DOUBTFUL BUSINESS METHODS.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 18802, 3 March 1923, Page 18

DOUBTFUL BUSINESS METHODS.

STRANGE ACTION OF FRUITGROWERS’ ASSOCIATION. “CUTTING UNNECESSARY EXPENSE.” (From Oub Own Correspondent.) LONDON, January 9. During the last apple season some enterprising New Zealand grower bit on the scheme of placing within his cases a ticket requesting that the purchaser of the case should intimate hy letter tq himself what ho thought of the apples, how much ho paid for them, and front whom he bought them. Tho particular grower may have had one or two reasons for doing this. He may have wanted to chock tho final prices paid for the cases with the amount handed over to him through the channels of distribution. On the other hand, he may have wanted to obtain the names of retailors or smaller wholesale dealers with tho object of doing direct trade with them in subsequent years, and cutting out tho commission of tho middle man. Bo that as it may, in due course somo confiding retailer seems to hare sent a reply to the grower giving him the name of the linn from whom he bought his apples. After that it is evident that the grower took this letter to his own Fruitgrowers’ Association whoso secretary or responsible officer sent a letter to the firm in question—a firm not in London. In the course of this letter the secretary of the Fruitgrowers’ Association wrote as follows—and 1 have copied it from the original letter written on the association's official notepaper:—"We hope to land tho next lot of apples at your door at a much cheaper rate. Would you bo kind enough to let us know from whom you bought these apples and what price you paid f%. them, as this will assist us veejr much.

We are making arrangements for the distribution of our own apples in England next, year, and wish to cut all unnecessary expenses.’’ The provincial firm which received this letter sent it on to the London firm from whom they had bought the apples, and in tho course of my inquiries round the markets I had the privilege of reading tho letter and taking a copy of it. Naturally, there may be other similar letters in the hands of other firms in London and the provinces. If individual fruitgrowers in New Zealand or individual associations feel that could do better business by cutting out tho London brokers ami merchants they have a perfect right to establish their own means of distribution. It is a questionable proceeding, however, to use tho means of distribution of an established firm secretly, in order to obtain the information this firm has acquired throughout half a century. Possibly it merely displays a deplorable ignorance of business methods here, but the action will not,—and probably cannot —be kept, a secret, and must bring considerable discredit, not only to the particular Fruitgrowers’ Association, hut to tho dominion as a whole.