Confusion in marketing trends

It is often said that the more advanced a civilization becomes, the more value man places upon time and service. It is true that the social, economic, and industrial progress of the present century have resulted in increasing the number and variety of the ultimate consumers' demands.

New merchandise is being developed continually, and new brands of established commodities are constantly appearing. Improved methods of getting the new merchandise from the maker to the consumer have been developed. New time-saving and labour-saving services are performed by the middleman.

More and more, the average consumer's decision to buy consumers' goods is not a matter of fundamental needs nor of intrinsic qualities in the goods themselves, but rather a matter of a "purely subjective idea or desirability." An attempt to indicate the significance of some of the trends in marketing is precarious. It is impossible, of course, to discuss them all here, or even to discuss any one at great length.

The status of the wholesaler or jobber

In numerous lines, a marked consolidation of the marketing process from manufacturer to consumer has been going on, with a corresponding decline in the importance of the wholesaler. What, then, will happen to the wholesaler or jobber? For years his doom has been pronounced but still he exists. In the first place, any consideration of the present and future status of the jobber must take into account the inevitable fact that the function of wholesaling is vital, whether or not an actual wholesaler or jobber handles the goods from manufacturer to retailer.

Manufacturers may establish elaborate branch-warehousing systems and sidestep the wholesalers to sell directly to the retailer. But they are wholesaling. Chain stores, as soon as they assume an importance sufficient to justify warehouses and to buy directly from the manufacturer, are wholesaling as well as retailing. Voluntary chains of independent merchants, maintaining warehouses and buying directly, are performing the same two functions, or are splitting the task of wholesaling with the manufacturer. Any inferences with respect to the future of the wholesaler himself must be based upon a consideration of the most efficient and economical performance of the wholesaler's function.

Already, there are indications that the more progressive wholesalers are ceasing to think of themselves as owners of merchandise and warehouses, or as members of an unchangeable middleman type belonging to some "immutable economic order." Instead, they are concentrating more on the idea that their function is to expedite the movement of merchandise efficiently and economically.

They realize that their job is twofold—to take the product line of one manufacturer and put it into many stores, and to take the products of many manufacturers and put them into individual stores. They also appreciate the fact that if wholesalers are more efficient, more goods will pass through wholesale channels.

The present activities of the progressive jobber

These more progressive wholesalers or jobbers are consciously attempting to increase their efficiency. For one thing, they are cutting down the size of the territories they try to serve. The trend toward local jobbing is, in large measure, the result of a determined policy. The intelligent and analytical jobber realizes to-day, as never before, that serving his retail clientele is fundamental to his existence and that local jobbing gives him an increased opportunity to serve.

His retail clientele is composed mainly of individual, independent retailers. In order that these independent retailers may survive in competition with the regular chains, they must become more efficient. Consequently, these jobbers point out to their independent retail customers that no independent retail outlet is as good as it may become, and attempt constantly to help their local customers to become more efficient retail operators.

This group of jobbers recognizes also the fact that interpreting consumer acceptance in terms of specific products is responsible for the growth of the chain stores. Instead of fighting the chain, these jobbers are attempting to help the independent retailers do the same thing—interpret consumer acceptance in terms of specific products.

The independent retailer is inclined to buy whatever is offered to him. The progressive wholesalers or jobbers, therefore, are trying to offer sound buying advice and to stimulate those independents who are too easily contented with moderate success. Moreover, they are offering the independent retailer sound advice on retail salesmanship, store arrangement, interior and window displays, and retail direct mail and publication advertising.

It is apparent that the future of such jobbers is safe so long as they continue to assist the independent retail store to be more profitable to its proprietor and to become more permanent as an outlet for the merchandise that the wholesaler sells.

Jobbing and retailing cooperation

Some large wholesalers, in fact, have gone so far as to organize their retail clients into voluntary chains that practice group buying, and employ group accounting and advertising methods. Many wholesalers are organizing retail associations for cooperative selling. One such national wholesaler explains his particular plan as follows:

After more than a year of investigating throughout various parts of the United States and Canada, we drew up a contract that we thought would appeal to the retail grocer. We introduced this plan to the retail trade and started operating with 400 retail grocers.
The retail stores are all individually owned. We are not interested financially in any of them.
We are using advertising that is competitive; we are using specials, anywhere from six to twelve weekly ; we are giving the store supervising; we are using hand bills in a great many of our locations ; we encourage the use of plenty of soap and water and paint, also changing around the fixtures—in fact, we believe that most retailers have too many fixtures ; we encourage the changing of their lighting systems.
We have found where we have increased the retailer's business. We do not oblige the retailer to buy all his goads from us, and, while our volume has shown increases, we really believe that we have increased our competitors' volume as well. We are very well satisfied with the operation of the plan to date.

