marketing cost mango - national statistics office of the ... · marketing cost structure for mango...

Marketing Costs Structure Study

Series 3

MARKETING COSTS STRUCTURE FOR MANGO

Agricultural Marketing Statistics Analysis Division BUREAU OF AGRICULTURAL STATISTICS

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

September 2002

Marketing Cost Structure for Mango

FOREWORD

The third of the serialized report for the Studies on Marketing Costs Structure

for Selected High Value Commercial Crops features the results of the research for mango which was conducted in the second semester of 2001 under the GMA-HVCC Program.

The results of the studies may help the marketing participants in their

production and marketing decisions and the policy makers in the formulation of the types of assistance and interventions to improve marketing efficiencies for crops of commercial value.

Other series will feature the results of marketing costs studies for other crops

such as calamansi, papaya, potato, rose and orchids.

ROMEO S. RECIDE Director

ii


FOREWORD …………………………………………………………………………………… ii

I. Study Procedures………………………………………………………………………… 1Team Composition……………………………………………………………………… 1Research Sites ………………………………………………………………………… 1Selection of Sample Respondents…………………………………………………… 2Data Processing………………………………………………………………………… 2Report Preparation……………………………………………………………………… 2

II. Limitations………………………………………………………………………………… 3

III. Discussion of Results……………………………………………………………………… 3Geographic Coverage…………………………………………………………………… 3Distribution of Respondents…………………………………………………………… 3Types of Marketing Participants……………………………………………………… 3Profile of Respondents…………………………………………………….…………… 4Marketing Practices and Functions……………………………………….…………… 7

Procurement …………………………………………………………………………… 7Distribution …………………………………………………………………………… 8

Geographic Flow………………………………………………………..……………… 8Marketing Channels……………………………………………………..……………… 15Marketing Costs………………………………………………………………………… 21

Labor ………………………………………………………………….………………… 21Transportation ………………………………………………………………………… 21Material Inputs ………………………………………………………………………… 22Miscellaneous and Other Operating Costs ………………………………………… 22Depreciation …………………………………………………………………………… 22Aggregated Marketing Costs …………………………………………….………… 23Total Marketing Costs …………………………………………………..…………… 23Marketing Costs by Point of Destination …………………………………………… 23Marketing Margins …………………………………………………………………… 31Marketing Costs of Processors ……………………………………………………… 33

VI. Problems/Constraints Encountered……………………………………………………… 40

Statistical Tables ……………………………………………………………………………… 41

Annex …………………………………………………………………………………………… 111

TABLE OF CONTENTS

iii


1 MANGO : Distribution of respondents, by type, by province/municipality, 2001 42

2 MANGO : Distribution of respondents, by type of marketing participants, by province, 2001 43

3 MANGO : Number and percentage distribution of farmer-respondents, by size of farm, by province, 2001 44

4 MANGO : Number and percentage distribution of farmer-respondents, by tenurial status, by province, 2001 45

5 MANGO : Distribution of trader-respondents by type of business, by province, 2001 46

5a MANGO : Distribution of trader-respondents, by type of marketing participants, by type of business, by province, 2001 47

6 MANGO : Distribution of trader-respondents, by nature of capitalization, by province, 2001 49

6a MANGO : Distribution of trader-respondents, by type of marketing participants, by nature of capitalization, by province, 50

7 MANGO : Distribution of trader-respondents, by length of experience, by province, 2001 52

8 MANGO : Major sources and destinations, by location, by province, 2001 53

9 MANGO : Trading Pattern, by activity in selected provinces, 2001 55

STATISTICAL TABLES

iv


10 MANGO : Distribution of respondent by manner of procurement, by province, 2001 56

10a MANGO : Distribution of respondents, by type of marketing participants, by manner of procurement, by province, 2001 57

11 MANGO : Distribution of respondents, by mode of payment in buying stocks, by province, 2001 59

11a MANGO : Distribution of trader-respondents, by marketing participants, by mode of payment in buying stocks, by province, 2001 60

12 MANGO : Distribution of respondents, by manner of distribution, by province, 2001 62

12a MANGO : Distribution of respondents by type of marketing participants, by manner of distribution, by province, 2001 63

13 MANGO : Distribution of respondents, by manner of payment in distribution, by province, 2001 65

13a MANGO : Distribution of respondents, by type of marketing participants, by manner in payment for distribution, by province, 2001 66

14 MANGO : Labor costs incurred by activity/practice, by province, 2001 68

14a MANGO : Labor costs incurred by marketing participants, by activity/practice, Metro Manila, 2001 70

14b MANGO : Labor costs incurred by marketing participants, by activity/practice, Pangasinan, 2001 71

v


14c MANGO : Labor costs incurred by marketing participants, by activity/practice, Iloilo, 2001 72

14d MANGO : Labor costs incurred by marketing participants, by activity/practice, Guimaras, 2001 73

14e MANGO : Labor costs incurred by marketing participants, by activity/practice, Cebu, 2001 74

14f MANGO : Labor costs incurred by marketing participants, by activity/practice, Davao City, 2001 75

14g MANGO : Labor costs incurred by marketing participants, by activity/practice, Davao del Sur, 2001 76

14h MANGO : Labor costs incurred by marketing participants, by activity/practice, General Santos City, 2001 77

15 MANGO : Transportation costs incurred by activity/practice, by province, 2001 78

15a MANGO : Transportation costs incurred by marketing participants, by activity/practice, Metro Manila, 2001 79

15b MANGO : Transportation costs incurred by marketing participants, by activity/practice, Pangasinan, 2001 79

15c MANGO : Transportation costs incurred by marketing participants, by activity/practice, Iloilo, 2001 80

15d MANGO : Transportation costs incurred by marketing participants, by activity/practice, Guimaras, 2001 80

vi


15e MANGO : Transportation costs incurred by marketing participants, by activity/practice, Cebu, 2001 81

15f MANGO : Transportation costs incurred by marketing participants, by activity/practice, Davao City, 2001 81

15g MANGO : Transportation costs incurred by marketing participants, by activity/practice, Davao del Sur, 2001 82

15h MANGO : Transportation costs incurred by marketing participants, by activity/practice, General Santos City, 2001 82

16 MANGO : Cost of material inputs, by activity/practice/cost item, by province, 2001 83

16a MANGO : Cost of material inputs incurred by marketing participants, by activity/practice/cost item, Metro Manila, 2001 84

16b MANGO : Cost of material inputs incurred by marketing participants, by activity/practice/cost item, Pangasinan, 2001 84

16c MANGO : Cost of material inputs incurred by marketing participants, by activity/practice/cost item, Iloilo, 2001 86

16d MANGO : Cost of material inputs incurred by marketing participants, by activity/practice/cost item, Guimaras, 2001 87

vii


16e MANGO : Cost of material inputs incurred by marketing participants, by activity/practice/cost item, Cebu, 2001 88

16f MANGO : Cost of material inputs incurred by marketing participants, by activity/practice/cost item, Davao City, 2001 89

16g MANGO : Cost of material inputs incurred by marketing participants, by activity/practice/cost item, Davao del Sur, 2001 90

16h MANGO : Cost of material inputs incurred by marketing participants, by activity/practice/cost item, General Santos City, 2001 91

17 MANGO : Other operating costs by cost item, by province, 2001 92

17a MANGO : Other operating costs incurred by marketing participants, by cost item, Metro Manila, 2001 93

17b MANGO : Other operating costs incurred by marketing participants, by cost item, Pangasinan, 2001 93

17c MANGO : Other operating costs incurred by marketing participants, by cost item, Iloilo, 2001 94

17d MANGO : Other operating costs incurred by marketing participants, by cost item, Guimaras, 2001 94

17e MANGO : Other operating costs incurred by marketing participants, by cost item, Cebu, 2001 95

viii


17f MANGO : Other operating costs incurred by marketing participants, by cost item, Davao City, 2001 96

17g MANGO : Other operating costs incurred by marketing participants, by cost item, Davao del Sur, 2001 97

17h MANGO : Other operating costs incurred by marketing participants, by cost item, General Santos City, 2001 97

18 MANGO : Imputed cost of depreciation by material/facilities/equipment used, by province, 2001 98

18a MANGO : Imputed costs of depreciation incurred by marketing participants, by material/facilities/equipment used, Metro Manila, 2001 99

18b MANGO : Imputed costs of depreciation incurred by marketing participants, by material/facilities/equipment used, Pangasinan, 2001 99

18c MANGO : Imputed costs of depreciation incurred by marketing participants, by material/facilities/equipment used, Iloilo, 2001 100

18d MANGO : Imputed costs of depreciation incurred by marketing participants, by material/facilities/equipment used, Guimaras, 2001 100

18e MANGO : Imputed costs of depreciation incurred by marketing participants, by material/facilities/equipment used, Cebu, 2001 101

ix


18f MANGO : Imputed costs of depreciation incurred by marketing participants, by material/facilities/equipment used, Davao City, 2001 101

18g MANGO : Imputed costs of depreciation incurred by marketing participants, by material/facilities/equipment used, Davao del Sur, 2001 102

18h MANGO : Imputed costs of depreciation incurred by marketing participants, by material/facilities/equipment used, General Santos City, 2001 102

19 MANGO : Total marketing costs, by cost item, by province, 2001 103

20 MANGO : Total marketing costs, (cash and non-cash), by major item, by province, 2001 106

21 MANGO : Total marketing costs (cash and non-cash) by province, 2001 107

22 MANGO : Marketing costs incurred by mango processors, selected provinces, 2001 108

23 MANGO : Distribution of respondents, by problems encountered, by province, 110

x


1 MANGO: Trading Pattern, by province, 2001……………………………………………… 5

2 Geographic Flow of Mango in Pangasinan, 2001………………………………………… 10

3 Geographic Flow of Mango in Guimaras, 2001…………………………………………… 11

4 Geographic Flow of Mango in Iloilo, 2001………………………………………………… 12

5 Geographic Flow of Mango in Davao City, 2001…………………………………………… 13

6 Geographic Flow of Mango in Davao del Sur, 2001……………………………………… 14

7 Marketing Channels for Mango in Pangasinan, 2001……………………………………… 16

8 Marketing Channels for Mango in Guimaras, 2001………………………………………… 17

9 Marketing Channels for Mango in Iloilo, 2001……………………………………………… 18

10 Marketing Channels for Mango in Davao City, 2001……………………………………… 19

11 Marketing Channels for Mango in Davao del Sur, 2001…………………………………… 20

12 Total Marketing Costs for Mango, by Point of Destination, Pangasinan, 2001………… 26

13 Total Marketing Costs for Mango, by Point of Destination, Iloilo, 2001………………… 27

14 Total Marketing Costs for Mango, by Point of Destination, Guimaras, 2001………….. 28

15 Total Marketing Costs for Mango, by Point of Destination, Davao City, 2001………… 29

16 Total Marketing Costs for Mango, by Point of Destination, Davao del Sur, 2001……. 30

17 Marketing Costs for Mango, by level of Marketing Participants, Pangasinan, 2001… 35

18 Marketing Costs for Mango, by level of Marketing Participants, Guimaras, 2001…… 36

19 Marketing Costs for Mango, by level of Marketing Participants, Iloilo, 2001…………. 37

20 Marketing Costs for Mango, by level of Marketing Participants, Davao City, 2001…. 38

21 Marketing Costs for Mango, by level of Marketing Participants, Davao del Sur, 2001 39

LIST OF FIGURES

xi


MARKETING COSTS STRUCTURE FOR MANGO

I. STUDY PROCEDURES

Mango (Mangifera indica L.) is one of the country’s superior agricultural products. This fruit thrives best in areas with five months continuous dry period. After harvest, its movement from the supply to the demand areas involves long distances. The study team determined the flow and the corresponding costs incurred by marketing participants in the process of distributing the commodity from the farmers to consumers. The study was conducted jointly with the study on the utilization of the commodity. Team Composition

The staff of the Agricultural Marketing Statistics Analysis Division (AMSAD), Crops Statistics Division (CSD), Agricultural Accounts and Statistical Indicators Division (AASID) and the Statistical Operations Coordination Division (SOCD), all of the BAS, conducted the study from the 4th week of September to the 1st week of December, 2001. At least two (2) staff from the BAS’ central office and one from the provincial operations center (POC) in each supply province participated in field operations. The team hired emergency data collectors (EDCs) to facilitate the conduct of interview. The training of the EDCs was undertaken at the POC.

