- Na: m.... n. rmums ..1 m... m x
.-. m m... Ha m~.m N Mm.m 3 um.m N tna 1 .mw
..... .. am.. m mm.. H a .ma m. cm.. m w.» 1 mam
. .. M 4a.. m mm.o m .u.. m mo.¢. m. mm. 1 4mm
.. Mm s..mu .9 mm.o. .. an... a. m4.m~ .3 mm pics.

0H»

.1 . p x

U)
J
H
r»,
("1
'1
C‘»
C
.‘5

..
o
.!
’\
J
a
I
5‘
o
T)
'4
‘I
I
A
0
'3
‘}
«‘4

 

0
F”
‘0
)
”-1'
N
A
O
a
H
rm
H
CO
{,3
O
‘ 4

w
-.z ...r
. f:-
k:
0
C
p-
I“
0
_V‘
C) (’4”
A A P"
o
(w
_, 0 Ai .
r”
O
—~I
.jtfi‘
>4

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

1'}
\
n.
-.o \ 1.0 z... . \ g. 11H. I .. \
.. . \ .... .v. a a r Y... _ U .. .(. . 11. N.
o ...; \ o -J , \o A. f.o\ . 0.11 .l a... \
. . . _ _ .
N... . n m4 7. ,H. . m... u a . .. A u
0 I. .\0 .. 0‘ \ O 1 N 1J0. 7 \94 .J.\.
. x I .. r . I- . N
r. n x. .4 N C: we u .. «N . in 1 fi. ,4
o I .18... .J 1. o... .-.. ...... .... .0 . \J\ n. .J . . .
. v .. a _ .1 . . . . N .f . fll‘ . .
_ A .. .. ”A. .. ... .l u. C. n. .... F ._ . ... .H .L.
. ‘ 1 -
...L rd. v
- l b1 5 '1‘ 111.1 I' I I'IIIJIII'II 1} - r'fhn. .Irl-t !. I. I D. [ ll'.‘.|'l|lu l
1 .. . . , .. 1. . . ... 4 . 1. . . . . .I. .. . ..
rt. . . .o .. 51.17.}... t» ...H +r.n..(.(rr.... (r 2 1. .. +TQL’H.-.. 1.3.3.11,» ... +§n¢..o»...... Cr ..-. r .u
‘ . ’1
_1fl)-Lr..OH®a
C I l. 1" 9" I}- I £01.!" In...
I .1! 1! I . I ‘ 1 . . J1 1 ll 1.. 'I .\.d Jl J ‘1 1 .
A u f n '4. "U . . .1 (1. F r.~ WPP and. L I”- ”.r\P-.1\‘. .mv f». P x C w WL (\rcug hxfha
a 1 III. II 1"I' I‘ll lilv 1. I. i .l 1‘ I! 111'. II ' [-I‘II", I't.’ - I ‘Ill '1 olllllil - 0|.» 'l‘ .I 1‘ 'IOIII'I
‘ 1 . ‘ . .. . i I". .1 .11" Illl'l.lv.lll.1!! ‘Iu'uaill I. cl ‘ll..I-1 . .4 .I.. I‘.l.| .ll1...!l.!|ll“ll|'lv 1". .I.:I'llfh“ 1"- i‘:‘l'1“1|l -I‘I‘I' J. 21-..]!
. . . t . .. ., V J L‘ . ... .. .. r}. .. . . ... 11 . A .F I. .1” .1. ...! , .. ... a . .. ... . » .41. g .. r1. .
P. . Q . ..f\ I1...“ .I.. ... . F... ”>2 \Wa If .. rk .. (.tv “\r a}. .prrqofii . - 1+ . .. PL.L Ila _.r ['1
2‘ z .11 Q ) J J

 

O 1. .u.-\ . O ... \ ..-
F .‘ i fix... a \ p. 1f
I?! v.1. .I.- A...u‘l.1' -... ..Oltlln ‘ll. ill
0 v. u. .. O. _ ..
p .r ... h . .r r q
J . c I 5|- . ‘
F L NH “U H
O . \\ .\ w. .
_ ,. u : N
. . snl.‘ . .. a)‘. a
4 ‘ N a .‘ . P P
O ‘ ... 1.... ..l .. ‘1 In.
a (s . rnc\ M r I‘M-x” ”4. C
0 IV 0 O ...: o \
r W Alrl ..M m. .,~—I
‘ I f ' i '1‘".!5 ‘1‘)- Qr“:
. D1 . |.¢ r
. h r I? F _ ._~
..~ 9 _ I... - , O J
«l. .\ “I .... «Ix! mm “M H
o . - x, o . J
m “v .7 C h C
, .., N. .m H m
... O . 9w! 0 T". JJ
. H .C _r H . firx nk O

 

r.‘
x

, -S'f
f” \ a...“

f"
. ~ \h

a...

'4
*1) (“J

J \

L

m“

 

U'arr“.

:\

uA

xv

,_:'I-'I:'
v.l

(—

g" \ (4",

347 "\ (‘1

P‘ (3“.
Ir”
..

f‘
L ..
I OJ

L”

D

{31

030b-
l'\-("‘\r"1 (‘1 01
H

.W m {Tl-T)
31*».
{H

O\L
—+r+

 

 

’1 {313‘IIII ‘5’! I-

v
.9

l
I
1 .
L»

(1“ .. _

5‘\ L2 Cal
,.._1

' .
l
1

1
.5
A

'I’\
71

f'"

5
l

p)

C) 3-3 011“?”

H

U
11‘?

"T j?

r”

.3.!

.3') f"

\

3x - :1' ‘7‘)

mNC‘C‘ wiléT
'Qawr-«i

- v V
”5|

(“'w
L.
.."J

 

 

 

'\ I'l\ l\ ‘5, I I 1 In. ‘5 "l ' I.) I!» t 1‘"
4., .1. ...., . a.......: .4
, . , n. _ .. . _
.r r, .. (A r? «(a F -..i..osrfifl ‘2. sq; Mfr» V
r . ’ ’ n bf.
avnl . I. .IV ill. I! 'I‘ll‘ .I.“ '1' ’3'... '0’]

... . .