Moreover, independent wholesalers are allying and associating themselves in chain groups together with affiliated retailers. The Independent Grocers' Alliance is an organization of this general type. It includes more than 50 wholesalers and over 12,000 retailers. Each wholesaler has an exclusive sales franchise in his territory.

Each retail member agrees to buy a certain proportion of his merchandise from the territorial wholesaler. Furthermore, he agrees to remodel his store and to follow the directions of the central management. From week to week, the territorial wholesalers furnish "leaders" at special prices to the affiliated retailers. The central management group buys in large quantities from manufacturers and passes the buying advantage along to wholesalers and retailers.

The jobber and his private brands

There are, of course, many jobbers who are still devoting most of their time and attention to fighting the chain, and the manufacturer who sells direct to the chain. Some of them are not attempting to interpret consumer acceptance in terms of specific products.

Instead, they are failing to push nationally-advertised manufacturers' brands and in their place are trying to force the sale of their own private brands. Very frequently, the reasoning used by such jobbers is somewhat as follows : "The regular chains will not continue to buy and push manufacturers' nationally-advertised brands, so that if we can kill off the purchase of these products by the independents, the manufacturer will have to stop trying to sell directly and must give us larger discounts to handle his nationally-advertised merchandise."

Such a policy is usually unsound. Manufacturers' nationally-advertised brands are being handled by the regular chains, and, if anything, the volume of sale of such brands is increasing. The progressive jobber is entirely willing to handle this type of merchandise because of the consumer demand that is reflected back upon his retail customers.

The jobber, of course, if he is a large operator and if his territory is sectional or national, may attempt to buy bulk goods, package them under his own brand name, advertise them nationally, and thus attempt to get a clean-cut identity with the retailer something like that enjoyed by the manufacturer. But one of the penalties of consumer advertising is enforced uniformity of quality. The quality of branded and nationally-advertised goods must be consistently and everlastingly the same regardless of any fluctuations in the quality of raw material.

Consequently, many jobbers are gradually giving up the practice of buying bulk goods and packing and selling them under private brands, or they are jumping squarely over into the manufacturing field, so far as a few standard products are concerned. Large amounts of money and the best scientific and technical knowledge and skill must be employed in manufacturing if the quality of the product is to remain constantly uniform.

Only the very largest jobbers are able to undertake this manufacturing burden. Private branding by individual jobbers appears to be somewhat on the decline. However, groups of wholesalers are adopting distinctive brands on special lines of merchandise manufactured according to their specifications. These associated wholesalers operate in non-competing territories so that they have the exclusive sale of the group brand.

The privately-branded special lines are sold to the retailers for use as "monthly specials." So far as the individual wholesaler is concerned, the problem remains one of whether or not it is wise to antagonize the manufacturers whose nationally-advertised brands he distributes, and whether or not private-branding is actually profitable in itself. More studies are needed on the latter point.

Jobbing mergers

Another effort on the part of the jobber, entered into for the purpose of combating the development of the chain, is the outright merger of jobbing houses. The firm of McKesson & Robbins, which purchased a whole chain of wholesale-drug companies, furnishes an illustration in point. This company arranged service contracts with about 17,000 independent retail druggists who agreed to buy a proportion of their supplies from McKesson & Robbins.

It set up warehouses in 51 different cities. In addition to its own product line, this company could sell to the affiliated retailers some 120 other nationally-advertised products. It offered stock to its retail clients at a figure below market price for the purpose of giving the retailer a proprietary interest in the jobbing company and thus insuring his marketing support. A large jobbing organization of this kind can do a great deal, of course, with private brands. It is big enough and resourceful enough to handle the manufacturing function and to advertise nationally to the consumer.

Any complete elimination of the jobber unlikely

There is little danger of any complete elimination of the jobber or wholesaler. As a unit middleman, the jobber will continue to exist as long as independent retail stores exist, and as long as small and medium-size manufacturing concerns exist.