The team interviewed sample respondents and key informants using the structured questionnaires prepared by staff. Only farmers and traders who actually engaged in producing/trading mango from July 2000 to June 2001 were selected and interviewed. Research Sites

The study covered key supply and demand areas in Luzon, Visayas and Mindanao. The tracing approach was used in the identified supply areas, namely, Pangasinan, Iloilo, Guimaras, Davao City and Davao del Sur.

For each province, the fieldwork started at the farm level. Top five (5) producing barangays in the province were chosen based on BAS production data.

From the farm level, the research team traced the traders identified by the farmer-respondents as buyers of their produce. Most of them were located in the trading centers. The study then moved to the next point of sale consisting of the

1


retail markets within the province and/or trading centers in the partner provinces. The demand areas in Pangasinan include several municipalities within the province. Mangoes from Guimaras went to Iloilo and Cebu; Iloilo mangoes were consumed mostly within Region 6 provinces. Mango produced in Davao provinces were traded in Davao, General Santos and Cebu Cities. Metro Manila was covered primarily as a major demand area for these provinces. Selection of Sample Respondents

At each level of the marketing system, key informants, traders and farmers were interviewed.

At the farm level, the chairman/other officers of the barangays, members of farmer associations and cooperatives served as key informants in locating farmer respondents and other information on mango marketing practices. The results of the listing made under “Ginintuang Masaganang Ani High Value Commercial Crops Project” served as reference in identifying the barangays and the names of the farmer-respondents.

The total number of respondents in the supply province were 40 farmers and three (3) traders per type/classification. Data Processing

The research team performed on-field validation of the data gathered at the farm level against the information given by respondents at the trading center level to 1) integrate the findings, 2) ensure the accuracy of primary data on costs; and 3) facilitate the compilation of survey returns.

At the central office, the survey returns were compiled manually. The summary tables were generated out of the compiled returns. Report Preparation

The research team prepared the technical report that described the components of the marketing costs structure of mango produced in Pangasinan, Guimaras, Iloilo, Davao City and Davao del Sur. The report also contained the marketing costs borne by traders in the demand provinces consisting of Cebu, General Santos City and Metro Manila.

2


II. STUDY LIMITATIONS

The study traced the flow and the marketing costs of mango from the production areas to the demand areas. At the demand province/site, the study concentrated only on the costs incurred in marketing mango coming from a supply province, and not for the mangoes produced in the demand province itself. For instance, in Cebu City, the costs borne by traders of mango from Guimaras were covered but not the costs of moving mango produced in the producing municipalities within Cebu province.

III. DISCUSSION OF RESULTS

The study focused primarily on the costs borne by marketing participants in moving the commodity from the supply level to the consumption level. The results will be discussed according to the major costs components. Geographic Coverage

The study covered five (5) supply provinces that included Pangasinan, Guimaras, Iloilo, Davao City and Davao del Sur. The demand provinces/areas consisted of the cities of Cebu, General Santos and Metro Manila. Distribution of Respondents

There were two groups of respondents for the study: farmers and traders. Of the total of 313 respondents, 200 were farmers and 113 were traders. The details on the distribution of respondents by study areas are presented in Table 1.

The team also interviewed nine processors for the purpose of determining the utilization of mango (there is a separate report on this). However, those processors were asked also on their marketing costs, results of which can be found on the last part of this report.

Types of Marketing Participants. Farmers and traders were the major type of marketing participants. The trader-respondents were further classified based on their sphere of influence in performing their procurement and distribution activities. Those who devoted resources to both functions are referred to as assembler-distributors (A-Ds). Table 2 shows the type of marketing participants encountered in the study.

3


Trader-respondents were grouped into assembler-distributor, exporter and retailer. (See Annex for the definition of each type of traders).

Thirty six (36) of the trader-respondents were large distributors; 22

were medium and 8 were small distributors; 45 were retailers and 2 were exporters.

Profile of Respondents

The characteristics of the respondents are presented in frequency distribution tables. Farmers were classified by size of farm and land ownership. Traders were grouped according to type of business ownership and length of experience in the business. Sample Farmers

Size of Farm. The study purposively chose farmers who had land areas ranging from small to above-average in size. The distribution of farmer-respondents by farm size is found in Table 3.

Mango is produced in relatively small land areas. Majority (148 out of 200) of the respondents have farm areas of less than one hectare.

Forty (40) respondents or twenty percent (20%) have land holdings of

one to 4.99 hectares. A mere 6% (12 respondents) reported land area of more than 5

hectares.

Land Ownership. In terms of land ownership, most (161) of the farmer-respondents owned the land they operate. Two of them were awardees of Certificate of Land Transfer (CLT), 18 were tenants, 5 were lessees, 6 were part owners and 8 used public land.

In Pangasinan, 32 out of 40 respondents were landowners, 8 were tenants and one used public land.

Of the farmer-respondents in Iloilo, 31 were landowners, 5 were

tenants and 4 were public land users. In Guimaras, out of 40 respondents, 30 were land owners, 1 CLT

holder and 9 rented/leased land.

4


All farmer-respondents in Davao City were owners of the land they

cultivated for mango. Among the respondents from Davao del Sur one was a CLT awardee

while 10 were renting/using public lands. Trading Pattern. Table 9 shows the number of farmer-respondents who

traded mango for each month of 2001. This is further described in a chart (Figure 1) showing the following:

In Pangasinan, mangoes were in the market from January to May

only; peak trading happened in March. Most of the respondents from Iloilo traded mango from March to May;

no trading occurred in August and September. Mangoes were available in Guimaras in the first semester of the year;

none were available in July, August and November. In Davao provinces, the fruit was visible in the market throughout the

year. Peak trading months were June, July and August both for Davao City and Davao del Sur.

Figure 1. MANGO: Trading Pattern, by province, 2001

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec.

Pangasinan Iloilo Guimaras Davao City Davao Sur

5

Marketing Cost Structure for Mango Marketing Cost Structure for Mango

Sample Traders Business Ownership. Majority of the trader-respondents (89%) operated/ran their own business under single proprietorship.

In Metro Manila, fourteen out of 15 respondents were single proprietors. One retailer went into business with partner.

Eighteen (18) respondents from Pangasinan including one exporter

managed business on their own. The other exporter was a member of a corporation.

Two assembler-distributors from Iloilo were engaged in mango

trading with business partners. One large distributor from Cebu ran his business through the

auspices of a cooperative; another with partnership. Retailers from Davao City and Davao del Sur were single proprietors.

Nature of Capitalization. The amount and source of his working capital give the traders flexibility in underwriting certain cost items.

Ninety-four out of 113 or about 83% of the respondents could afford to finance their own business.

Except in Metro Manila, there were 17 respondents from covered

areas who are into business with capital under financing scheme. Two of the respondents were under contract agreements; one large

distributor from Pangasinan and one retailer from Cebu.

Length of Experience. The study considered the length of experience as an important gauge of the accuracy of the respondents’ estimation of costs. Traders with longer experience should come up with more accurate estimate of their costs.

Twenty-one percent (21%) of the total trader-respondents were

relatively new in the business with less than 5 years experience. Forty-two or 37% were already 5 to 10 years in mango trading.

6


Seventeen traders (15%) had been in the business from 11 to 15

years. Another fifteen percent (15%) were in this venture for more than 20

years. Marketing Practices and Functions

Farmers and traders perform marketing practices and functions that add value to the product. Correspondingly, they incur certain amount of costs for value-adding, transfer of ownership and for moving the products from one point to another. The major practices and functions and the corresponding marketing costs are described in the succeeding topics. Procurement

In the supply province, traders procured mangoes from the producing barangays. In the demand areas, traders sourced mango within the same province and from the established supply provinces.

Manner of Procurement. In supply procurement, traders preferred modes which required less effort and cost.

Of the total trader-respondents, 61 or 54% picked-up mango from the source.

Fifty-one or 45% had their mangoes delivered by their suppliers.

One large distributor from Pangasinan practiced both manners in

procuring mangoes.

Mode of Payment. Different modes of payment were practiced in buying mango: cash, consignment, delayed payment or every 15th of the month. In some instances, payment was made both in cash and consignment.

Majority of the trader-respondents (83 out of 113) paid their mango suppliers in cash.

Twenty seven or 24% of them paid in consignment basis.

Two assembler-distributors paid their suppliers every 15th of the

month.

7


Distribution Most of the respondents sold mangoes within and outside the province. The mode of delivery and terms of payment depended on the agreement between the buyer and seller. Mode of Delivery. The mode of delivery for distribution or selling depended on the type of buyer and the location.

Most of the buyers picked-up mango from the business location of the respondents. Some traders however, delivered their products to the buyers.

One large distributor from Iloilo practiced both manners in the

delivery of his products. Mode of Payment. The mode of payment in selling mangoes was either cash, consignment or every 15th of the month.

Eighty-five percent (85%) of the respondents received payment for their fruits in cash from their buyers.

A few of them were being paid in consignment basis; the rest

received payment after one week, every 15th of the month or 3-5 days after delivery.

Geographic Flow Figures 2-6 illustrate the flow of mango by location and by province. Tabular presentation of the sources and destination of mango by province is in Table 8.

Pangasinan

The identified supply municipalities within the province are Malasiqui, Urdaneta, Calasiao, Bolinao and Manaoag. Other sources of mango outside Pangasinan were Ilocos Sur, La Union, Nueva Ecija and Tarlac.

From the supply areas, mango passed through the trading centers in

San Carlos, Urdaneta, Dagupan Cities, Tayug, Alaminos and Villasis on their way to Metro Manila, Isabela, Laguna and Cavite.

From Metro Manila, exporters shipped mangoes to other Asian

countries, namely, Hong Kong and Japan.

8


Guimaras

Sources of mango in Guimaras were the towns of Buenavista, Nueva Valencia and San Lorenzo.

The produce were assembled in Jordan, Buenavista and Gaban

trading centers. From there, traders distributed mangoes to the demand areas particularly in Iloilo, Metro Manila, Cebu and countries outside the Philippines.

Iloilo

Mango supplies in Iloilo came solely from the municipalities within the

province. These municipalities included Guimbal, Tigbauan, Tubungan, Buga, Leon and Cabatuan.

Outlets aside from the traders in the supply areas were trading

centers in Iloilo City and Sta. Barbara. The reported demand areas were municipalities within Iloilo and

provinces like Antique, Aklan, Cebu and Manila.

Davao City

Supply areas of mango within Davao City were Toril, Buhangin and Tugbok. Other sources of mangoes were Davao del Sur, Davao Oriental, North Cotabato, South Cotabato and Samal Island.

From the supply areas/provinces, mangoes were brought to

Bangkerohan, Toril, Calinan and Marahan Markets. The locally produced mangoes went to other districts of Davao City.

Other demand sites were Davao del Sur, General Santos City, Surigao del Sur, Bukidnon and Cebu.

Davao del Sur

Mangoes in Davao del Sur were produced in Digos and Matanao. The fruits were being assembled in trading center found in Digos.

From there, mangoes were distributed to Davao City, Cebu, Leyte and Manila.

9


HONGKONG JAPAN

SAN CARLOS CITYURDANETA

DAGUPAN CITY TAYUG

ALAMINOS VILLASIS

DEMAND AREAS

TRADING CENTERS

SUPPLY AREAS

Figure 2. GEOGRAPHIC FLOW OF MANGO IN PANGASINAN, 2001

PANGASINAN -San Carlos -Villasis -Urdaneta -Calasiao -Manaoag -Dagupan -Bayambang

PANGASINAN -Malasiqui -Urdaneta -Calasiao -Bolinao -Manaoag

ISABELA MANILA LAGUNA CAVITE

METRO MANILA

ILOCOS SUR

LA UNION NUEVA ECIJA

TARLAC

10


JORDAN BUENAVISTA

GABAN

DEMAND AREAS

TRADING CENTERS

SUPPLY AREAS

GUIMARAS -Jordan -Buenavista

GUIMARAS -Buenavista -Nueva Valencia -San Lorenzo

COUNTRIES OUTSIDE

PHILIPPINES

METRO MANILA OR CEBU ILOILO

Figure 3. GEOGRAPHIC FLOW OF MANGO IN GUIMARAS, 2001

11


ILOILO CITY GUIMBAL

LEON STA. BARBARA

CABATUAN

DEMAND AREAS

TRADING CENTERS

SUPPLY AREAS

ILOILO -Iloilo City -Guimbal -Leon -Sta. Barbara -Passi

ILOILO -Guimbal -Tigbauan -Tubungan -Buga -Leon -Cabatuan

ANTIQUE AKLAN CAPIZ CEBU

MANILA

Figure 4. GEOGRAPHIC FLOW OF MANGO IN ILOILO, 2001

12


BANGKEROHAN TORIL

CALINAN MARAHAN

DEMAND AREAS

TRADING CENTERS

SUPPLY AREAS

DAVAO CITY -City Proper -Toril -Sasa -Agdao -Calinan

DAVAO CITY -Toril -Buhangin -Tugbok

DAVAO SUR GEN. SANTOS

CITY SURIGAO SUR

BUKIDNON CEBU

METRO MANILA

DAVAO SUR DAVAO OR.