 

 

Umafiwxn-

In"

”a; .__.

i
...LHV ..U

1‘
St
a
I . .
a .
r!
p.
| ~ ...
.v ' fl.
'

...»
.. ..C

.n
EMU:

D

fl CSHAL.

.\

pagan

u mmw
v«&
u Mmm
hmdcm

Hapoa

x

a ”mu

Ihwcm

a mmm

.HmUCD
paw4@

 

 

pcmoumu

 

‘I w . p .. I 1.. .I C 'lllul‘l III. 11‘.I lint-II, ,Eni‘. fly
. naIIlII-II'I ‘I‘n .\ 1“".1", ll. I‘ll ‘lt‘v‘

 

A. I. II. I'll'l [.I‘II‘IIII‘I

 

fill .f'l‘ii‘llu. O.“ I"

ll"!!!- ’3“

 

 

 

 

. ‘1 o hui; .I. V
' .. ..H‘OHHL ‘1...:..» Dr.” Aug.

Hr grub!» «.....nu

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

n,-_ #)f 'Y W.“ ’ F.‘ 1 ‘ 4,. -.,‘ I“
1vuLe bxdo hOW LlE:E_£gnégi_fi$E_LLiELwn._. _ — r-"~«—~-*‘—
. ‘— ‘ ‘1::
Free'ckrfed hut?hor hervino Ln rza?r#;'u§
‘ *4” __‘ _ .-..-
‘I- _- . ..
Ersq49ncy
Number Percent Nam??? Percent Ngwhw“ rnvrefz
_ #_\_ — ~~ v»
T‘ ‘
rllnt
. f) .
().53

\u \A)
O
\or~
1‘ v‘ .‘1
to K)
c~p4
fwd
‘ 1’ ‘J1
*4
F.
O
:—-J

L:
\.
O
(x,

h0.52

5
(U
:‘S’
'—
4
’7
b1

Times a Week 50 39.68 133 50.59 67 ED. 0
Every Two Weeks 3 2.J3 7 2.29 3 2.24
X l 079 l 033 1 oz:

 

W" '7." ' ""." R, {J '. ' {W " '\ ‘
Total L50 lJu.JJ ij ldd.JJ lgu ng.»u

firend Rapids
Daily

‘0

0092 Fl]. 30032 1?: V'.E.3

deekLy C9 €3.08 332 al.09 97 3%.:W
Two or anee

\

CDRJC)

Txmes a Heek 5

38.bé 372 u¢.og 91 f;,s

hvery Two week l.§h lo 1.93 h '
.00 7 .97 O 3.4

X

TO 381 130 1-;";) o {RAJ €133 Qt) 0 OJ 190 11") g ‘ )v

FLint and

Grgnd Rapids
Haily 13 5
weekly 137 53.22
Two or anee

0.15
L3.93 la

[‘3
l‘
‘.

I.“ H
\n (.D
O~ N

\n
\ -.
\J
0
fi

Times a Week 100 39.06 325 £7.13 Ed F?.¢7
Every EWO fieeks S 1.95 23 2.00 ? 2.33
x 1 -39 8 .72 1 .3:

www r5? “T” 4

A"

lz-‘AJ‘ . i) ')

Total 430 30.00

\
\
f
\4
f
.
l
\

H
P...
f!
I.

 

.- '-' “A. ..2
I —-4 4—. L} ..J

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

7" _‘ ‘ . . . . v‘ ‘ . _ ..p ‘
n ! I" 1. + «I 9 ‘ r - f» .r _ . 1 A . t 9 - n ., -_ '
TEL 5‘3 ‘1 3n. ".161; 11‘ 'I.:'.U :13! 9.13428 15.5.1.2“) alrst open f0? \‘ig‘a 14851.4( 8-
'“ r3 ’5' . .2 .‘ l ‘ '. ' . ' 1 ‘3
T‘s-ix. J :‘3. 5.7 1?)? 1.3111“ 2 9..."; a!
—— —._'-‘4— A ‘ u ‘u-um- - . -—-. - I. _-.p,....—‘—‘ Ann-.... — —_-—~—-
r , “H‘Q‘ “‘* '- 'I I” -r"-—v--.- 02% fi ‘O—n-‘C. 2' “i “D“ . J‘h--—5—_c- ‘ *—
m M-‘w-mu \. .n—“w I :v~m.— "4-1- m _. .0 -W-—.-‘-..--2 .0-«o----—-n -. .- ~ taco-cl” man—ww- '— IV . ..a. .-. ...a .
Erenack fled Lutcner mérvxce N0 r. V f9‘950%
I --v * CIR-DP“ -5
hmount
AT. . 1" A . . ‘,, A
T’Whr rercart garner Pprnert F ”’2” ' “0:;
‘ * —_.h-‘..—. ‘2?— ;m-—_‘ .. —- -—l"-_ ‘fi-m‘w f - I *’ ‘

 

 

 

Flint

Unmer :5 2 1 29 5 1.2 3 '.24
9~ - ”9.9? 3 2.35 15 b.90 8 9.97
913.09 - 212.99 25 19.82 go 1a.33 12 13.5*
215.00 - $19.99 25 22.29 Fh 29.92 25 2Q.33
220.00 — H.1..'99 32 26.98 79 25.82 21 32.9’
225.00 - 229.99 1d lu.29 to 19.07 2 17.9"
39.09 - 532.99 10 7.92 25 6.1? (,7;

t‘f‘fiz’:

t—J
N‘
A)
O
‘0
N
PJFJUTQSC
LU
.
T \ 4‘

35.03 - fig9.99 3 2.38 ' j
:LU.OQ and Over 2 1.59 7 2.29 .7,
X 1 079 3 095 0?:
Total 135 130.9“ 956 13J305 192 17:???