Under our competitive business system, nothing can prevent the individual from starting a retail business if he has or can borrow the capital and possesses the inclination. Nor can anything prevent the small business man with some capital from establishing himself as a manufacturer.

If large-scale retailing continues to develop and if manufacturing mergers continue to be formed, the wholesaler can retain his position as an important independent middleman by developing associated jobbing activities, by the organization of his retail clients into cooperating groups, and by intensively cultivating and serving the smaller market territories.

The jobber and the "convenience" retailer of the future

Likewise, there appears to be a definite trend toward a new kind of retail outlet that may be called a "convenience goods" store. Retailing lines are breaking down, as far as merchandise carried in stock is concerned. Hundreds of items are now on sale in the average drug store that are outside the natural field of the drug store.

Practically all of these new items are "convenience" goods. Similar changes are occurring in the stocks of grocery stores, tobacco stores, and five-and-ten-cent stores. But the greatest advantage lies with the drug store. The Marketing Department of Batten, Barton, Durstine and Osborn points out this situation as follows:

With the cigar store, it (the drug store) has the advantage of being open at night, on Sundays and holidays. The drug store also has the advantage of being a store for men and women and children. The druggist has a further advantage over all merchants in this new "convenience store" classification in that he is the most respected of these merchants and is the only one of them who has the least bit of professional standing in his community.

It would seem, therefore, that the drug store will take on more lines in the future rather than less. And furthermore, because of the influence of the doctor, and the dependence of the community upon the judgment of the druggist, he will be an even more important factor in retailing in the future than he is at present. His professional training has given him a better training than most of his fellow merchants, and by and large, he is the best of the unit store merchants in his knowledge of business and merchandising.

This new type of retail outlet may become very important to the wholesaler. Drug chains will increase, of course, and by combining will grow in size and strength. However, the independent drug store will persist, and the necessity of carrying an unlimited variety of goods will discourage the widespread organization of chain drug stores covering neighbourhood, suburban, and rural communities. These considerations are partial explanations of the McKesson & Robbins wholesaling expansion.

The growth of large-scale retailing.—We appear to be in an era of large-scale retailing operation, if we consider the retail field to-day as compared with fifteen or twenty years ago. The regular chain retail store made rapid progress until the recent passage by Congress and the states of anti-chain legislation.

In the grocery, variety, gasoline and tobacco fields, the development of the chain has been particularly impressive. It has been much slower in the hardware and men's furnishings businesses and in the meat trade except for "the meat markets operated by chain grocery companies and the markets doing business in regular meat chains.

Supermarkets began to flourish under depression conditions during the early 1930's. The Big Bear, the King Kullen and other markets were established in abandoned factory buildings or other low-rent quarters on the outskirts of a city, and drew customers by spectacular bargains and ballyhoo methods.

They have now spread to all sections of the United States except in some parts of the South and the rural Middle West. It is estimated that there are now over 10,000 supermarkets operating, whereas a few years ago there were only 800.

In earlier years the supermarket was considered as a depression phenomenon, sure to disappear with the coming of recovery. When it did not, the chains began to set up their own supermarkets, consolidating several of their retail units to form a larger market. By this step they successfully met the new competition and at the same time found a partial solution for the taxation problem. The fewer the units, in most states, the smaller the tax. Moreover, supermarket sales volume exceeds ordinary chain store volume ten to fifty times over. For the food chains in particular, this seems to be a way out.

Anti-chain store legislation and taxes

The Robinson-Patman Act of 1936 had for its primary object the prevention of unfair price discrimination on the part of a seller in his relations with buyers, but the origin of the Act is connected with the anti-chain store movement.

Independent merchants had felt for many years that chain stores derived price advantages from hidden discounts granted by manufacturers and wholesalers, and this feeling was capitalized by the sponsors of the law. Some support for the charges against the chain stores was obtained from investigations made by the Federal Trade Commission and from House committee hearings.

Section 1 of the Robinson-Patman Act amends the Clayton Act of 1914 so as to "suppress more effectually discriminations between customers of the same seller, not supported by sound economic differences in their business position or in the cost of serving them." Specifically, the Act provides that the treatment accorded to competing buyers must be alike as to the price asked for the merchandise and as to the allowances and services reflected in the price. Brokerage allowances without the rendering of any services are eliminated. Furthermore, any buyer who knowingly receives a price-distribution benefit is made equally responsible with the seller.