N. COTABATO S. COTABATO

SAMAL IS.

Figure 5. GEOGRAPHIC FLOW OF MANGO IN DAVAO CITY, 2001

13


DIGOS

DEMAND AREAS

TRADING CENTERS

SUPPLY AREAS

DAVAO SUR -Digos -Matanao

DAVAO SUR -Digos -Matanao

DAVAO CITY CEBU

LEYTE MANILA

Figure 6. GEOGRAPHIC FLOW OF MANGO IN DAVAO DEL SUR, 2001

14


Marketing Channels

Figures 7-11 illustrate the marketing channels of mango from the mango groves to the retailers in provinces covered by the study.

Pangasinan

From the farm, mangoes were sold to the agent at the supply area for distribution to the exporter. Other outlets were assembler-distributors in the trading centers. Suppliers outside the province sold mangoes directly to interregional assembler-large distributors. Traders sold their products to retailers, buyers outside the province, institutional buyers and consumers.

Guimaras

In Guimaras, interregional, provincial and municipal assemblers were

the buyers of mangoes at the supply areas. These traders distributed their fruits to retailers, consumers and buyers outside the province.

Iloilo

Mango supplies coming from the farm within and outside the province

were bought by provincial assembler-distributors who further distributed the fruits to municipal assemblers at the trading centers. The products were finally sold to retailers and consumers.

Davao City

Farmers in Davao City sold their mango to interregional and

provincial assembler-distributors at the trading centers. They also sold their produce directly to processors, exporters and buyers outside the province.

Davao del Sur

Similarly, interregional and provincial assemblers, exporter,

processor and buyers outside the province were the outlets of mango farmers in Davao del Sur. Retailers and consumers were the final destination of the commodity.

15

Marketing Cost Structure for Mango Marketing Cost Structure for Mango

CONSUMER

RETAILER

PA-LD IRA-LD

FARMER

BUYER OUTSIDE

THE PROVINCE

INSTITUTIONAL BUYER

SUPPLIER OUTSIDE

THE PROVINCE

AGENT

EXPORTER

Figure 7. MARKETING CHANNELS FOR MANGO IN PANGASINAN, 2001

16


17

CONSUMER

RETAILER

MA-MD PA-MD

FARMER

BUYER OUTSIDE

THE PROVINCE

MA-SD

IRA-LD

Figure 8. MARKETING CHANNELS FOR MANGO IN GUIMARAS, 2001


CONSUMER

RETAILER

PA-SD PA-LD

FARMER

BUYER OUTSIDE THE

PROVINCE

MA-MD

PA-MD

MA-SD

SUPPLIER

OUTSIDE THE PROVINCE

Figure 9. MARKETING CHANNELS FOR MANGO IN ILOILO, 2001

18


CONSUMER

RETAILER

PA-SD IRA-LD

FARMER

BUYER OUTSIDE

THE PROVINCE

EXPORTER

PA-LD PROCESSOR

Figure 10. MARKETING CHANNELS FOR MANGO IN DAVAO CITY, 2001

19


CONSUMER

RETAILER

IRA-LD

FARMER

BUYER OUTSIDE

THE PROVINCE

EXPORTER

PA-LD PROCESSOR

Figure 11. MARKETING CHANNELS FOR MANGO IN DAVAO DEL SUR, 2001

20


Marketing Costs

Marketing mango from the farm level up to the retail level entails a lot of costs. The expenditure items include labor, transportation, material inputs, other operating expenses and depreciation. The succeeding topics describe the expenditure items and the corresponding costs borne by the marketing participants in the transfer of the commodity from the farmer to the retailer. The items may be similar among certain level of marketing participants but the amount varies depending on the extent of business operations. Labor

The activities performed in the process of procuring mango from the farm include hauling (loading from the farm to the truck/vehicle) and handling (loading and unloading from the truck to the stall/bodega/pier or place of buyer), sorting, weighing, packing and supervision. For areas with shipment of mangoes from the supply to the demand areas particularly in Manila, traders pay for arrastre, stevedoring and porterage.

In distributing the fruits, the activities that entail costs are handling, sorting, weighing, packing, cleaning, selling and supervision.

In the supply areas, labor costs were highest in Pangasinan at P2.05; followed by Davao del Sur at P1.06; Guimaras with P0.99, Davao City at P0.58 and Iloilo with P0.29 per kilogram of mango.

The labor costs for other areas ranged from P0.89 (General Santos

City) to P1.05 per kilogram (Metro Manila). Transportation

Transportation is a major consideration in moving the commodity from point to point and from one participant to another. The cost depends on the distance and destination of the commodity.

The highest cost of transportation for mango trading was about P5.79 per kilogram in Davao City. This included plane fare for shipping the commodity to Manila.

The traders from other areas incurred transportation costs ranging

from P0.19 (General Santos City) to P1.08 (Iloilo) per kilogram of mango.

21


Material Inputs

Mango trading requires a lot of material inputs. In buying and selling of mangoes, the basic materials used are kaing, old newspapers, twine, bayong, sacks and cartons. Table 16 presents the materials used and the corresponding costs.

Traders from Cebu spent a minimal amount of P0.14 for material inputs (P0.08 for procurement and P0.06 for distribution).

Total cost of materials was relatively high in Iloilo and Davao City at

more than P2.00 per kilogram. Miscellaneous and Other Operating Costs

Marketing participants also incur miscellaneous and other operating expenses. Miscellaneous expenses include business permit, market fee, storage fee, utilities (electricity, telephone, water), repair and maintenance, toll fee, stall rental, gas and oil, meals and beverages, cell cards, etc. The items and its corresponding amount of cost incurred are enumerated in Table 17.

Wastage of mango during the marketing process contributed the largest portion in other operating costs shouldered by traders ranging from P0.18 (Iloilo) to P1.04 per kilogram (Guimaras).

The total amount for other operating expenses ranged from P0.55 to

P3.31 per kilogram. Depreciation

Depreciation is the value given to the used portion or life of an item for a given period. Depreciation costs were imputed for items used in marketing of mango.

In Pangasinan, traders incurred a total of P2.42 for every kilogram of mango for the depreciation of transport facilities, office building and weighing scale used in the mango trading business.

Traders in other areas shouldered a depreciation cost amounting to

less than P0.50 per kilogram of mango.

22


Aggregated Marketing Costs

The costs items are aggregated according to cash outlay which include cash, non-cash and imputed costs. Total Marketing Costs

The highest amount of expenses in mango marketing was estimated at P9.91 per kilogram in Davao City. This amount consisted mainly of the transportation cost incurred by traders in cost of air cargo of mango to Manila. The costs of material inputs and other operating expenses were also high in Davao City.

In Pangasinan, the big contributors to the total marketing cost of

trading mango were depreciation (P2.42), labor (P2.05) and other operating costs (P1.49).

High cost of mango marketing was also observed in Guimaras at

P5.90 per kilogram attributed mostly to other miscellaneous expenses, material and labor inputs.

Cost of material inputs was the highest cost component in Iloilo

followed by transportation. The total marketing costs were estimated at P5.03 per kilogram.

Mango traders in Davao del Sur spent much for labor inputs (P1.06

per kilogram). Other costs items ranged from P0.04 to P0.86. The total costs in the demand areas were placed at P2.70 for

General Santos City; P3.13 for Metro Manila and P3.00 for Cebu. Marketing Costs by Point of Destination

The transfer of a commodity from the supply area to the first point of sale entails costs for transportation, material inputs, labor and other expenses.

Figures 12-16 illustrate the estimated costs of moving mangoes from the supply barangay to every trading/demand area.

23


Pangasinan

Mango trading within the producing barangays entailed a total cost of P0.74 per kilogram. When the fruits were moved from the barangay to the trading centers within Pangasinan, another cost amounting to P3.28 should be added.

From Pangasinan to Nueva Ecija, traders who picked-up the

fruits from the farm should set aside an amount of P6.95 for every kilogram of mango. For mangoes delivered to Cavite and Laguna, a total cost of P4.63 per kilogram was spent. However, mangoes brought to Manila had P5.01 cost.

Iloilo

Within the supply barangays, mango trading had an average

cost of P1.96 per kilogram. When transported to the trading centers, another cost amounting to P1.01 was spent.

Traders who transported mangoes to Aklan or Antique needed

an P3.77 allowance for every kilogram of the fruits. Those who traded mangoes in Bacolod City spent a total of P4.70 while those who traveled to Cebu City needed around P5.14 per kilogram of mangoes.

Mangoes shipped to Manila required a total amount of P3.91

per kilogram for marketing costs.

Guimaras

Marketing cost for mango inside the producing barangays was estimated at P1.06 per kilogram. Bringing the fruits from the production areas to Iloilo entailed another P2.31. When distributed to Bacolod via Iloilo City, the total marketing cost was P4.05 per kilogram.

Davao City

From the supply areas to Bangkerohan, mango trading had a

total marketing cost of P1.76 per kilogram. When distributed within Davao City, another P2.41 was spent per kilogram. When shipped to Manila, the total cost was P10.49.

24

Supply Area/Destination Origin Next point Final Destination TOTAL

Pangasinan - within barangay 0.74 0.74 - within the province 0.74 3.28 4.02 - Nueva Ecija 0.74 3.28 2.93 6.95 - Cavite/Laguna 0.74 3.28 0.61 4.63 - Manila 0.74 3.28 0.99 5.01

Iloilo - within barangay 1.96 1.96 - within the province 1.96 1.01 2.97 - Aklan/Antique 1.96 1.01 0.8 3.77 - Bacolod 1.96 1.01 1.73 4.7 - Cebu 1.96 1.01 2.17 5.14 - Manila 1.96 1.01 0.94 3.91

Guimaras - from barangay 1.06 1.06 - Iloilo 1.06 2.31 3.37 - Bacolod via Iloilo 1.06 2.31 0.68 4.05

Davao City - Bangkerohan 1.76 1.76 - within the province 1.76 2.41 4.17 - Manila 1.76 2.41 6.32 10.49

Davao del Sur - within barangays 1.67 1.67 - within the province 1.67 1.91 3.58 - Davao City 1.67 1.91 2.11 5.69 - Surigao/ Butuan/ 1.67 1.91 0.88 4.46 Bukidnon

BY POINT OF DESTINATION, 2001

Marketing Costs (peso per kilogram)

MATRIX OF MARKETING COSTS FOR MANGO

Davao del Sur

Within the farm, a total marketing cost of P1.67 was determined for each kilogram of mango. When brought to the trading centers within the province, another amount of P1.91 should be added to the cost. If traders intend to sell mangoes to Davao City, they should have another P2.11 allowance for every kilogram of the fruits. Those traded and distributed to Surigao, Butuan or Bukidnon, a total expense of P4.46 was put for one kilogram of mango.