Grand Rapids

Undor 25 1 .77 9 1.11 h 2.21
g: JIJ - ;9.99 b 3.08 32 h.21 1h 3.23
210.0) - 212.99 19 12.02 107 13.22 29 1?.'?
19.00 - ;19.99 32 25.62 172 21.29 31 19.;9
22:_>.00 - 22’.99 39 29.99 207 25.61 23 22.21
22;. 03 - ”2° .99 29 19. 38 129 15.97 28 1,.37
QBJ. )J - H¥3L. Q9 1h 13.. 90 ll.lh 3 b.§?
235.30 - 239.99 1 .?7 33 2.08 1; 2.21
21V.JO and Over 0 .00 15 1.8L 3 1.3]
x 0 .00 12 1.29 2 1.29

Tate? 133' 100. 5 833 163:33' ICE ‘IT:I’"

UnCer
VS.UO
$1u.au

.I.)! \4)
‘46. _J 9 ..rl.

“,2 C: 0 {‘0
MB‘. 3)
#3fDOOU

8,3in . JO

- #9099

‘ #iho99
- x 9.99
' QLLOTQ
- e29.99
' #34099
- $39099
and Over

T1\~
l’LV‘V Q Li ‘J

W;.wm u

M'w'- --

1.20
14. £10
1h.03
21.19
2S.b
15.1?
19.32
b.0h
1.97
1,35

—'-‘--o "
l‘w ~‘
‘v \- o v \}

1’.“ R)

H \n (I? \.!“=. 1
-J h.) 12" \o \u r0 ‘4

Jkucrva

b)
L
L

1' ~.‘.
‘— .. Q uI.L
11 .._. i
L 0’ I

.A..‘

1wmy—M'u- &G'vm~‘¢ q. —.vx “——

H
..
I

.

 

 

 

 

 

 

'P3h1» a“! '“ ‘ I ‘ ’v .1..7: + H411 ‘* Y‘ Tr—i1. :1. -r~¢n0
1:11 1t: 1 2‘1. “Hitt- S 13“.? 1~~.-*‘.I‘;:LL':: n 9.3.1.: a :1. 1...? -111“ - r... ._-. 1.x! - t?!" .‘l-‘fi‘: ‘. a

“ w -hrD—o ~.
”u'm- g—fl ——'-_“ fl.” -' - -

 

_ “—- u r‘" — - _-nm —'——r ar-vvc-uu -.'——~~_--———— _ a~ —-‘

 

 

')w vxnn‘ finan- 1133‘ \v‘; Carr“ ‘1 hp \7n Urp pOY‘phPO
1. e. CAKKC, .4 U [C ._.r L) - f1.-. _. . x: -t . _ . .-~- ..
"“‘- ' 'Yfi- — " '-- - '- ‘flu -'“_"n #n 'v“. V' -—
§.
‘
XH‘L1V
r . ' . .. - ". ...l. —
Nufiher Percent Limbmr Pcrceut ”1 we? Pvrvw f
—--—-- - m-m-—.~ -—_- -_... - -m—poo—vanm- ...

 

 

Flint
22.50 - 24.97 35 27.75 23.53

‘U

6.72

20.30

{‘9

y...-
F‘KJ
U

20

aE.uu - pi.u9 57 15.25 3%.9u L9 50.,2
17.50 - 59.9y 13 10.32 55 17.7? 28 20.90
.13.00 - 212.19 7 5.50 35 11.uu 9 0.72
.12.50 - .1h.99 h 3.1? 13 3.2' h 2.90
a15.03 - .17.L9 2 1.59 b 1.90 2 1.u?
917.50 - #19099 0 0.30 h 1.31 1 075
230.30 and Over 1 .79 l .33 U .00
x 1 .7- 7 2.29 h 2.99
Total 126 153733 336 133333 'IFE 135735

irand fiapifls
w) - b2.h9
;,.2.SO - «PW-1079
35.30 - a7.h9
47.50 - $9.99
$13.93 - w12.u9
312.53 - ¥1L.99
915.0U - &17-L9
gl?.§fl — 319.9?
520.00 and Over

3.85 18 2.23 11 0.03
22.c2 162 21.05 b4 23.51
39.22 273 35.03 57 31.31

6.92 162 21.05 31 1a
10.30 98 12.13 11

2.31 37 b.58 3

2.31 12 1.19 2

.00 5 .02 1

.00 8 .99 2

.77 18 2.2
153735 833 133713

H NWKA.‘

K
EfibJCDCJkukuxurokar0\n

O
(1 1'?

H 1.4 ($1
0
L;- F‘MJ-J

o
"‘. l‘.) "’1:

6.

N—v
6-

I
“I

H
C“
0‘
if
L4
:1
C

x
Total

Flint and
Grand Rapids

“... m-..--¢ -‘fi -.~~_- «- .

22.50 - 22.99 67 20.17 23h 21.01 72 2:. T
;S‘OO - $70h9 108 LZOZO 398 35072 3 o ’
37,53 - 34.99 13.67 217 l9.h8 1

$5.11) . 00

'112.b9

7.31

M"‘\ «
o
. _ (TL-)1?
'1; -J ‘Jf‘u

- 20 133 11.91 c.c
$12.50 - wlh.93 7 2.73 h? 1.22 2.3.
115.00 - L17.h9 5 1.95 18 1.02 1.33
$17.50 - $19.99 0 .00 9 .61 .07
@20.JO and Uver 1 .39 9 .81 .07
2 .7§ 25 2.2h 2.c7
Total ”?3 100.01 1113 133333 133:3}

 

 

 

/ J 7‘ ,‘ .1 5. .1
- 1 ' .
A -..—.... _4..._..‘1‘1

‘.(.-v‘

M
- A!

