This is a subject, I believe, of interest to all who are engaged in
apiculture, either as bee-keepers, supply dealers or queen breeders,
and is growing as the business extends.
The supply business seems as yet to be in a crude state, and prices
lack uniformity. In many cases we find needless “cutting” of prices. It
may be said that this is a good thing for buyers; but I believe that
the opposite is the case, for the inevitable result of unreasonably
low prices is inferior goods. When prices are so lowered that there is
no margin left for profit, the trade will not be supported with the
enterprise which is necessary to stimulate improvements or inventions,
or even to put the business on a good footing. The character of the
business can best be maintained if the energy of manufacturers is
directed to the perfecting of goods rather than the cheapening of them.
Good tools are necessary in any pursuit, and seem to be associated with
a thrifty business; in fact, the prosperity of a business is largely
dependent upon the means at hand of carrying it on. If one tool is
better than another—even if the difference is slight—it is worth
very much more, for the benefit of the difference is felt every time
that it is used. A good thing may be a source of profit, and a poor one
of loss. The best is _always_ the cheapest.
There is one respect in which the business is in a better condition
than many others, and that is, that there is but very little credit
given. This is an advantage to both parties, for the seller loses
nothing through bad debts, and the prompt buyer does not have to pay
for the losses caused by the careless or dishonest ones.
It is quite common among supply dealers to guarantee safe arrival of
goods. This condition of sale is unnecessary, as the express receipt
is sufficient, and in case of injury or loss the fact is more readily
proven and damages more easily collected than could be from some
dealers. It is unreasonable to expect the dealer to be responsible for
goods after they have left his hands, especially when the consignee can
adjust any difficulty more easily at his end of the line; this is the
customary rule in business. When articles are sent by mail the buyer
can protect himself against loss by having the article registered;
but the precaution is almost unnecessary, as it is _very rarely_ that
anything is lost in the mails. Of course the sender is required to use
necessary care in packing; with most shippers this is a point of pride.
The traffic in queens seems to be closely allied to the supply
business—at least so I have found it—for as the bee-keeper begins
to feel the need of good tools he sees the advantage of good stock as
well; and he naturally looks in the same direction for both. I believe
that I express the opinion of the best queen breeders when I say that
it is much more satisfactory to sell a good queen at a correspondingly
good price—even if the profit is no greater in proportion—than a
cheap and poor one, for the reason that a queen, wherever she goes,
will represent the stock from which she came. And I believe, too, that
I speak the opinion of all observing apiarists when I say that it pays
infinitely better to keep good queens than poor ones. Thus it is that
good queens at good prices are more profitable to both parties. Some
of the best apiarists have discontinued selling any queens that are
not possessed of a high degree of merit, and send out only those which
are thoroughly tested and found to be good. In return they receive a
suitable price from appreciative customers. This is notably the case
in localities where honey raising is an established business, and
the value of good stock is therefore understood. It is now almost
universally held by apiarists that if good queens are to be obtained
they must be raised under favorable conditions. It is freely admitted
that to bring about these conditions requires a large outlay of time
and thought, as well as money. This especially is the case when queens
are to be reared out of season.
The cost of rearing queens will decide their price, for of course
they will not be sold at prices which do not pay for rearing and a
reasonable profit besides. If buyers insist on having cheap queens,
they will get them, but their value will be found to correspond with
their price. The one-price rule, which is applied to queens throughout
the country, has the effect of causing many poor ones to be sold at
fair prices, which really should be killed. It has the tendency to
discourage the rearing of very superior ones, for as a rule, a thing is
no better than its price. When they are all sold at a uniform price it
is to be expected they will be nearly alike in merit, as there is no
special inducement for the breeder to improve his stock. The uniformity
of price probably originated in the supposition that all queens are
equally good, whereas experience proves the opposite to be true. A
queen that lays even a few more eggs daily than another is much more
valuable, for the extra number of eggs will be multiplied by the number
of days that she is kept. This difference alone, so often repeated,
will in time amount to more than the price of the queen. A poor queen
is kept at a corresponding loss, although both may have sold at the
same price. There are such things as plus and minus outside of algebra.
The buying of queens at present has some resemblance to a lottery.
They should be graded—at least so far as this is possible—and priced
accordingly.
Combinations for the maintenance of artificial prices are impracticable
and undesirable. I would only submit that prices be based upon cost of
production and a _reasonable_ profit.
Detroit, Mich.
For the American Bee Journal.
Who is to Blame for the Losses?