Marketing Margins A marketing margin is the difference between the value of a product at one stage and the value of an equivalent product at another stage in the marketing process. Measuring this margin indicates how much has been paid for processing and marketing services applied to the product at that particular stage. This information can provide hints in assessing the performance of the food marketing system. The initial step in measuring the marketing margins is to describe the structure of the marketing chain, starting at the farm gate and tracing the product through the various intermediaries until it reaches the final consumer. Second is to identify and list the various functions that are performed at each stage in the marketing process. The estimation of marketing margin needs price data at which the product is bought and sold at each stage in the marketing process. Costs incurred in marketing plus the buying price give the estimated selling price. On the part of traders, buying price can be considered an expense. They have to pay for the commodity as the initial investment at prices agreed by both parties, the farmer and the trader. The gross margin, which still includes the cost of trading and the risk/losses, is the difference between the retail price and the effective buying price at the farm level. The net margin, or the net return, therefore, is the remainder when the total marketing costs were subtracted from the total gross margin. Below is the illustration of the concept: RP NM TGM FP + TC FP

where: RP = retail price FP = farm price or the effective buying price at farm level FP+TC = farm price plus the total costs TGM = total gross margin (RP - FP) NM = net margin or return [RP – (FP + TC)] Presented in the succeeding table is the estimated marketing margins for mango based on the average prices collected by the BAS in 2001 for the supply areas under study. Likewise, the costs of marketing mango at each level of marketing participants and the estimated selling price for each supply province are presented in Figures 17-21. Pangasinan

The price of mango at the farm level was P21.25 per kilogram. With the

total marketing costs of P7.51, the estimated selling price without margin is P28.60. At retail market price of P57.13, the total gross margin is P35.88 per kilogram or 62.80%. Of that P35.88 peso-gross margin the farmer’s share was P13.35 while the traders had P22.53. The net margin was estimated at P28.37 per kilogram. Guimaras

Traders paid P24.51 per kilogram of mango from the farm and spent

around P5.90 during the process of procurement and distribution. The estimated gross margin was P22.34 of which the farmer’s share was P11.69 (52%) and the trader’s with P10.65 (48%). A net return of P16.44 per kilogram was derived.

Iloilo

The total cost of marketing mango in Iloilo was P5.03 per kilogram. This amount plus the buying price at the farm of P20.33 gave the estimated selling price of P25.36 per kilogram. At an average retail price of P50.61, the farmers’ and traders’ shares to the total gross margin are 40.17% or P12.16 and 59.83% or P18.12, respectively.

Davao City

The total gross margin in marketing of mango in Davao City was P21.95 at

retail price of P36.36 and buying price of P14.41 per kilogram. With the total marketing costs of P9.91, the net margin was placed at P12.04 per kilogram.

Davao del Sur

Farmers registered greater share than the traders in the consumers’ peso. With the estimated selling price of P24.57 and average retail price of P31.16, traders had gross margin of P3.09 or 31.48%. After deducting the marketing cost of P3.22, a return of P6.59 per kilogram was remained.

Marketing Costs of Processors. There were 9 processors interviewed

mainly to gather information on supply utilization of mango. The number of processor-respondents by province is as follows: Iloilo – 1; Guimaras – 3; and Cebu – 5. Table 22 presents the expenses borne by mango processors in their supply procurement and processed products distribution.

The lone processor-respondent in Iloilo spent only for labor costs in pre-marketing and distribution stages amounting to P0.40 per kilogram of mango. He paid P0.08 for hauling of mangoes from the farm. In selling his products, he hired laborers for handling, weighing, sorting and packing.

The average marketing cost incurred by the processors in Guimaras was P4.66 per kilogram. This amount included labor cost for weighing during procurement and imputed depreciation of materials, facilities and equipment used in the business.

In Cebu, the estimated cost of mango trading was P0.74 per kilogram. The processors paid P0.50 per kilogram as agent’s commission and P0.14 per kilogram for wages. Other contributors to the total cost were imputed values of depreciation for the materials, equipment, transportation and warehouse facilities.

IV. PROBLEMS/CONSTRAINTS ENCOUNTERED The following are the problems cited by the respondents in mango trading:

One major problem identified by the respondents from all the covered areas was the low sales and low prices due to oversupply of mango during peak seasons.

Another common constraint in the business was the lack of financial assistance/lack of capital and the slow turnover of capital due to the delayed or non-payment of loan.

Poor quality, limited supply of fruits and high percentage of spoilage were some of the problems encountered by the traders in this venture.

Other problems included competition among traders, limited consumers, high transportation costs and emergence of transient.

ITEM Prices Prices PricesPercent Peso per kg. Percent Peso per kg. Percent Peso per kg.

Farm 21.25 24.51 20.33Wholesale 30.95 - -Retail 57.13 46.85 50.61

Farmer 37.20 13.35 52.32 11.69 40.17 12.16Trader 62.80 22.53 47.68 10.65 59.83 18.12

Total 100.00 35.88 100.00 22.34 100.00 30.28Less: Total Costs 7.51 5.90 5.03Net Margin/Return 28.37 16.44 25.25

ITEM Prices PricesPercent Peso per kg. Percent Peso per kg.

Farm 14.41 21.35Wholesale - -Retail 36.36 31.16

Farmer 39.63 8.70 68.52 6.72Trader 60.37 13.25 31.48 3.09

Total 100.00 21.95 100.00 9.81Less: Total Costs 9.91 3.22Net Margin/Return 12.04 6.59

PANGASINAN

AVERAGE PRICES AND MARKETING MARGINS FOR MANGO, SELECTED AREAS, 2001

AVERAGE PRICES AND MARKETING MARGINS FOR MANGO, 2001

ILOILOMargins

GUIMARASMargins

DAVAO DEL SURMarginsMargins

Margins

DAVAO CITY

Amount(P/kg) Level Ave.

Estimated Selling Price w/o margin Retail 29.67 - 89.36 57.13(buying price & total costs) 28.60

Total Costs 7.51

Materials 0.41Labor 1.37Transporting 0.03 Wholesale 21.14 - 45.91 30.95Depreciation 2.42Others 1.49

Materials 0.42Labor 0.62Transporting 0.03

Pre-marketingHauling 0.06Transportation 0.66

Buying Price 21.25 Farm 16.73 - 63.41 21.25

* Source: BAS' FPS, Wholesale & Retail Price Monitoring

Price RangePractice/Activity/Cost Item Market Price*

Figure 17. Marketing Costs for Mango, by level of Marketing Participants, Pangasinan, 2001

CONSUMER

RETAILER

PA-LDIRA-LD

FARMER

BUYER OUTSIDE

THE PROVINCE

INSTITUTIONALBUYER

SUPPLIER OUTSIDE

THE PROVINCE

AGENT

EXPORTER

Average(P/kg) Level Ave.


Total Costs 3.22

Materials 0.38Labor 0.55Transporting 0.37Depreciation 0.04Others 0.86

Materials 0.26Labor 0.39Transporting 0.25

Pre-marketingHauling 1.02




Figure 21. Marketing Costs for Mango, by level of Marketing Participants, Davao del Sur, 2001

CONSUMER

RETAILER

IRA-LD

FARMER

BUYER OUTSIDE

THE PROVINCE

EXPORTER

PA-LDPROCESSOR

Average(P/kg) Level Ave.


Total Costs 9.91


Materials 0.74Labor -

Shipping 0.009Transporting 0.51

Shipping 4.70





Figure 20. Marketing Costs for Mango, by level of Marketing Participants, Davao City, 2001

CONSUMER

RETAILER

PA-SDIRA-LD

FARMER

BUYER OUTSIDE

THE PROVINCE

EXPORTER

PA-LDPROCESSOR



Total Costs 5.03


Materials 1.08Labor 0.16


Shipping 0.02

Pre-marketingHaulingTransportation 0.21



Price RangePractice/Activity/Costs Item Market Price*

Figure 19. Marketing Costs for Mango, by level of Marketing Participants, Iloilo, 2001

CONSUMER

RETAILER

PA-SDPA-LD

FARMER

BUYER OUTSIDE

THE PROVINCE

MA-MD

PA-MD

MA-SD

SUPPLIER OUTSIDE

THE PROVINCE



Total Costs 5.90


Materials 0.51Labor 0.17


Shipping 0.18





Figure 18. Marketing Costs for Mango, by level of Marketing Participants, Guimaras, 2001

CONSUMER

RETAILER

MA-MDPA-MD

FARMER

BUYER OUTSIDE

THE PROVINCE

MA-SD

IRA-LD

Statistical Tables

Province/Municipality Farmer Trader Total

Metro Manila 15 15Manila 9 9Quezon City 5 5Pasay 1 1

Pangasinan 40 20 60Malasique 16 9 25Urdaneta 8 3 11Calasiao 8 8 16Sta. Barbara 8 8

Iloilo 40 26 66Guimbal 8 5 13Leon 8 9 17Cabanatuan 16 6 22Tubungan 2 2Iloilo City 4 4Sta. Barbara 8 8

Guimaras 40 12 52Buenavista 8 5 13Jordan 16 4 20Nueva Valencia 8 2 10Gaban/San Lorenzo 8 1 9

Cebu 15 15Tabunok 5 5Mandaue 3 3Cebu City 7 7

Davao City 40 8 48Davao City 8 8Buhangin 8 8Toril 8 8Tugbok 24 24

Davao del Sur 40 8 48Digos 24 8 32Matanao 16 16

General Santos 9 9General Santos City 9 9

TOTAL 200 113 313

Table 1. MANGO: Distribution of respondents, by type, by province/municipality, 2001

Province Farmer IRA-LD/RA-LD/ PA-LD

IRA-MD/RA-MD/PA-MD/MA-

MD/BA-MD

PA-SD/MA-SD/BA-SD

Retailer Exporter Total Percent

Metro Manila 7 2 6 15 4.79

Pangasinan 40 9 4 5 2 60 19.17

Iloilo 40 5 7 5 9 66 21.09

Guimaras 40 1 3 3 5 52 16.61

Cebu 5 2 8 15 4.79

Davao City 40 3 5 48 15.34

Davao del Sur 40 4 4 48 15.34

General Santos City 2 4 3 9 2.88

TOTAL 200 36 22 8 45 2 313 100

Table 2. MANGO: Distribution of respondents, by type of marketing participants, by province, 2001

Farm Size (in hectare)

Pangasinan Iloilo Guimaras Davao City Davao Sur Total %

less than 1.0 22 31 37 27 31 148 74.00

1.00 - 1.99 8 1 2 7 6 24 12.00

2.00 - 2.99 6 1 3 10 5.00

3.00 - 3.99 1 1 2 1.00

4.00 - 4.99 1 1 1 1 4 2.00

more than 5.0 2 6 4 12 6.00

TOTAL 40 40 40 40 40 200 100

Table 3. MANGO: Number and percentage distribution of farmer respondents, by size of farm, by province, 2001

Tenurial Status Pangasinan Iloilo Guimaras Davao City Davao del Sur

Total %

Owner 31 31 30 40 29 161 80.50

CLT 1 1 2 1.00

Tenant 8 5 4 1 18 9.00

Lessee 5 5 2.50

Part-owner 4 2 6 3.00

Othersa/ 1 7 8 4.00

TOTAL 40 40 40 40 40 200 100

a/ Rentals

Table 4. MANGO: Number and percentage distribution of farmer-respondents, by tenurial status, by province, 2001

Type of BusinessMetro Manila

Pangasinan Iloilo Guimaras CebuDavao

CityDavao del Sur

General Santos

CityTotal %

Single Proprietorship 14 17 24 12 13 7 5 9 101 89.38

Partnership 1 2 2 1 3 9 7.96

Corporation 1 1 2 1.77

Cooperative 1 1 0.88

TOTAL 15 20 26 12 15 8 8 9 113 100

Table 5. MANGO: Distribution of trader respondents, by type of business, by province, 2001

ProvinceIRA-LD/RA-LD/ PA-LD

IRA-MD/RA-MD/PA-MD/MA-

MD/BA-MD

PA-SD/MA-SD/BA/SD

Retailer Exporter Total

Metro ManilaSingle Proprietorship 7 2 5 14Partnership 1 1

PangasinanSingle Proprietorship 8 4 5 1 18Corporation 1 1Partnership 1 1

IloiloSingle Proprietorship 4 7 4 9 24

Partnership 1 1 2

GuimarasSingle Proprietorship 1 3 3 5 12

CebuSingle Proprietorship 4 1 8 13Cooperative 1 1Partnership 1 1

Davao CitySingle Proprietorship 2 5 7Corporation 1 1

Davao del SurSingle Proprietorship 1 4 5Partnership 3 3

General Santos CitySingle Proprietorship 2 4 2 8Under financing 1 1

TOTAL 35 23 11 42 2 113

Table 5a. MANGO: Distribution of trader respondents, by type of marketing participants, by type of business, by province, 2001

Nature of CapitalizationMetro Manila


CityDavao del Sur

General Santos

CityTotal %

Self-financed 15 15 24 10 12 7 3 8 94 83.19

Under financing 4 2 2 2 1 5 1 17 15.04

Under contract agreement 1 1 2 1.77

TOTAL 15 20 26 12 15 8 8 9 113 100

Table 6. MANGO: Distribution of trader respondents, by nature of capitalization, by province, 2001