 

 

 

 

u .I. .. ' .1' .. ...- ,-‘ 1 1 ,- - ., - " . r 2 1
aplg 21a. Infilr.+o +;a Jeex1y PCGMQ. 1fter e'uCIIQI 1n 1911 11?:
—= ..--m”- v mm-‘nmo‘ «- ‘é-v- .- -- L._.-—~_,-.-
My w_-~h—-u-._-—-- ...-D“ —---—-.‘n .‘I 1'"
H—— - A

 

 

 

 

Amount

Presgckgy

 

r21.~.tc‘nr_.—r

 

 

 

 

 

Number‘ P«*C@bt. NvfiVEq‘ “croont, NuWVET‘ F2???
FLint

UUGBI‘ .30 2 0L3)J 9 20911 C” 13.0 .
200 - 2my so 52.38 Eb al.18 on u1.rfi
WHO - 2119 19 15.J5 53 17.32 2h 17.91
ngQ and Over 9 7.1h bl 13.EO 5 3.73

x 2 1.59 19 6.21 8 $.97

iOté‘l 1‘0 l'J'\)o*.‘J )‘JO lVJ.\)\) I l‘J ’0 “’

Grand Rapios
Jnaer 130
930 - $59
403 - $89
Q90— 5119
$120 and Over

x
Total

Flint and

“rend Ragids
URGGP 53133 ’1

230 - ~§9

.OU - $59

1V3 - 9119

4123 and uver

x

Total

6.15
20.15
39.2b
1h.62

8.bb

5.38

133.30

3.91
2h.22
So/U
111.811
7.3L
3.§2

I'J'Jov’k)

29
152-o
309
119
78
09

yin-Fwy

can

38
238
135
172
119
111

1115

22.28
12.73
9.05
11.39
JSTEBU

3.2.)

3.h1
21.35
39.05
l“.hb
].(30C‘8
9.90
133.QJ

1“
ii

fi-k

c.03
2Q.YC
13L..‘7

0.03
12.2)5

G 2
‘./..'.

—.— .
\
B
l ~4‘ K4. . J ‘J

You Pglieve You Pay dare 13? firepackaged meat
n 9 \
. C -

I
‘1
a
‘
\

La

Le

x..‘

:‘v-

” 3

II?

0'
;- ..

(U

“?

.- I
{2‘

r

’J

Hd F

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

—.—'-—9~ -r--—<-. - _‘ M*-. g «-
Preoackaqed Rutcnnr Service No Pref range
- “fl 4.4.“?‘37. H4 “m.— s— m :fi—v-v
2e11ef
Number Bergent Number Percent N1mher flur2:r?
A ~v—v M- ‘ ~~c——- h-‘._~ -. “ .I.-m ~-.- ’~——w
Flint
~. ‘ - ." ’ ' ‘ . r" ‘
n0 11b 7 ..C 113 39.95 f

183
x

Total

Grand hagias
No
Yes
x

‘Ioual

b11nt and
“rand Hapius
No
195
x

P
a

Total

.2 80.J0 313 3%.72 11? 79.2?
22 10.92 hEJ 56.19 bk 2C.Sl
h 3.08 kl. §.U7 5 3.”L
:5 13$:53 .533 175:3? 155 155.37

 

A, , - -:- frd—fi
:0 131.).90 BUG l‘JJoJ'x)

O
9 11.3 63h 50.91
7

:0 110.03 1111 153.1)

2 1
5.56 1*0 59.82
5 3

2 16 5.23

\ A.)
"'0 (.3 K71

 

1
S

H
1.;
*4
L

.
I

 

F0

65.9h b23 37.97

7L).C{3
2 .11 I C"?
b.t7

v ‘ I
‘I '-
.LI‘)‘J‘.v-¢.

r--'~~)i--J
fir-“N

2.73 57 5.13

P4.
L)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

1" I.‘ f ~ I A It I A
L hLe bj“. “Ufit Is Ywur hdv~r*+e _Txpe o: uw t:
a.‘ "C‘Au—‘-‘-- A-M - .u—‘—.v -wm ”‘IW—g ~_"-“¢-»J,_f 1 *
—-‘—‘ C _M—w m ‘ “_un.-._~—- “-..- —‘ w—- _I'~‘ . “URI—_‘q. - -.-—— 4 --.-fin - ”—- -— “ .. --
m—Mr‘W—Q (u— .._- -. --.. - fi—fi- - - u-—-~-—d :- A _’
TVWC rfiwecva de DQFDQDP sprvire No Brew: rwnvi
I, L --"' D“ Q 0 0 .I.... -- m --~ M- “—1- ‘ FC~ . '.. ~- '7’“..‘— ~ _C— - — —v
f ‘ ’ \ Y . - ' . — ‘ .. . ‘ ‘ _ .. .. .‘ t
LLfiLLP ;DIC¢P2 n4d3;r rurucqt “ ‘1-‘ 7,3;1 i
U“ W mm‘“ w' a 1“..-“ ~A .-
:' lelt
' .- 1 ’ ‘3’ l b ‘
[OCJAUE S) baaga _jd ‘~‘."J\) I3” lf‘qq‘
- - ' r ' n r ~
flog-:1 it D) 7 2.; 1.44
.. n . A A .‘ .,
JEQJK 1 lQoJZ 7 20 )of‘

9.33 10
3.97 b

019 l
0.35
Co: LIJ 2701:,

.
"‘
fin./V

(I _ I

pulcknn

N fi-H \‘V

"JIAUEID
nanburger

- fl, “'
Lunun mfidtS
bansage

La con
Fish

wakuczxnroc
3

0
))
..‘ k
» o~q
NuU
R)
_‘J .‘
O 0
f“ 1
U k);
, rvrc
' U30 C
U1
0
‘C
—a

\

-owocoo|-memmw
J

.30 o .00 a .J)
x '21; 112. 3: 71:) 2:2 1):: p w;

1.x).in) .EJC) i 1;..1) J w; l is..11

F;
L
m
{1
F‘
h'
C

. 3 _
5.04:4: t3 L10 35. 3

8 h7 ,.-2 21 13.“?
man 1 .77 5 .99 0 .SJ
otee‘ 13 l). J') 13 2.23 9 §,{2
C." icken ll 3.Lb 3 2.23 O 3.Li
.hsps l .77 5 .62 9 5.52
M&flbur70r 2 l.§h L- 1.36 h 3.3;
Lunch geats 9 0.92 25‘ 31.52 L3 23.53
SauSFEe S 3.85 159 14.b8 2 i”.rb
rdcon 2 l.Fh h

w 2

Fisrl 1 .77 '0 uJU
x :I 31.5h 2&2 _,.’

tfi 130 1J0.UU 303 100.9J

Mn
0

"w
L)

mill—‘2}

F»
0

;,

 

'..J

‘~ 7 1"-

¢
L
O
t
k
0

Flint and
ad Rapius

ioasts l3 h1.02 7? .10 LG 1 - I
mam l.L7 l ’

v
L.
U

-

lvai4-fi
O
M)
O
thrd
O
l

O

. \IH
5*0.
I... b—J
;:
b
§
0
— I

-JuO{.S
hEJhH‘JI‘ETBZ‘

S

3

6

gnicken 1h 5.b7 2
O

3 .