Violations of the Robinson-Patman Act are investigated by the Federal Trade Commission. After investigation, the Commission issues to violators under the Act complaints which cover those sections of the Act banning fake brokerage fees, unfair quantity discounts, price discrimination to favoured customers, "knowing" price discriminations, rebates, services not offered on "proportionally equal terms," basing point discriminations, and discriminations based on "functional classification" of customers. The Commission thus orders violators to "cease-and-desist" those practices prohibited by the Act.

Legislators have been impressed by the argument that chain and department stores are ruining the small merchant through price-cutting on standard advertised brands. Others too have been in favour of standardizing prices for the resale of branded or trademarked articles to protect the goodwill which those identifications represent.

But such practices were held in the past to violate the antitrust laws, since no statutes expressly permitted such actions. During the past few years, however, practically all states have passed fair-trade laws allowing the setting of minimum resale prices on branded commodities. The passage of these laws by the various states in so short a time (all since 1931, and 29 during 1937) is in part a reflection of a popular distrust of large business, and in particular of the chain store.

The Tydings-Miller Act of 1937 makes the various "price-maintenance" state laws nationally effective. Through this law, contracts fixing minimum prices for the resale of commodities which carry the trademark, brand or name of the producer or distributor and which compete with similar commodities, are exempt from the Clayton antitrust act prohibitions.

Taxation is another line of attack upon corporate chains. In 1938, at least 22 states and over 50 cities were collecting special taxes from the chain stores. This anti-chain movement, stimulated by depression, seems to be reaching a climax. Of the state taxes which are either direct in the form of levies on the number of stores operated, or indirect as taxes on gross sales, some are mild, others are confiscatory. In Montana a chain pays $205 for the privilege of operating eleven stores ; in Louisiana the tax is $6,050. In nearly every case, these taxes have been upheld by the United States Supreme Court.

The effect of the anti-chain taxation and legislation has been to diminish the relative importance of the chain stores among retail outlets, although the decrease is small absolutely.

Large-scale retailing advantages

The available facts unquestionably indicate that the large-scale retailer—the chain store and the supermarket, for example—is a development in financing and operating retail establishments that has been intelligently conceived. By buying in quantity it makes its purchases at favourable prices ; by eliminating slow-selling items it cuts down its inventories ; by practically discontinuing delivery it reduces its operating expenses; by selling on a cash basis it escapes the burden of credit losses ; by scientific management, careful store arrangement, trained salesmanship, and judicious advertising, it secures volume of sales at low cost.

In spite of these possibilities, there are some indications other than legislative that advantages of the chain over the independent store are being reduced.

Chains are carrying a wider variety of goods. In suburban territories, chains are accepting telephone orders and making deliveries. Many, in fact, are even granting retail credit.

The chain and public financing

In the early days the chains were owned by individuals or by groups of associated partners. Today they are passing into the hands of large corporations. In 1917, a group of five large chains headed by the Acme Tea Company united and formed the American Stores Company which now has some 2,600 stores. In 1928, the National Tea Company acquired a number of smaller chains, added 400 stores, and now has. over 1,200.

The Kroger Grocery Company has merged several medium-size chains and now operates about 4,100 stores. The Great Atlantic and Pacific Tea Company operates some 13,000 stores and markets. Loft, Incorporated, in 1930, acquired 71 per cent of the stock of the Happiness Candy Stores, and later purchased Mirror trade-marks, etc., with shares of its stock. It also controls the Pepsi-Cola Company.

While the ownership of the chains tends to concentrate in the hands of fewer and larger corporate organizations, the ownership of the corporations themselves tends to diffuse among a larger number of stockholders. Those chain stores that were once owned by a few thrifty merchant princes are now owned by hundreds of thousands of investors. The process of distributing hundreds of millions of shares of chain-store stock is going on continually.

The public financing of retail chains induced the general public to become interested in the management and financial success of merchandising companies. It has brought the technical man and the scientific manager into the retail field. But it has certain dangers. Widespread public financing frequently results in a capital investment that is larger in proportion to sales. Interest must be earned upon this investment.

Many chains are adding new items, not by expansion from within but by purchasing of chains of existing stores. Sometimes the prices paid for such stores are in excess of their actual worth. This fact may later cause difficulties.