ProvinceIRA-LD/PA-LD/MA-LD/

BA-LD

IRA-MD/PA-MD/MA-MD

PA-SD/MA-SD/BA-SD

Retailer Exporter Total

Metro ManilaSelf-financed 7 2 6 15

PangasinanSelf-financed 5 3 5 2 15Under financing 3 1 4Under contract agreement 1 1

IloiloSelf-financed 5 6 4 9 24Under financing 1 1 2

GuimarasSelf-financed 1 3 3 3 10Under financing 2 2

CebuSelf-financed 5 2 5 12Under financing 2 2Under contract agreement 1 1

Davao CitySelf-financed 3 4 7Under financing 1 1

Davao del SurSelf-financed 2 1 3Under financing 2 3 5

General Santos CitySelf-financed 2 4 2 8Under financing 1 1

TOTAL 36 22 8 45 2 113

* Table is limited to traders, excluding processors (no data about the nature of capitalization)

Table 6a. MANGO: Distribution of trader respondents, by type of marketing participants, by nature of capitalization, by province, 2001*

Years in businessMetro Manila


CityDavao del Sur

General Santos

CityTotal %

less than 5 1 5 8 4 1 2 3 24 21.24

5 - 10 5 8 8 7 4 3 2 5 42 37.17

11 - 15 2 2 4 1 2 1 2 3 17 15.04

16 - 20 3 1 2 4 2 1 13 11.50

more than 20 4 4 4 4 1 17 15.04

TOTAL 15 20 26 12 15 8 8 9 113 100

Table 7. MANGO: Distribution of trader respondents, by length of experience,by province, 2001

Within the province Outside the province Within the province Outside the province

Metro Manila Manila Pangasinan Manila Laguna- Divisoria Bulacan Quezon City Cavite

Quezon City Zambales Pasay City Rizal- Nepa Q mart Iloilo Parañaque Batangas- Cloverleaf Cagayan de Oro Mandaluyong- Balintawak Cebu Muntinlupa

Davao City Pasig CityDavao Sur ValenzuelaGeneral Santos City

Pangasinan Malasique Zambales San Carlos ManilaUrdaneta Ilocos Sur Villasis CaviteCalasiao La Union Urdaneta LagunaBolinao Nueva Ecija Calasiao IsabelaManaoag Tarlac Manaoag Batangas

Dagupan RizalBayambangTayug

Iloilo Guimbal Guimaras Iloilo City ManilaTubungan Guimbal AntiqueLeon Leon CebuCabanatuan Sta. Barbara Capiz

Aklan

Guimaras Buenavista Jordan IloiloNueva Valencia Buenavista Negros OccidentalSan Lorenzo

Cebu Cebu City Negros Oriental Mandaue Manila- Carbon Guimaras Cebu City Leyte- Tabunok Davao Sur Bohol

BoholCagayan de Oro

Davao City Davao City Davao Sur Davao City Manila- Bangkerohan South Cotabato Cebu- Pag-asa North Cotabato Cotabato

Toril

Davao del Sur Digos Digos ManilaMatanao Cebu

Leyte

General Santos City General Santos City Davao Sur ManilaDavao CitySouth CotabatoSultan Kudarat

Source Destination

Table 8. MANGO: Major sources and destinations, by location,by province, 2001

Province/City/Area

Province Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec.

Pangasinan 5 10 32 21 5 3

Iloilo 1 7 12 12 12 6 2 2 6 2

Guimaras 5 3 4 16 14 6 1 1 6

Davao City 1 5 2 2 4 10 9 5 1 1 3 2

Davao Sur 2 6 2 2 9 7 7 6 3 5 3

Table 9. MANGO: Trading Pattern, by activity in selected provinces, 2001

Mode of DeliveryMetro Manila


CityDavao del Sur

General Santos

CityTotal %

Picked up 4 12 17 6 7 2 7 6 61 53.98

Delivered 11 7 9 6 8 6 1 3 51 45.13

Both 1 1 0.88

TOTAL 15 20 26 12 15 8 8 9 113 100

Table 10. MANGO: Distribution of respondents, by manner of procurement,by provinces, 2001

Mode of PaymentMetro Manila


CityDavao del Sur

General Santos

CityTotal %

Cash 11 18 22 8 12 4 4 4 83 73.45

Consignment 4 1 4 3 3 4 4 4 27 23.89

Both 1 1 0.88

Every 15th of the month 1 1 2 1.77

TOTAL 15 20 26 12 15 8 8 9 113 100

Table 11. MANGO: Distribution of respondents, by mode of payment in buying stocks,by province, 2001

Mode of PaymentBA-SD/MD-SD/PA-SD

PA-MD/MA-MD/RA-MD/IRA-

MD/BA-MD

IRA-LD/RA-LD/PA-LD

Retailer Exporter TOTAL

METRO MANILACash 2 5 4 11Consignment 2 2 4

PANGASINANCash 4 8 4 2 18Consignment 1 1Both 1 1

ILOILOCash 5 7 5 5 22Consignment 4 4

GUIMARASCash 2 2 1 3 8Consignment 1 2 3Every 15th of the month 1 1

CEBUCash 2 5 5 12Consignment 3 3

DAVAO CITYCash 2 2 4Consignment 1 3 4

DAVAO DEL SURCash 4 4Consignment 4 4

GENERAL SANTOS CITYCash 2 2 4Consignment 1 3 4Every 15th of the month 1 1

Table 11a. MANGO: Distribution of trader respondents, by type of marketing participants,by mode of payment in buying stocks, by province, 2001

2 113TOTAL 8 22 4536

Mode of DeliveryMetro Manila


CityDavao del Sur

General Santos

Total %

Picked up 14 37 55 27 13 44 42 8 240 76.68

Delivered 1 22 10 25 2 4 6 1 71 22.68

Both 1 1 0.32

No response 1 1 0.32

TOTAL 15 60 66 52 15 48 48 9 313 100

Table 12. CABBAGE: Distribution of respondents, by manner of distribution,by province, 2001

Mode of Delivery FarmersBA-SD/MD-SD/PA-SD


MD/BA-MD

IRA-LD-RA-LD/PA-LD


METRO MANILAPicked- up 2 7 5 14Delivered 1 1

PANGASINANPicked- up 35 1 2 38Delivered 5 4 8 3 2 22No response 1 1

ILOILOPicked- up 40 2 2 4 7 55Delivered 3 5 2 10Both 1 1

GUIMARASPicked- up 22 2 3 27Delivered 18 1 3 1 2 25

CEBUPicked- up 2 4 7 13Delivered 1 1 2

DAVAO CITYPicked- up 40 4 44Delivered 3 1 4

DAVAO DEL SURPicked- up 40 2 42Delivered 4 2 6

GENERAL SANTOS CITYPicked- up 3 2 3 8Delivered 1 1

Table 12a. MANGO: Distribution of respondents by type of marketing participants,by manner of distribution, by province, 2001

45 2 314TOTAL 201 8 22 36

Mode of PaymentMetro Manila


CityDavao del Sur

General Santos

CityTotal %

Cash 14 56 56 32 10 44 48 6 266 84.98

Consignment 1 3 10 14 2 3 2 35 11.18

Every 15th of the month 6 1 1 8 2.56

Weekly 2 2 0.64

3 - 5 days after delivery 1 1 0.32

No response 1 1 0.32

TOTAL 15 60 66 52 15 48 48 9 313 100

Table 13. MANGO: Distribution of respondents, by manner of payment in distribution,by province, 2001

Mode of Payment FarmerBA-SD/MD-SD/PA-SD


MD/BA-MD

IRA-LD/RA-LD/PA-LD


METRO MANILACash 2 6 6 14Consignment 1 1

PANGASINANCash 38 3 8 5 2 56Consignment 1 1 1 3No response 1 1

ILOILOCash 36 2 7 3 8 56Consignment 4 3 2 1 10

GUIMARASCash 32 32Consignment 4 2 2 1 5 14Every 15th of the month 4 1 1 6

CEBUCash 4 6 10Consignment 1 1 2Every 15th of the month 1 1Weekly 1 1 2

DAVAO CITYCash 39 2 3 44Consignment 1 1 1 3Every 15th of the month 1 1

DAVAO DEL SURCash 40 4 4 48

GENERAL SANTOS CITYCash 2 1 3 6Consignment 1 1 23 - 5 days after delivery 1 1

Table 13a. MANGO: Distribution of respondents, by type of marketing participants,by manner of payment in distribution, by province, 2001

45 2 313TOTAL 200 8 22 36

Pre-marketing 0.06 0.03 0.08 0.01 1.02Hauling 0.06 0.03 0.08 0.01 1.02

Procurement 0.42 0.62 0.17 0.16 0.25 0.39 0.10Hauling 0.14 0.03 0.07 0.31Handling

Loading 0.14 0.11 0.06 0.05 0.09 0.05Unloading 0.14 0.11 0.06 0.05 0.09 0.05

Sorting 0.02Weighing 0.35 0.05 0.03Packing 0.03Supervising 0.08

Shipping 0.24 0.01 0.12 0.009Arrastre 0.02 0.01 0.06 0.003Stevedoring 0.14 0.004 0.06 0.003Portarage 0.08 0.003

Distribution 0.48 1.21 0.55 0.17 0.48 0.44 0.48 0.12Handling

Loading 0.09 0.03 0.12 0.03 0.09 0.17 0.04 0.002Unloading 0.09 0.03 0.12 0.03 0.09 0.17 0.04 0.002

Sorting 0.16 0.16 0.09 0.05 0.16 0.05 0.02 0.04Weighing 0.06 0.06 0.10 0.03 0.06 0.01 0.02 0.01Packing 0.08 0.93 0.10 0.03 0.08 0.04 0.02 0.005Cleaning 0.02Selling 0.32 0.06Supervisory 0.02

Salaries and Wages 0.15 0.16 0.15 0.12 0.07 0.67

TOTAL 1.05 2.05 0.99 0.42 1.00 0.58 1.96 0.89

Metro Manila

Marketing Activity/Practice

peso per kilogram

Table 14. MANGO: Labor costs incurred by activity/practices,by province, 2001

CebuIloiloGeneral Santos

City

Davao del Sur

Davao City

GuimarasPangasinan

Procurement 0.29 0.51 0.77Hauling 0.13 0.25 0.15Handling

Loading 0.08 0.13 0.31Unloading 0.08 0.13 0.31

Distribution 0.54 0.86 1.80Handling

Loading 0.06Unloading 0.06

Sorting 0.13 0.26 0.60Weighing 0.12 0.26 0.60Packing 0.17 0.34 0.60

Salaries and Wages 0.07 0.29

Table 14a. MANGO: Labor costs incurred by marketing participants,by activity/practice, Metro Manila, 2001

peso per kilogram

RetailerMarketing

Activity/PracticeIRA-LD MA-MD

TOTAL 0.90 1.37 2.86

Pre-marketing Costs 0.06Hauling 0.06

Procurement 0.01 0.56 0.30 0.12Hauling 0.01 0.19 0.12Handling a/

Loading 0.15 0.01Unloading 0.15 0.01

Sorting 0.02Weighing 0.35Packing

Distribution 0.35 0.05 0.28 0.36 0.20 0.18 1.15Handling

Loading 0.07 0.02 0.04 0.01 0.48Unloading 0.07 0.02 0.04 0.01 0.48

Sorting 0.09 0.00 0.16 0.16 0.10 0.05 0.19Weighing 0.05 0.02 0.05 0.04 0.12Packing 0.07 0.01 0.10 0.07 0.04 0.01

Salaries and Wages 1.38 0.25 0.87 0.34

peso per kilogram

1.71 1.150.66

RetailerPA-LD PA-MD MA-MD Exporter

Table 14b. MANGO: Labor costs incurred by marketing participants,by activity/practice, Pangasinan, 2001

TOTAL 1.79 0.31


Farmer IRA-LD

0.20 0.64

Pre-marketing Costs 0.04 0.03 0.02Hauling 0.04 0.03 0.02

Procurement 0.25 0.17 0.19 0.03Handling


Weighing 0.25 0.05 0.03 0.03

Distribution 0.31 0.66 0.27 0.22 0.06 1.05Handling


Sorting 0.11 0.05 0.15Weighing 0.04 0.12 0.05 0.03 0.03 0.30Packing 0.04 0.12 0.05 0.03 0.03 0.30Cleaning 0.02