Lunch M3a+ s 17 b.‘

IQ

“DNJR3(3CI\P\R
o
(L
‘V
P4

R)
‘0

O
\ (')
fv
'10

53b)
R)
H

o

0

f0

(Drurb\b\nz;'

H

‘Q

I

\ a

k.)

 

Sausage 13 5.0 9

bacon S 1.95 6h 5.30 L -.gfi

F13h l .39 O .00 .U‘
x 65 25.3? 312 2q.2¢ 7h 4;.v9

Tutal 335 113.1, 1215 lfiififi 3’7 ,"TT”5

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

n‘ 7 ‘ a -. .4. ~ - .5. 4 1 ‘I ~ .- s -. ‘ ‘J, A . 1 ~—
- ’ 5.1.4.2. CIJ‘.L10. . d .. .' :C C _ 2’ '3 L’..- I lir ' {I '\J 1 .. fl ‘
w—‘L —‘ V — ——u.s_—-—-_A_ a ...-a. ‘w-———‘- ...-...- -—- ---——-———- -»-n
-B fiv-B~~ f— . ' V _
. ‘ , ... ‘ -._ _~ ' ’_, ‘3' v -
Brp .Cngrd auteuer Jerv'¢e hu trs. ‘-' 3
. V “wuv-~—~——
rrrcont

 

 

 

V‘V ‘ ‘ ~
.1"1‘,4_*:".i‘!f_‘1“

 

 

FLint
Under 235
2g;._ kg.
533 - 7hé
75¢ - 100%

Grand Ragids
Under 25$
25; - b9;
51: - 711
7:3 - 11));

x
Trzal

LI

Eiint and

Grgnd Rafiids
Under 25$
25% - hgé
533 - 7b%
75; - 100%

X

Total

0
MQL“ H
‘NKJ‘I {‘0th

19.23
2 3 9 )8
23.85
33.82
. 3‘0

m
L315) . )1,

26.56
22.27
23.hh
20.17

1.55

m

l. )1.) . 'J‘J

lJJ . ‘1.)‘3

79.70
h.83
2.10
2.23

11.1U

IDJ.JJ

82.25
n.71
2.20
1.72
9.93

lJu.Uu

\AJ M Kn s,__'

1

191
C9
20
13

J \z“\)

’ I

f 9!
-“c‘t‘u
1 3', -
.L.-'-v o -

 

.k. ‘“ 7. ‘ fl - F .-‘ H,” H . -- 1 v- w: J.Lr. u.~1A r.w 1
Table GJA. :wW LOhL diE Yau nausnt gegt fr3m a bu1:—.wraJce .Tk.6Cnu-fiu uxmlcx
-C-O“ . - ‘

wwgfl-o— m “...“...me J. *_~__‘_c—‘—.M—~M~ “——__...—_— C—-~‘ 1. ...—u...- ““51". _w -. .5 3’;— -..-y—oc'uarzn .. -. u—ur-e-

 

 

 

 

...——_-.

 

‘. —— m— “~~‘.

 

‘*——* _v Q—v-wm-‘

 

 

.- . 1.. -' DUI. k» ‘, -‘ '.. J , 0 . -.
Lr1"tfi Prep“¢‘”:“0 Umehwr SrerCe -u IrMAmrnLan
ul‘ 5 _—1 ..--- M “$— w~~~p “-
u-rb :J 6

 

 

D m-
. V 7'_ ‘ 3. ,, Y,‘_‘._. ‘_., \‘ K... ‘-.~-.---
0* llfle mumbkr IETCEHt hdMLET ftlufihfl numhfl? .¢£.‘hf

 

nevar 1 .79 25 5°17 8 ”0’7
L985 Than Una Lontn 13 13.32 55 17.05 13 v.7

cue to Three gontns 27 21.b3 L3 11.35 22 .0..-
Taree to Six Kontns 17 13.b9 51 10.67 20 1*.'

Six Months or Kore C2 h9.21 95 31.3b 33 al.:<

X C hoYC 35 12.n2 9 ’o73

Total 123 IQJ.JJ 333 135733 IE: 1‘71-“

Grand Rapids
Never
Less Than One Month
One to anee lontns
Three to Six I

.77 El 6.31
7.5h. 125 lEoL?
13.15 95 11.70
20.00 90 11.1h
61.5h 323 39.o0
-11) 127 i373

_v—

130.30 E38 luc.u¢

Ronths
Six H-nths or Kore
x
Total

CJO‘F‘RJF‘

CDPJA)
WJKDP
'7" [\3 ,‘7‘7 '0 kn)
’—
J
L

“MD
4~a
P-

;
f .

54‘
F»
s) ,
H
;

, I
l

b
...)

Flint and
Grand Rapids

Never

Less Tnan Qne month
One to anee Montns
m‘ Vonths

I '7}:

.73 76
5.8é I
‘13.75 13;
10.80 lbl 12.77 73
5§.b7 515 37.59 1L7 3%.~T
2.31 127 1h.95 1C “.f-
135733 117

.nm

L-J
«J
L;
PJFJ
Anna
O
CDrAcx
f
l’
O
‘\

{Bx
\nh)

Lnree to Six

Six lonths or iore
x

Total

£"Eft‘r4

F‘
IU\»

 

 

130.03 3&0 lai.-:

h)
\w
0

,I.