The chain and its private brand

Ten years ago and even five years ago it was frequently predicted that the chains would increase their efforts tremendously to win consumer "loyalty" for store or "private" brands. While many chains are still pushing their own brands and are reaching toward the control or ownership of their own manufacturing sources of goods, the trend in this respect does not fulfil the earlier prophecies. In fact, it seems to be somewhat in the opposite direction.

When all the goods sold at retail are taken into account, a decided tendency towards the sale of manufacturers' nationally-advertised brands is apparent on the part of the chains. Nondescript makes of radios, refrigerators, automobiles and other high-priced specialties usually do not prosper. However, this fact is understandable. Even when convenience and shopping goods are involved, the manufacturers' brands retain their leadership. The same principle of maker's guarantee of quality extends down to five-and-ten-cent articles.

Chains continue to sell manufacturers' brands

One of the best instances of this trend is the experience of the Great Atlantic and Pacific Tea Company. This organization is a chain that has the capital, the distributing organization and the managerial ability to exploit its own private brands on a nation-wide scale to the practical exclusion of the manufacturers' nationally-advertised brands. It is of sufficient size and extent to possess a recognized place in the buying consciousness of a large element of the national market.

With considerable show of reason, it should be able to claim that its reputation as a producer of salable commodities is at least as great as that of the average manufacturer of nationally-advertised brands. Nevertheless, it features the manufacturers' nationally-advertised brands, not because it is unable to get along without them but because it appears to be able to get along much better with them.

Of course, the chain private brand is still a large factor in some quarters. The Kroger Grocery and Baking Company puts its selling emphasis on its own private brands. Many department stores have "deservedly gained the confidence of the public to such an extent that their own brands are gladly accepted."

But these individual instances and others account for only a very small percentage of all goods sold over the retail counter. Broadly speaking, the chain and the department store are realizing that the salability of quality merchandise is a matter of well-established "subjective desirability," and that this fact makes any private brand, even of equal quality, rather a poor second to a well-known manufacturer's nationally-advertised brand.

The introduction of the state fair-trade laws, which allow manufacturers to set minimum resale prices on branded goods, however, has aggravated the relationship between the private brands of chain stores and the national brands of manufacturers.

The department store and large-scale retailing

The same general trend toward large-scale retailing is noticeable in the case of the department store. Sears, Roebuck and Company and Montgomery Ward Company are very rapidly establishing department stores in small and medium-size cities.

These mail-order houses through their department-store chains have been doing between 15 and 20 per cent of the retail tire business of the entire country. Many established department stores are purchasing other department stores and operating them under their original names. R. H. Macy & Company, of New York, with stores in Newark, Toledo and Atlanta, has followed such a plan. It allows the purchased stores to retain their own identities, so far as name is concerned.

There is also a trend toward the amalgamation of department stores into single holding companies, as is evidenced by the organization of the Hahn Department Stores Corporation. Finally, some of the larger department stores are establishing branches in neighbouring cities, or in outlying and suburban districts of the home city. Marshall Field and Company presents an instance of this trend. Such efforts on the part of the department store are logical developments because of the increasing competition of chains and high-class and exclusive specialty shops.

The manufacturer and mass production

Indications are growing that manufacturers and business executives have a clearer understanding of the fact that mass production at low cost presupposes mass distribution at low prices. Because low prices depend upon low total costs, there is a more general realization of the marketing limitations upon mass production.

Low manufacturing costs under a system of mass production necessitate the standardization of the product line that is being manufactured, and a large volume of continuous sales. The attainment of results is put squarely up to distribution and marketing. Paul Mazur, who has studied and written extensively on the subjects of advertising and marketing, summarizes the matter succinctly and forcefully:

High-cost distribution is the price exacted by mass production. Although the services which high-pressure distribution has rendered to low-cost production are enormous, nevertheless the economies of manufacturing are being offset by the increasing cost of sales.

Undoubtedly this in turn has stimulated new inventive and engineering skill to increase production efficiency, but there is a limit even to this possibility ; and it is not at all an inspiring experience to find the rewards of manufacturing ingenuity swallowed up by increased marketing costs.

Moreover, when economy in production has exhausted its major possibilities, a continuation of rising costs of sales will reflect itself in lower profits ; and even with the hero-worship that exists for mass production, the American business man does not believe in volume for the sake of volume unabated by a substantial profit sharing.

In the future it is unlikely that manufacturers will attempt to apply mass production to the manufacture of goods that are purchased with the factors of style and taste as dominating buying motives. Already there are indications of the soundness of this conclusion.