Salaries and Wages 0.24Arrastre 0.02Stevedoring 0.14Portarage 0.08

0.47 1.050.43 0.09


TOTAL 0.25 0.90

peso per kilogram

0.35

Processor IRA-LD

Table 14c. MANGO: Labor costs incurred by marketing participants,by activity/practice, Guimaras, 2001

PA-MD MA-MD MA-SDFarmer Retailer

Pre-marketing Costs 0.08Hauling 0.08

Procurement 0.08 0.08 1.10 0.06 0.10Handling


Weighing 0.02 0.04 0.20 0.02 0.04Packing 0.02 0.04 0.20 0.02 0.04

ShippingArrastreStevedoring

Distribution 0.32 0.35 0.14 0.06 0.28Handling


Weighing 0.04 0.11 0.06 0.02 0.13Packing 0.09 0.08 0.06 0.02 0.09Sorting 0.05

Processor IRA-LD PA-MD MA-MD MA-SD

1.10 0.280.20 0.16

Table 14d. MANGO: Labor costs incurred by marketing participants,by activity/practice, Iloilo, 2001

Farmer

0.08TOTAL 0.40 0.43

peso per kilogram

RetailerMarketing

Activity/Practice

Procurement 0.07 0.18Hauling 0.07Handling


Distribution 0.35 0.96Handling


Sorting 0.08 0.47Weighing 0.06 0.07Packing 0.05 0.18

Shipping 0.14 0.06Arrastre 0.07 0.03Stevedoring 0.07 0.03

Salaries and wages 0.38 0.14

IRA-LD Retailer

TOTAL 0.94 0.18 0.141.02

Processor

Table 14e. MANGO: Labor costs incurred by marketing participants,by activity/practice, Cebu, 2001

peso per kilogram

PA-MDMarketing

Activity/Practice

Pre-marketing 0.16 0.002 0.02Hauling 0.16 0.002 0.02

Shipping 0.008Handling 0.003Arrastre 0.003Stevedoring 0.002

Distribution 0.014 0.12 0.18 0.82Handling


Weighing 0.002 0.04 0.17Packing 0.006 0.04 0.31Sorting 0.006 0.04 0.18

Salaries and wages 0.05 0.02 0.08 0.11

Farmer PA-SDPA-LD

0.930.07

Table 14f. MANGO: Labor costs incurred by marketing participants,by activity/practice, Davao City, 2001

IRA-LD

TOTAL 0.16 0.28

peso per kilogram

0.14

RetailerMarketing

Activity/Practice

Pre-marketing 0.12Hauling 0.12

Procurement 0.39Hauling 0.31Handling

LoadingUnloading

Supervising 0.08

Distribution 0.02 0.21 0.17 0.48Handling


Sorting 0.01 0.03Weighing 0.01 0.03Packing 0.01 0.03Selling 0.32Supervising 0.02

Farmer IRA-LD

TOTAL 0.14 0.480.60 0.17

Retailer

by activity/practice, Davao del Sur, 2001Table 14g. MANGO: Labor costs incurred by marketing participants,

peso per kilogram

PA-LDMarketing

Activity/Practice

Procurement 0.004 0.24 0.20Handling


Distribution 0.13 0.11 0.01Handling


Sorting 0.05 0.02Weighing 0.01 0.01Packing 0.002 0.02Selling 0.06 0.06 0.01

Salaries and wages 0.67

IRA-LD IRA-MD

0.13 1.02

peso per kilogram

0.21

Table 14h. MANGO: Labor costs incurred by marketing participants,by activity/practice, General Santos City, 2001

TOTAL

RetailerMarketing

Activity/Practice

Practice/activity Metro Manila Pangasinan Guimaras Iloilo Cebu Davao

CityDavao del

SurGeneral Santos

Pre-marketing cost 0.66 0.21

Procurement 0.35 0.03 0.17 0.43 0.42 0.51 0.25 0.15

Shipping 0.18 0.02 0.45 4.70

Distribution 0.11 0.03 0.05 0.42 0.14 0.58 0.37 0.04

* Includes plane fare

Table 15. MANGO: Transportation costs incurred by activity/practice,by province, 2001

peso per kilogram

TOTAL 0.46 0.72 0.40 1.08 1.01 5.79 0.190.62

*

Procurement 0.35 0.39

Distribution 0.10 0.09 0.98

Marketing Activity/Practices

by activity/practices, Metro Manila, 2001Table 15a. MANGO: Transportation costs incurred by marketing participants,

TOTAL 0.45 0.48 0.98

RetailerIRA-LD MA-MD

peso per kilogram

Pre-marketing 0.66

Procurement 0.15 0.20 0.18 0.08 0.40

Distribution 1.59 0.200 0.180 0.080 0.40

Table 15b. MANGO: Transportation costs incurred by marketing participants,

MA-MD

1.74 0.40 0.00

PA-LDIRA-LD

TOTAL

by activity/practice, Pangasinan, 2001

Marketing Activity/Practice Farmer

peso per kilogram

0.160.66 0.800.36

RetailerExporterPA-MD

Procurement 0.17 0.01 0.16 0.63

Shipping 0.18 0.02

Distribution 0.09 0.01 0.07

by activity/practice, Guimaras, 2001Table 15c. MANGO: Transportation costs incurred by marketing participants,

0.04

RetailerMA-MDIRA-LDMarketing Activity/Practice

peso per kilogram

0.630.23TOTAL

MA-SD

0.44

Pre-marketing 0.21

Procurement 0.44 0.03 0.67

Shipping 0.02 0.22 0.32 0.32

Distribution 0.40 0.38 1.43 0.54

Procurement

Shipping

Distribution

0.48

IRA-LD

peso per kilogram

PA-MD

0.59

0.14

TOTAL 0.73

0.42

0.06


Table 15e. MANGO: Transportation costs incurred by marketing participants,by activity/practice, Cebu, 2001

TOTAL

PA-MD PA-SD MA-MD

0.41 1.65 0.860.21


by activity/practice, Iloilo, 2001Table 15d. MANGO: Transportation costs incurred by marketing participants,

MA-SD

0.990.86

peso per kilogram

PA-LDFarmer

Procurement 1.00 0.20 0.42

ShippingBoat 0.47Air cargo 4.23

Distribution 1.00 0.002

0.42

peso per kilogram

TOTAL 6.70 0.002 0.20

by activity/practice, Davao City, 2001Table 15f. MANGO: Transportation costs incurred by marketing participants,

RetailerIRA-LDMarketing Activity/Practice PA-LD PA-SD

Procurement 0.25

Distribution 0.72 0.36

Procurement 0.20 0.11

Distribution 0.04 a/

peso per kilogram

TOTAL 0.24 0.11 0.00

by activity/practice, General Santos City, 2001

Marketing Activity/Practice IRA-LD IRA-MD Retailer

IRA-LDMarketing Activity/Practice PA-LD

Table 15h. MANGO: Transportation costs incurred by marketing participants,

by activity/practice, Davao del Sur, 2001Table 15g. MANGO: Transportation costs incurred by marketing participants,

0.25

peso per kilogram

TOTAL 0.72 0.36

Retailer

Marketing Activity/ Cost Item

Metro Manila Pangasinan Guimaras Iloilo Cebu Davao

CityDavao del

SurGeneral Santos

Procurement 0.42 0.51 1.08 0.08 0.74 0.26 0.14Kaing 0.07 0.42 0.36 0.001 0.004 0.04Old newspaper 0.02 0.02 0.05 0.01 0.08 0.04Twine 0.01 0.01 0.03 0.01 0.02 0.01 0.03Bayong 0.07Sacks 0.25 0.04 0.03Cartons 0.25 0.04 0.34 0.10 0.02Kalburo 0.002 0.02 0.33 0.03 0.01Plastic bag 0.02 0.30Plastic sacks 0.06Banana leaves 0.001Wire 0.003Padding box 0.01Padding paper 0.04Staple wire 0.04

peso per kilogram

Table 16. MANGO: Cost of material inputs, by activity/practice/cost item,by province, 2001

Marketing Activity/ Cost Item

Metro Manila Pangasinan Guimaras Iloilo Cebu Davao

CityDavao del

SurGeneral Santos

peso per kilogram

Distribution 0.37 0.41 0.55 1.53 0.06 1.58 0.38 0.52Kaing 0.08 0.04 0.33 0.53 0.007 0.01 0.12 0.07Old newspaper 0.03 0.02 0.14 0.26 0.01 0.07 0.04 0.004Twine 0.01 0.03 0.005 0.04 0.003 0.02 0.04 0.03Plastic bag 0.06 0.06 0.05 0.55 0.002 0.22 0.08 0.05Kalburo 0.18 0.26 0.02 0.03 0.18 0.37Bilao 0.01Cartons 0.02 0.01 0.54 0.10Gloves a/Laddle a/Plastic sack 0.02 0.11Banana leaves 0.003Padding box 0.01Padding paper 0.04Net 0.49

TOTAL 0.37 0.83 1.06 2.61 0.14 2.32 0.64 0.66

a/ Less than 0.001

Marketing Activity/ Cost Item IRA-LD MA-MD Retailer

DistributionKaing 0.08 0.002Plastic bag 0.04 0.01 0.32Old newspaper 0.03 0.05 0.01Bilao 0.01 0.008Kalburo 0.17 0.50 0.38Twine 0.007 0.06

peso per kilogram

Table 16a. MANGO: Cost of material inputs incurred by marketingparticipants, by activity/practice/cost item, Metro Manila, 2001

TOTAL 0.34 0.62 0.72

Marketing Activity/ Cost Item Farmer IRA-LD PA-LD PA-MD MA-MD Exporter Retailer

Procurement 0.14 0.11 1.58 0.51 0.54Kaing 0.04 0.10 1.36 0.45 0.23Old newspaper 0.02 0.003 0.06 0.04 0.04Twine 0.006 0.002 0.16 0.02 0.02Bayong 0.07Sacks 0.25

Distribution 0.67 0.04 0.11 0.27 0.72Kaing 0.34 0.02 0.10 0.23 0.37Old newspaper 0.05 0.02 0.003 0.01 0.06Twine 0.04 0.004 0.003 0.03 0.08Plastic bag 0.06Kalburo 0.24 0.15

Transportation 2.40

0.67

peso per kilogram

by activity/practice/cost item, Pangasinan, 2001Table 16b. MANGO: Cost of material inputs incurred by marketing participants,

0.18 2.61TOTAL 1.85 0.51 0.54 0.72

Marketing Activity/ Cost Item Farmer IRA-LD PA-MD MA-MD MA-SD Retailer

Procurement 0.53 0.51 0.20 0.14 0.41Sacks 0.10 0.02Kaing 0.50 0.45 0.18 0.005 0.32Plastic bag 0.04 0.01Old newspaper 0.01 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.05Banana leaves 0.001Twine 0.02 0.002 0.02 0.02Wire 0.003

Distribution 0.52 0.02 0.01 0.38 0.12 0.27Kaing 0.43 0.14Plastic bag 0.02 0.005 0.04 0.12 0.27Old newspaper 0.06 0.20Sack 0.02Twine 0.005Banana leaves 0.003

peso per kilogram

by activity/practice/cost item, Guimaras, 2001Table 16c. MANGO: Cost of material inputs incurred by marketing participants,

0.55 0.52TOTAL 0.52 0.58 0.26 0.68

Marketing Activity/ Cost Item Farmer PA-LD PA-MD PA-SD MA-MD MA-SD Retailer

Procurement 0.52 0.69 1.37 1.02 1.31 0.93Sacks 0.03 0.06 0.43 0.02 0.07 0.05Kaing 0.34 0.49 0.36 0.600 0.79 0.12Plastic sacks a/ 0.06 0.07 0.040 0.07 0.05Plastic bag 0.27 0.01 0.58Old newspaper 0.06 0.02 0.56 0.09 0.08 0.09Twine b/ 0.03 0.05 0.02 0.04 0.04Calburo 0.002Cartons 0.25