.- _-.——.-,

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

‘“ r.‘>~ Lp. hr." 4f: _ (w: {fl «ave HornVl H‘wr': ~W 'v frp- ~ r“; .; "‘3 Q':"* r‘,’ ’ ,I‘ ‘3 ‘ 1 ' ‘
J-w- ., sin-gt. \- ...A x- &- --'C‘-.~./ I.--'--1 ~ .1) ”'53.; - "."I‘A' A". a x‘ a», .. J. . .. ~ 4‘ J. .J *
.. .... -_._x.._....._. ._.....~ - - ...-....“ “...... _.,_,
Prewackevud Eu*chor Service ?43:124%ren?e
’ ’ w. - —— -‘—-—*“-.-l—AM‘
Quantlty
r. ,x._,. '2- , v .Y .. n-— - ‘w , .,-
hlflgwr :ervent Lumber excent an HR? vvrr-vt
Fa“ .-
1‘ Lint

b.25 1 .7?
.98 3 2.2;
57.19 9h 79.:
19.28 2h 1?.91
1% . 30 1 ') {K {:23
lfifififii TEE ‘1.-E£

~—
+—

Less

More

Same Amount

Don't Know
x

Total

H
H

l \.o
\n CO CC

3.

~J
h.) O--J Oahu
I
-o\»«q-qr—
' N‘J‘LCDw—J
*‘J
u‘)
0 oxnmw

5
g}

...:
m
C
H
(.2
Q
o
L.»
Q

Q
5

Trend Raoids

Less h 3.95 b2 5.20 F 3.‘:
more 15 lL-Fh 3 .9? 1 .uQ
5751.718 £1310 lint 133 73) . 2 3 111.9 :21 . .35 12 _‘j '3’- -. . .11!

don't Know
x
Total

(3.15 159 19.08 2} .15-4.9112
f) 170 22.28 H L.93
- V“? ‘1'“ -... *" ‘ ~' F-

le.JO Eta 130.00 lea l 4.u4

r1
L,-
LJ 0 ()3 .
o
I;

Flint and

n - ‘

-

Less 8 3.13 55 ».96 0 2.3;
Bore 26 10.16 11 1.30 h 1.3?
Same Amount 201 73.5“ 59h 53.79 “22 ?M.Jd
Don't Kne‘ lb 6.25 218 19.75 b5 {n.5‘

x 5 1.95 239 21 38 20 5.7?

. - '*? 'x _. T‘P . y- .
lObS :50 lflu.JJ lllu 130.UJ Bud 1»u..:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

' " C 2, -. .. ' n I . 1 ’s f :1*e ? '"a r 1“" "';-¢‘ '
Pr'pgw :‘k a:mj Pufcrrer .lwr‘tioe KO L"'f‘~’-% Y'ez'fi'if” :;
Cuts ...1._ 7". —--r"~~
HLmber Percent Number Percent ”gfilor Fev3e'
Flint
duet or Fat 1c 7.90 5 &.60 1h 7.3?
no rfs 2D 9.9 12 0.20 18 13.11
Rigs Feet 9 b.08 0 3.b5 15 3.1?
Uxtajls 10 b.98 7 n.02 8 u.t?
Brains L 1.99 8 b.53 o 3.37
Sparerjbs b9 2h.38 37 21.20 3? 21.7?
Liver 31 15.52 27 1%.?2 28 15.73
Kidneys h 1.99 3 1.72 9 5.9.
Sweetbregds S 2.b9 5 b.00 S 2.31
Bork Liver 17 8.uo 19 10.92 9 5.0c
BOFK Neck bones 11 S.L? 1: 9.20 12 0.7;
seef oones S 12.&h 23 13.22 1}? 19:};
Total 531 lou.ib 1?E 133T33 53' 1:1. J
Grand Rapids
Suet or Fat 21 . 11 7.23 1 ..u:
Hearts 3h 12 8.11 2 7

Figs Feet
Oxtails
brains
Spereribs
Liver
Kidneys
Sweetbreads
rork Liver
Fork heck Bones
Beef Bones
Total

31
20
12
72
68
19
22
26
21

L0

~¢

arr-r
)‘UO

Flint and Grand Rapids

duet or Fat
Hearts
Figs Feet
Uxtails
Brains
dpzreribs
Liver
Kidneys
sweetnreaos
Bork Liver
Pork fleck Bones
beef bones
‘Total

 

3?
Sb
Lo
30
15
121
99
23
27
h}
32
65

JV!

 

O O O
r~+~<3rxrr

O
V-
J

.
0’.-

FJFJ
O‘Uifr-Q(TKU\HCD<INR
O O
-Q\O
coru

0
—q
£2"

27

3.38
b.05
1.35
19.59
S.u1
3.39
.51
7.13
9.h6
133765

5.90
7.115
30192
b.0b
3.11
21.72
17.39
?.b5
NOV“
9003
8.39
11.26

...—”......—
\(‘t

l- "U o I).

f...
NJ‘NLO

1....
/

.f‘x N‘).’ H NRC -
‘J \C ‘0 CO {0 4'

‘f‘
I, I:—

\
(
k

\f'
O
plmvnzr'

- .... \.L) ‘A‘ \‘;- f"

h)
C
o o
C,"
l\.'.

'._u
‘

C 0':- kn x;

. . .
' f" N \L.‘ (I? ff
1".) \J) H In \L‘.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

m .
101dl

Grand Rapids

Est

dust or ”at
nesrts
rigs Feet
Uxtails
brains
outreribs
Liver

I 1 dr‘ neys
Sweetbresds
Pork Liver

'1

Pork neck Bones
beef Lones
Total

P“
N' ..

5

52.
52
so
97
70

Flint and Grand hagics

an
"n.
82
a?
107
38
1.3
97
97
71
92

GL

'1
1‘

915

8.52
8.20
8.83
5.99

3....»

{Err
o

O O
\J“. a] ” ,
l‘

/

-J\u

. 0116‘
1C.O9
.69
9.62
8 .0L

“.--—-

1’JOLJU

8.83
7.8’
8.07
9.23
11.30
11.02
b.55
13.25
19.25
7.51
9.73
7.52

wow--
'7‘”. ‘ '1")
u \l . V \

132

 

135133

9.§3
6.96
9.30
1C!“ r)
11.c3
2.79
3.20
10.70
11.“). "((3
8 o 37
10.23
6.51

73'7“???
1”be 9 K. J

10.60
.21)
‘1‘ r"

_-

Obj
13.37
11.82

0 Ow

&.Ul.