If he makes goods that cannot be highly standardized the manufacturer must maintain a flexibility in his plant that will permit him to adjust his production to new demand-tendencies on short notice. Even though goods can be standardized, if they will not sell continuously and in volume, in competition with similar goods that are changed very frequently, it is unprofitable to manufacture them under a system of mass production. In the manufacture of such goods, the trend today is away from centralization and large factory units, and quite definitely toward decentralization and smaller units.

This situation does not mean that large factory units which for a long time have been located in industrial centres are being broken up and moved out into the smaller towns. But it does indicate that manufacturers are expanding in the direction of many small plants, rather than in the direction of enlarging units already existing. Individual plant units perform one or more special operations.

When changes in demand become apparent, one plant may continue the old work while the others may begin the new. The aim is interplant flexibility in the light of market changes.

Manufacturing trends

Unquestionably, many manufacturers are already recognizing the fact that what they have been calling over-production is simply the wrong kind of production. They see with increasing clarity that the wrong kind of output must be sold under distress conditions if it is sold at all.

Because they are reluctant to decrease prices, they find it necessary to increase the sales pressure and to accept higher marketing costs. High marketing costs increase total costs and decrease profits. Systematic mass production, as we commonly understand it, does not pay in the case of many types of products.

Along with this development in manufacturing, undoubtedly the principles of mass production will be extended to "backward" industries in which the standardization of goods is possible. There are many industries still operating under traditional methods, with obsolete equipment, that need considerable improvement in their technological processes of manufacturing.

Mass production, however, is not desirable in all of these "backward" industries. In some cases, quantity output may be desirable. In others, the factors of style and taste may preclude quantity output on any continuous basis.

There will probably be a considerable increase in manufacturing mergers. Many attempts undoubtedly will be made to merge manufacturing concerns that produce standardized goods on a mass-production basis, with plants which produce goods dominated by factors of style and taste. In such mergers, the plants in one group can be operated as flexible units, and one large plant can be devoted to the assembly of products on a continuous mass-production schedule.

Any widespread development of these suggested trends in manufacturing should be of considerable social benefit. The drive of "high-power" and "high-pressure" marketing will be considerably reduced because there will be a decrease in the amount of the "wrong kind" of manufactured goods that under present conditions must be sold in volume to keep the inflexible and highly mechanized mass-production systems in operation.

The forcing of luxuries and comforts of questionable utility upon the consumer at the expense of prime essentials undoubtedly will be somewhat reduced. Moreover, many of the industries that still need considerable technological improvement are those producing the "prime essentials."

Cooperative marketing

"Cooperative" has become so popular a label in marketing as to bring about considerable confusion. Cooperatives are of many kinds, of which the following types are most important:

• Consumers' cooperatives: These have the widest membership affiliations and offer services ranging through wholesale and retail buying and selling to housing, banking and the distribution of electric power. They are often radical in their economic philosophy, advocating the elimination of the profit system.
• Producers' cooperatives: These market mainly farm produce and buy farm supplies. At last report, there were about 10,500 farmers' buying and selling associations with 3,660,000 members.
• Retailer cooperatives: This type iS entirely different from the first two listed. It comprises regular retailers, in business for a profit, who have banded together to do their own buying without the aid of middlemen. They own and operate their own warehouses.
• Voluntary chains : Strictly speaking, all groups of retailers associated for cooperative buying are voluntary chains—voluntary as opposed to the corporate chains, in which all units are owned by one company. The term is, however, coming to be restricted to groups of retailers associated with an established wholesaler. He does their buying, advises on merchandising, and directs any cooperative advertising. Voluntary chains and retailer cooperatives are strongest in the grocery and drug trades, especially in the former.

Many forms of partial cooperation exist, mainly fostered by strong wholesale houses, in addition to the fully developed forms of cooperative organization described above. Buying groups are numerous in the dry goods, clothing and furniture trades.

Public Relations
Activities for public relation
Budgets for public relations
Changing happenings into news
Community relationships
Consumer relationships
Costs for public relations
Effective areas of PR
Functions public relations
Government relationships
Labor relationships
Magazines public relations
Methods of communication
Newspaper public relations
Prestige achievements
Public field relations
Public utilities
Radio, TV and PR
Stockholder relationship
Techniques public relations