Distribution 0.31 0.82 0.61 0.31 0.10 0.81 0.83Plastic sacks 0.03 0.06 0.09 0.08 0.21Kaing 0.19 0.63 0.30 0.30 0.63 0.26Calburo 0.01 0.12Plastic bag 0.05 0.05 0.21 0.08 0.04 0.17Old newspaper 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.06 0.02Twine 0.02 0.05 0.001 0.05Carton 0.02

a/ Include sackb/ Rattan strips

1.30 2.12

Table 16d. MANGO: Cost of material inputs incurred by marketing participants,by activity/practice/cost item, Iloilo, 2001

TOTAL 0.31

peso per kilogram

1.34 1.68 1.12 1.76

Marketing Activity/ Cost Item IRA-LD PA-MD Retailer Processor

Procurement 0.08 0.09 0.00 0.00Kaing 0.001Old newspaper 0.01 0.01Twine 0.01 0.02Cartons 0.04 0.04Kalburo 0.02 0.02

Distribution 0.02 0.03 0.52 0.001Kaing 0.007Plastic bag 0.01 0.01 0.07 0.001Old newspaper 0.01 0.01 0.02Twine 0.003 0.003Kalburo 0.03Carton 0.001 0.40Gloves a/Laddle a/

a/ Less than 0.001

Table 16e. MANGO: Cost of material inputs incurred by marketing participants,by activity/practice/cost item, Cebu, 2001

0.001TOTAL 0.11

peso per kilogram

0.12 0.52

Marketing Activity/ Cost Item Farmer IRA-LD PA-SD Retailer

Procurement 0.41 0.33Box 0.34Kalburo 0.33Twine 0.02Padding box 0.01Padding paper 0.04

Distribution 1.33 0.61 0.47 0.13Kaing 0.14 0.005Plastic bag 0.24 0.13Old newspaper 0.22 0.04Twine 0.48 0.020 0.003Kalburo 0.18Box 0.54Padding box 0.01Padding paper 0.04Net 0.49

Table 16f. MANGO: Cost of material inputs incurred by marketing participants,by activity/practice/cost item, Davao City, 2001

0.46TOTAL 1.33

peso per kilogram

0.471.02

Marketing Activity/ Cost Item Farmer IRA-LD PA-LD Retailer

Procurement 0.80 0.04Kaing 0.01 a/Old newspaper 0.08Twine 0.02 a/Carton 0.66 0.001Kalburo 0.03Staple wire 0.04

Distribution 0.16 0.81 0.27 0.18Plastic bag 0.03 0.18Twine 0.01 0.07 0.03Old newspaper 0.03 0.07 0.04Cartons 0.64 0.20Kaing 0.12

a/ Less than 0.001

Table 16g. MANGO: Cost of material inputs incurred by marketing participants,by activity/practice/cost item, Davao del Sur, 2001

0.18TOTAL 0.16

peso per kilogram

0.311.61

Marketing Activity/ Cost Item IRA-LD IRA-MD Retailer

Procurement 0.14 0.23Kaing 0.03 0.11Old newspaper 0.05 0.02Twine 0.04 0.001Carton 0.01 0.10Kalburo 0.01

Distribution 0.22 0.61 0.17Plastic bag 0.02 0.17Kaing 0.07 0.08Old newspaper 0.004 0.004Twine 0.04 0.003Kalburo 0.11 0.50

0.17TOTAL 0.36

peso per kilogram

0.84

Table 16h. MANGO: Cost of material inputs incurred by marketing participants,by activity/practice/cost item, General Santos City, 2001

Cost Item Metro Manila Pangasinan Guimaras Iloilo Cebu Davao

CityDavao del

SurGeneral Santos

Other Operating ExpensesBusiness permit 0.01 0.001 0.22 0.03 0.02 0.03 0.001 0.02Market fee b/ 0.40 0.25 0.18 0.09 0.04 0.01 0.04 0.01Storage fee 0.30Telephone 0.02 0.03 0.001 0.03 0.02 0.01 0.06Electricity 0.02 0.01 0.18 0.01 0.02 0.01 0.002 0.01Water 0.001 0.001 0.003 0.001Repair and maintenance 0.08 0.04 0.001 0.02 a/ 0.003Toll fee 0.19 0.90 0.04 a/ 0.01 0.21Stall rental 0.19 0.37 0.36 0.01 0.02 0.05 0.50Gas/oil 0.12 0.13 0.14 0.14 0.02Meals and Breverages 0.04 0.01 0.09 0.11 0.09 0.06 0.05 0.01Interest on loan 0.01 0.12 0.13 0.03 0.008 0.03 0.10 0.01Wastage 0.55 0.30 1.04 0.18 a/ 0.86 0.49Calibration of weighing scale 0.004 0.002 0.02 a/ a/ 0.003Agent's commission 0.50Cell card 0.002 0.12Wharfage fee 0.02Other Operating Expenses c/ a/ 0.01 0.02 a/ 0.02 0.04

TOTAL 1.24 1.49 3.31 0.65 1.07 1.21 0.86 0.88

a/ Less than 0.001b/ Includes barangay permitc/ Includes tong, donations and sanitary

peso per kilogram

Table 17. MANGO: Other operating costs by cost item,by province, 2001

Cost Item IRA-LD MA-MD Retailer

Other Operating ExpensesBusiness permit 0.01 0.004 0.03Market fee 0.51 0.03 0.16Telephone 0.02 0.270Water 0.001Electricity 0.02 0.040 0.070Meals 0.03 0.09 0.26Wastage 0.55 0.92 0.90Others a/ 0.001 a/Stall rental 0.19 0.25 0.30Interest on loan 0.01

a/ Includes donations, tong, sanitary

TOTAL 1.33 1.35

peso per kilogram

by cost item, Metro Manila, 2001Table 17a. MANGO: Other operating costs incurred by marketing participants,

1.99

Cost Item Farmer IRA-LD PA-LD PA-MD MA-MD Exporter Retailer

Other Operating ExpensesBusiness permit a/ 0.02Market fee 0.50 0.32 0.50 0.140 0.43Storage feeRepair/Maintenance 0.56 0.001Tong 0.010Toll fee 0.19 0.39Stall rental 0.35Telephone 0.08 0.03 0.02 0.01 0.04Electricity 0.01Water 0.001Gas/oil 0.61 0.16 0.01 0.03 0.04Meals 0.32 0.006 0.005 0.03 0.01 0.05 0.67Interest 1.750 0.12 0.03 0.02 0.53Wastage 0.86 0.04 0.06

Table 17b. MANGO: Other operating costs incurred by marketing participants,by cost item, Pangasinan, 2001

peso per kilogram

0.38 1.55 0.56 0.15 1.55TOTAL 4.12 0.65

Cost Item Farmer IRA-LD PA-MD MA-MD MA-SD Retailer

Other Operating ExpensesBusiness permit b/ 0.34 0.85 0.001 0.14Electricity 0.18Calibration of weighing scale 0.004Market fee 0.02 0.02 0.60 0.46Rental fee 0.09 0.09 0.75Wastage 1.41 0.37Interest on loan 0.19 0.06 0.11Gas/oil 0.09 0.02Other cost c/ 0.02Toll fee 0.90Meals 0.11 0.02 0.03 0.13 0.21Repair and maintenance 0.04Wharfage fee 0.02

1.69TOTAL 3.03

Table 17c. MANGO: Other operating costs incurred by marketing participants,by cost item, Guimaras, 2001

peso per kilogram

0.13 1.74 0.55 0.13

Cost Item Farmer PA-LD PA-MD PA-SD MA-MD MA-SD Retailer

Other Operating ExpensesBusiness permit a/ 0.01 0.30 0.17 0.06 0.01 0.04Market fee b/ 0.09 0.71 0.12 0.11 0.03Repair and maintenance 0.001 0.002Meals and beverages 0.14 0.11 0.14 0.11 0.002 0.10 0.11Telephone 0.001Electricity 0.002 0.10 0.02 0.17Wastage 0.95 0.28 0.86 0.88 0.01Calibration of weighing scale a/ 0.01 0.001 0.004Toll fee 0.02 0.03 0.24Stall rental 0.01 0.02 0.04Cellcard 0.002Interest on loan 0.10 0.006 0.20Gas/oil 0.16 0.02 0.07 0.03 0.13 0.24

a/ Less than 0.001

Table 17d. MANGO: Other operating costs incurred by marketing participants,by cost item, Iloilo, 2001

0.67 1.34 1.07 0.34TOTAL 1.19

peso per kilogram

0.891.47

Cost Item IRA-LD PA-MD Retailer Processor

Other Operating ExpensesBusiness permit 0.01 0.02 0.14Market fee b/ 0.02 0.01 0.43Electricity 0.02 0.02 0.08Telephone 0.02 0.10Storage fee 0.30Calibration of weighing scale 0.02 0.004Meals and beverages 0.08 0.10 0.02Rental 0.02Wastage a/Interest on loan 0.002 0.05Agent's commission 0.50Repair and maintenance 0.02

a/ Less than 0.001b/ Include barangay permit

TOTAL 0.19

Table 17e. MANGO: Other operating costs incurred by marketing participants,by cost item, Cebu, 2001

peso per kilogram

0.25 1.02 0.52

Cost Item Farmer IRA-LD PA-LD PA-SD Retailer

Other Operating ExpensesBusiness permit 0.02 0.03 0.04Market fee a/ 0.01 0.04Electricity 0.001 0.19 0.03Telephone 0.002 0.28 0.12 0.12Meals and beverages 0.45 0.05 0.02 0.60Wastage 0.13 1.08 0.21Interest on loan 0.02 0.14Gas and oil 0.15 0.001Tong a/Calibration of weighing scale a/ 0.002 0.001 0.002Water 0.001 0.04Toll fee a/Stall rental 0.02 0.37 0.02 0.42

a/ Less than 0.001

Table 17f. MANGO: Other operating costs incurred by marketing participants,by cost item, Davao City, 2001

peso per kilogram

0.93 1.29 1.56TOTAL 0.240.58

Cost Item Farmer IRA-LD PA-LD Retailer

Other Operating Expenses 0.32 0.29 0.08 1.24Municipal permit 0.02 0.001Market fee 0.006 0.06 0.13Telephone 0.01Electricity 0.003 0.002Meals 0.08 0.02Wastage 0.32 1.00Toll fee 0.01Water 0.001Cellcard 0.12Repair and maintenance a/Interest 0.10Gas/oil 0.02Others "tong" 0.02Calibration of weighing scale a/ a/ 0.01

Salaries and wages 0.07

a/ Less than 0.001

Table 17g. MANGO: Other operating costs incurred by marketing participants,

TOTAL 0.360.32

by cost item, Davao del Sur, 2001

peso per kilogram

0.08 1.24

Cost Item IRA-LD IRA-MD Retailer

Other Operating ExpensesBusiness permit a/ 0.03 0.02 0.29Market fee b/ 0.01 0.02 0.08Repair and maintenance 0.002 0.004Meals and beverages c/ 0.006 0.02Donation d/ 0.04Telephone 0.06Electricity 0.003 0.04 0.01Calibration of weighing scale 0.002 0.005Toll fee 0.21Stall fee 0.50Others e/ 0.02 0.03Interest on loan 0.01 0.05

a/ Includes municipal permitb/ Includes ticketc/ Includes cigarettesd/ Includes association feee/ Includes tong

TOTAL 0.790.08

Table 17h. MANGO: Other operating costs incurred by marketing participants,by cost item, General Santos City, 2001

peso per kilogram

0.60

Cost Item Metro Manila Pangasinan Guimaras Iloilo Cebu Davao

CityDavao del

SurGeneral Santos

Materials UsedWeighing Scale a/ 0.01 0.02 0.05 0.02 a/ 0.03 0.005Electric fan a/Tolda 0.01Plastic crates 0.03 0.01Cellphone 0.12 0.01 0.004 0.01 0.03Basin a/Knife 0.002 a/Peeler 0.005 a/Strainer a/Colander plastic a/Kettle 0.03 0.002Band sealer 0.001Mechanical dryer 0.001Pulper 0.001Tables 0.005 0.001Chairs a/ a/ a/ a/ 0.001Computer 0.01Radio tranciever 0.001 0.004Blender 0.02Laddle 0.002 a/Office building 0.005 0.01Warehouse/storage 3.02 0.005 0.01 0.002 0.04

Transportation 2.40 0.34 0.02

TOTAL 0.01 2.42 3.25 0.40 0.10 0.01 0.04 0.08a/ less than 0.001

peso per kilogram

Table 18. MANGO: Imputed cost of depreciation by facilities/equipment used,by province, 2001