3.75
10.00
10.09
E.o§
9.91

5.70

131

‘4?-
1. "_IO

1 1.030 C O:
J“. 21. \J1 "O 3 ‘4.

F‘.

-. ‘_T-'. .k_ \

.1.) 3‘ {_D :‘:
i‘fl-C C?

«7‘
7 ‘)J

( ‘1
)
"

"I,
\. '-

1‘ * _-. r 1. 11 ..1 _:x for: L.-d. l» c)? . ~e 11‘ , . =:r. ‘__fl__
3 'I“? ’ '3 “:7 ~' 1‘ Ci ' “ ’ (“1 :a '*' "i , ., * ’ ' ‘"
Cums -""._' .7". ___11~.-__-..
\l‘m1'39” TEQFCQI" t, 'l' r I“ 1"r?'_‘(_‘-'-""g+} :""”1 -6777"
Flint
suet or rat 30 9.C2 17 12.30 39 ‘.u7
nearts 22 7.u§ 10 7.56 20 6.71
rigs Feet 26 $.33 10 7.ho 23 7.}fi
thails 33 9.02 11 13.L1 29 j.;’
Lrains 37 11.00 ls 12.12 EL 11..
.:;;>;reri;,ss 2‘ 2. {6' ' 3.‘ 33 1:) .. 4.
LiV‘f’I’ 11‘; 1.5. LIT) O in 55 1C- x. o -- ..
Kiunsz 37 11.LC 12 10.61 28 ).LE
Sweetoreeos 3 1U.j7 12 9.u9 33 1J.*7
fork Livar 21 6.73 12 9.09 21 7.35
:ork heck fiwnes 31 9.7L 11 8.33 29 f.73
EtEf Lanes 23 7.37 6 b.59 21 7. -

~rr\nkn-

.\n\wrvro~fl

’ _J

e
C
I

1
J
81‘

 

 

 

A r1335! I): B

L’ATZRIAL USED FOR COLLECTICN OF DATA

MICHIGAN STATE COLLEGE
EAST LANSING

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS

I

January 2h, 1951
Dear Consumer:

Your name was drawn by chance from your city directory.
I would like to have your help in conducting a research project.
You can do this by filling out the enclosed questionnaire and
returning it to me in the self addressed envelope.

‘ The questionnaire deals with a neW'method of meat mer-

chandising. This new method is called self-service. Prepackaged
meat* is self-served from an open refrigerated.meat case.

is research rojeCt is one that the Agricultural Economics
Departmegz of MichiganpState College is conducting. The data on the
returned questionnaire will be used to determine the reactions of
consumers to prepackaged.meat, to find out meat buying habits or
patterns, and to try and help consumers and retailers solve common

problems between themselves.

' ' d I can guarantee
Your re lies will be kept confidential an
that there willpbe no future obligations on your part. Thank you
for your time and cooperation.

Very truly yours,

14’/)‘,£ ,vfi &.vfi’ {tax

Ray R. Ranta
Graduate Assistant
Agricultural Economics

‘ ' ' d packaged,
* ka ed.meat is meat that has been cut, trimme ,
55:22:? agd displayed previous to the customers' entrance into the
store.

RRR/ih

Enclosures

fr

Ray R. Ranta
Graduate Student
Agricultural Economics

MICHIGAN STATE COLLEGE
Consumer Survey - Prepackaged Meat

How many people eat at least two meals per day in your home? (Include regular
boarders).
1. Under six years of age
2. Over six years of age

 

How often do you buy meat? (Check 6/) one.)
1. Daily 3. Two or three times a week
2. weekly . h. Every two weeks

How do you store your meat at home? (Check 0/6 one.)
1. Mechanical refrigerator 3. Home freezer
2. Ice refrigerator b. Other

 

 

About what is the average amount spent for one week's food supply for your
family? (Include milk, meat - all food.) (Check (v0 one.)

 

 

1. Under 5 dollars 5. $20 - 3Qh. 99
2. $5 - $9.99 6. $25 - 529.99
3. $10 - 91h.99 7. 930 - 33b. 99
be $15 ' 319099 8- $35 ' $390 99

9. 50 dollars and over

About what is the average meat bill for your family per week? (Check (v0 one.)

 

1. $0 - e2. u9 5. 110. 00 - p12. h9
2. 32. so - th. 99 6. .12. so - ;lh. 99
3. 95.00 - .7.u9 7. .15. oo — .17. h9
h. $7.50 - $9.99 8 :17 so - .19. 99

9. 20 dollars and over

Please indicate the weekly income, after deductions, in your family by checking
one of the groups below. (Check (V9 one.)

 

1. Under 30 collars L. $90 - @119
2. $30 - s59 , 5. 120 dollars and over
' .60 - £589 "" - ""
Have you ever bought prepackaged meat? 1. Yes 2. No

 

 

2; answer to Question Z‘ig Hg, then Omit Questions Q through lb.

 

Do you believe you pay more for prepackaged fresh meat than for comparable meat
not packaged? (Check (V) one.)
1. No 2. Yes

Overall, do you prefer to buy your fresh.meat? (Check C/) one.)
1. Prepackaged 2. Butcher Service 3. No Preference

What is your favorite type of prepackaged meat? (e.g. sausage, lunch meat,
roasts).
l.

 

\
I‘ \
‘ .
— 2 .

11. What pereehtage of your meat do you buy prepackaged? (Check 6/0 one.)
1. Under 25% ' 3. SO " 714%
2. 25 — h9% h. 75 - 100% ""“
12. How long have you bought meat from a self-service prepackaged store? (Check G/)
01180)

 

1. Never b'. Three to six months
2. Less than one month 5. Six months or more
3. One to three months

_
M

 

' 13. Since you have been buying prepackaged meats, has your family been eating:
‘ (Check G/) one.)

 

1. Less meat 3. The same amount as previously
2. More meat h. Don't know
lb. 'Why do you buy prepackaged.meat? (Check all reasons that apply and list others.)
2. Larger selection of items 10. Can shop more quickly

3. Meat is fresher 11. More sanitary

i. Can examine the meat 12. Convenient selection of sizes
S. No particular reason . 13. No other way to buy

6. Only kind sold in store a '1 1h. Other
7. Meat has higher quality ' 15. Other
16. Other-

HHI
MW

1

l l

l

%

l

f

l

f

l }. Less bone 9. No talking with butcher
(

t

I

. .
( 8° Weight and total price are given
(

E33222 222121; 2.1}. ELEL‘E ___f°11°m_'s Questions.

15. If 122.d° not buy prepackaged.meat, why don't you? (Check 3;; reasons that
apply and list others.)

1. Like advice of butcher 6. Too impersonal
2. Don't know how long it has 7. Too expensive _
been packaged 8. Excess bone and fat are often

3. Does not taste the same hidden in the package

' b. No particular reason
5. Like to see the meat weighted 10. Other

1
f
t
t
E 11. Other
t

w
*-
~—

9. Like to see both sides of meat

11!

16. About what proportion of the following do you buy'from a self—service meat store?
Meat(Check(¢)ong;) Fruits &.Vegetablesfipheck§v§one), Other Groceries(Check(VOone)

 

 

1. All . 1. all 1. All
2. Most 2. Most 2. Most
3. Some 3. Some 3. Some
h. None h. None b. None

 

 

 

1?. How thick do you like steak from a beef round cut? (Check («0 the nearest one.)
1. 1/h inch 1 5. 1~1/h inch

r——.___.__

2. 1/2 inch '“ ' 6. 1-1/2 inch
3. 3/h inch 7. Two inches
h. One inch
' 18. How many pork chops do you like to buy at one time? _Check G/) one.)
. 1. Two h. Five
2. Three 5. Six

’ 3. Four 6. Seven

ad

.41.
0Q

l9.

éh.

_ 3 -

What weight beef chuck roast do you prefer? (Check (V) the nearest one.)

 

 

l. 1 pound h. 2-1/2 pounds 7. h pounds

2. l-l/2 pounds 5. 3 pounds 8. h—l/2 pounds
3. 2 pounds 6. 3-1/2 pounds 9. 5 pounds

In your family who does most of the meat buying? (Check (V) one.)

1. Son h. Husband

2. Daughter 5. Single adult

3. Wife or homemaker 6. Other

 

Do you usually shop for meat by: (Check («3 one.)
1. automobile 3, Taxi h. Bus or street car

2. On foot 5. Bicycle

 

 

What are the names of two stores from which you buy the majority of your meat?
1.

2.

Are these prepackaged meat stores or meat markets? (Check (v) one or both.)
1. Prepackaged 2. Meat market

 

How many blocks do you live from the nearest meat market? blocks.
How many blocks do you live from a store which sells prepackaged meat? blocks.

Do you know of any self-service meat store which accepts phone orders and
delivers meat to homes? 1. Yes 2. No

 

Of the following, check 6/3 whether you would like more, less, or the same
amount packaged and displayed in the meat case.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

More Same Less More Same Less
1. Suet or Fat 8. Kidneys
2. Hearts 9. Sweetbreads
3. Pigs Feet 10. Pork Liver
h. Oxtails 11. Pork Neck Bones
5. Brains 12. Beef Bones
6. Spareribs “—3 13. Other ‘A
7. Liver 7 lb. Other ‘__
What is tne last grade or year in school that you completed (Check («0 one.)
1. Less than grammar h. Completed high school
2. Completed 8th (grammar) 5. Some college
3. Some high school 6. Completed college

 

Is your family predominately: (Check (v0 one.)

1. Protestant 2. Catholic 3. Jewish
In what age group do you fall? (Check C/9 one.)

1. Under 30 years 3. 50 years and over
2. 3O - h9 years

m

Of what nationality origin is your family mostly composed?__

 

From what occupation does your family derive its main source of income?

Any additional comments which you care to add.will be appreciated. Please put
them on the back of questionnaire.

 

Dear Consumer: January 29’ 1951
A few days ago you received a questionnaire on prepack-
aged meat. Perhaps, for some reason, it slipped.your
attention and.you did.not complete and return it to me.
If'you would fill it out and mail it now, I would appre-
ciate it greatly. '

As you know, this research project is being carried on
by Mionigan State College. The total time that it will
take you to answer the questions is about ten minutes.
If there is any question that you do not wish to answer,
please disregard it, but return the questionnaire in the
self addressed envelope.

R Ranta
Thank You: may riculture Hall

Michigan State College
East Lansing, Michigan

 

 

 

FIRST CLASS PERIIT NO. 9. SEC. 34... P.L.IR.. EAST LANSING. IICII.

BUSINESS REPLY ENVELOPE l

 

RAY R. RANTA
41 AGRICULTURAL HALL
MICHIGAN STATE COLLEGE

EAST LANSING. MICHIGAN

ry

If Mailed in the
United States

 

 

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Anonymous
1959 PFEPaCkaged Self-Service heats 19h9 Report, Armour ;
Company

 

Kramer, R. C.

19h9 Consumer Response to Prepackaged Fresh Meats. Michigan
Agricultural Experiment Station Quarterly bulletin, 32,

 

Kugust l-lB-lgfiv

Gilchrist, F. W.
19b9 Self-Service Retailing of heat. The Journal of Marketing,
13. ‘3): 295-301.

 

U. s. D. A.
l9h9 Hetailing_§repackaged Meats. Production and Marketing
Kaminigtration, karketing Research oranch, December.
27 pp.
Anonymous
1950 Technical aspects of Self-Service heats. 1950 Report

Armour a COmpany.

Anonymous
1950 Pros and Cons of rrepackaged meats 1950 Report Dupont
Lrompany.

Kmmw,h.C. ‘

1951 An “Genomic Analysis of Prepackaged Meat Merchandising
Jith particular emphasis Upon Sales, Consumer Reaction
and Operational Efficiency. PHD Thesis Michigan State
L'Jollege.

ll.,,‘l‘. o.'I_[| “fl

1 {.‘Inl' .II‘IIp‘

lug;

Jul. (1955
JY 19 55
M 3.6 11:;

0M 22 ’56
no ‘9 5'8

 

L t \' '
1 CC 75?

wow 1135 our 7

 

 

III
|||
I'll!
III
II
III
I
l
I
ll