Facilities/Equipment IRA-LD MA-MD Retailer

Imputed CostWeighing scale a/ 0.004 0.005Chains a/ a/ 0.001Electricfan a/ 0.002 0.01Tolda 0.01

Table 18a. MANGO: Imputed costs of depreciation incurred by marketingparticipants, by facilities/equipment used, Metro Manila, 2001

peso per kilogram

TOTAL a/ 0.01 0.03

Facilities/Equipment Farmer IRA-LD PA-LD PA-MD MA-MD Exporter Retailer

Imputed CostWeighing scale 0.25 0.01 0.001 0.004 0.002 0.06 0.05Storage/Office Bldg. 0.005

TOTAL 0.25 0.02 0.001 0.004 0.002 0.06 0.05

Facilities/Equipment Processor Farmer IRA-LD PA-MD MA-MD MA-SD Retailer

Imputed CostWeighing scale 1.30 0.001 0.01 0.02 0.001 0.02 0.06Cellphone 0.12Radio Transciever 0.001Plastic crate 0.03Knife 0.002Peeler 0.005Blender 0.02Kettle 0.03Laddle 0.002Building 3.02

TOTAL 4.41 0.001 0.01 0.021 0.001 0.02 0.18

participants, by facilities/equipment used, Guimaras, 2001

peso per kilogram

Table 18b. MANGO: Imputed costs of depreciation incurred by marketingparticipants, by facilities/equipment used, Pangasinan, 2001

Table 18c. MANGO: Imputed costs of depreciation incurred by marketing

peso per kilogram

Facilities/Equipment Farmer PA-LD PA-MD PA-SD MA-MD MA-SD Retailer

Imputed Cost 0.02 0.01 0.04 0.24 0.02 0.06 0.02Weighing scale 0.02 0.001 0.03 0.24 0.020 0.03 0.02Storage 0.005 0.03Bamboo table 0.002 0.01Radio 0.004

Imputed Cost 0.38 0.23

Table 18d. MANGO: Imputed costs of depreciation incurred by marketingparticipants, by facilities/equipment used, Iloilo, 2001

peso per kilogram

TOTAL 0.02 0.44 0.250.02 0.01 0.04 0.24

Facilities/Equipment IRA-LD PA-MD Processor

Imputed Cost 0.06 0.02 0.05Plastic crates 0.03 0.02 0.01Weighing scale 0.02 0.003 0.002Cellphone 0.01Basin a/Knife a/Peeler a/Strainer a/Colander plastic a/Kettle 0.002Band sealer 0.001Mechanical dryer 0.001Pulper 0.001Office 0.01Warehouse 0.01Tables 0.001Chairs a/Computer 0.01

Tranportation 0.01 0.03

a/ less than 0.001

Table 18e. MANGO: Imputed costs of depreciation incurred by marketingparticipants, by facilities/equipment used, Cebu, 2001

peso per kilogram

TOTAL 0.080.07 0.02

Facilities/Equipment IRA-LD PA-SD Retailer

Imputed CostWeighing scale a/ 0.002 0.007Cellphone 0.004Chair a/

a/ less than 0.001

Table 18f. MANGO: Imputed costs of depreciation incurred by marketingparticipants, by facilities/equipment used, Davao City, 2001

peso per kilogram

TOTAL 0.0070.0020.004

Facilities/Equipment Farmer IRA-LD PA-LD Retailer

Imputed CostWeighing scale 0.33 0.002 a/ 0.01Storage 0.002Cellphone 0.01Chair a/ a/

a/ less than 0.001

Table 18g. MANGO: Imputed costs of depreciation incurred by marketingparticipants, by facilities/equipment used, Davao del Sur, 2001

peso per kilogram

TOTAL 0.01a/0.33 0.014

Facilities/Equipment IRA-LD IRA-MD Retailer

Imputed Cost 0.03 0.06 0.004Weighing scale 0.002 0.02 0.004Chairs 0.001Cellphone 0.03 0.04

Facilities 0.04Storage 0.04

a/ less than 0.001

Table 18h. MANGO: Imputed costs of depreciation incurred by marketingparticipants, by facilities/equipment used, General Santos City, 2001

peso per kilogram

TOTAL 0.0040.03 0.14

Item Metro Manila Pangasinan Guimaras Iloilo Cebu Davao City Davao del

SurGeneral Santos

CashLabor 1.05 2.05 0.99 0.42 1.00 0.58 1.96 0.89

Hauling 0.14 0.09 0.03 0.08 0.07 0.01 1.33Handling

Loading 0.23 0.14 0.18 0.08 0.18 0.17 0.04 0.05Unloading 0.23 0.14 0.18 0.08 0.18 0.17 0.04 0.05

Sorting 0.16 0.18 0.09 0.05 0.16 0.05 0.02 0.04Weighing 0.06 0.41 0.15 0.06 0.06 0.01 0.02 0.01Packing 0.08 0.93 0.10 0.06 0.08 0.04 0.02 0.005Supervising 0.10Arrastre 0.02 0.01 0.06 0.003Stevedoring 0.14 0.004 0.06 0.003Portarage 0.08 0.003Cleaning 0.02Selling 0.32 0.06


Transportation 0.46 0.72 0.40 1.08 1.01 5.79 0.62 0.19Pre-marketing cost 0.66 0.21Procurement 0.35 0.03 0.17 0.43 0.42 0.51 0.25 0.15Shipping 0.18 0.02 0.45 4.70Distribution 0.11 0.03 0.05 0.42 0.14 0.58 0.37 0.04

by province, 2001

peso per kilogram

Table 19. MANGO: Total Marketing Costs (Cash & Non-cash)

d/


SurGeneral Santos

peso per kilogram

Materials 0.37 0.83 1.06 2.61 0.14 2.32 0.64 0.66Kaing 0.08 0.11 0.75 0.89 0.008 0.01 0.12 0.11Old newspaper 0.03 0.04 0.16 0.31 0.02 0.07 0.12 0.04Twine 0.01 0.04 0.02 0.07 0.01 0.04 0.05 0.06Bayong 0.07Sacks 0.25 0.04 0.03Cartons 0.27 0.05 0.88 0.20 0.02Kalburo 0.18 0.26 0.02 0.05 0.51 0.03 0.38Plastic bag 0.06 0.06 0.07 0.85 0.002 0.22 0.08 0.05Plastic sacks 0.02 0.17Banana leaves 0.004Wire 0.003Padding box 0.02Padding paper 0.08Staple wire 0.04Bilao 0.01Gloves a/Laddle a/Net 0.49

Other Operating Costs 1.24 1.49 3.31 0.65 1.07 1.21 0.86 0.88Business permit 0.01 0.001 0.22 0.03 0.02 0.03 0.001 0.02Market fee b/ 0.40 0.25 0.18 0.09 0.04 0.01 0.04 0.01Storage fee 0.30Telephone 0.02 0.03 0.001 0.03 0.02 0.01 0.06Electricity 0.02 0.01 0.18 0.01 0.02 0.01 0.002 0.01


SurGeneral Santos

peso per kilogram

Water 0.001 0.001 0.003 0.001Repair and maintenance 0.08 0.04 0.001 0.02 a/ 0.003Toll fee 0.19 0.90 0.04 a/ 0.01 0.21Stall rental 0.19 0.37 0.36 0.01 0.02 0.05 0.50Gas/oil 0.12 0.13 0.14 0.14 0.02Meals and Breverages 0.04 0.01 0.09 0.11 0.09 0.06 0.05 0.01Interest on loan 0.01 0.12 0.13 0.03 0.008 0.03 0.10 0.01Wastage 0.55 0.30 1.04 0.18 a/ 0.86 0.49Calibration of weighing scale 0.004 0.002 0.02 a/ a/ 0.003Agent's commission 0.50Cell card 0.002 0.12Wharfage fee 0.02Other Operating Expenses c/ a/ 0.01 0.02 a/ 0.02 0.04

Non-cash 0.01 2.42 3.25 0.40 0.10 0.01 0.04 0.08Weighing Scale a/ 0.01 0.02 0.05 0.02 a/ 0.03 0.005Electric fan a/Tolda 0.01Plastic crates 0.03 0.01Cellphone 0.12 0.01 0.004 0.01 0.03Basin a/Knife 0.002 a/Peeler 0.005 a/Strainer a/Colander plastic a/Kettle 0.03 0.002


SurGeneral Santos

peso per kilogram

Band sealer 0.001Mechanical dryer 0.001Pulper 0.001Tables 0.005 0.001Chairs a/ a/ a/ a/ 0.001Computer 0.01Radio tranciever 0.001 0.004Blender 0.02Laddle 0.002 a/Office building 0.005 0.01Warehouse/storage 3.02 0.005 0.01 0.002 0.04Transportation 2.40 0.34 0.02

Total 3.28 7.67 9.02 5.17 3.47 10.03 4.20 3.37

a/ Less than 0.001b/ Includes barangay permitc/ Includes tong, donations and sanitaryd/ Includes plane fare


SurGeneral Santos

Cash 3.27 5.25 5.77 4.76 3.37 10.02 4.16 3.29

Non-cash 0.01 2.42 3.25 0.40 0.10 0.01 0.04 0.08

Total 3.28 7.67 9.02 5.17 3.47 10.03 4.20 3.37

a/ Less than 0.001b/ Includes barangay permitc/ Includes tong, donations and sanitaryd/ Includes plane fare

by province, 2001

peso per kilogram



SurGeneral Santos

Cash

Labor 1.05 2.05 0.99 0.42 1.00 0.58 1.96 0.89


Transportation 0.46 0.72 0.40 1.08 1.01 5.79 0.62 0.19

Materials 0.37 0.83 1.06 2.61 0.14 2.32 0.64 0.66

Other Operating Costs 1.24 1.49 3.31 0.65 1.07 1.21 0.86 0.88

Non-cash

Imputed Cost 0.01 2.42 3.25 0.40 0.10 0.01 0.04 0.08

Total 3.28 7.67 9.02 5.17 3.47 10.03 4.20 3.37

by province, 2001

peso per kilogram


Metro Manila Pangasinan Guimaras Iloilo Cebu Davao City Davao del

SurGeneral Santos

1. Lack of financial assistance/capital to finance the business, delayed/non-payment of loan and slow turnover of capital. 5 9 1 8 7 1 4 2

2. Low sales/price due to over supply during peak months. 3 4 3 1 5 2 4 3

3. Poor quality/limited supply of mango. 1 3 1 1 2 4 4

4. Competition among traders/limited consumers. 3 4 1 3 4

5. High percentage of spoilage. 2 2 5 1

6. Unstable prices/sometimes controlled by trader/exporter. 5 2 1

7. High transportation costs. 2 1 1

8. Emergence of transient. 2

Problems

Table 22. MANGO: Distribution of respondents, by problems encountered,by province, 2001

110

TYPES OF TRADERS 1. Assembler – procures from farmers and traders in the supply areas; usually has agents

or relatives (considered as extension of him/herself) responsible for procurement and assembly. Assemblers are classified according to geographic area of procurement. These are:

a) Barangay Assembler (BA) – procures from one barangay only. b) Municipal Assembler (MA) – procures from two or more barangays

within the municipality.

c) Provincial Assembler (PA) – procures from two or more municipalities within the province.

d) Regional Assembler (RA) – procures from two or more provinces

within the region.

e) Interregional Assembler (IRA) – procures from two or more regions.

2. Distributor – sells commodities to other traders and consumers. Since his/her business

is primarily to sell than to procure, he/she provides more services to his/her buyers than to his/her suppliers. Distributors are classified according to the geographic sphere of his/her selling operations (location of buyers), but are described according to size (i.e., small, medium, large). There may be instances, however, when classification could be according to the relative volume of commodities rather than the trader’s geographic sphere of influence. The following are the classifications of distributors:

a) Small Distributor (SD) - handles only a small volume of goods;

sells to retailers within the same market; may sell to several small eateries (carinderias).

b) Medium Distributor (MD) - sells larger volume than small

distributor; sells to traders coming from other markets in the province; may also sell to few institutional buyers (hotel, restaurant, hospital, military camp).

c) Large Distributor (LD) - handles the largest volume among the

three types of distributors; usually sells to traders from other markets within and outside the province; may also sell to several institutional buyers.

111

3. Assembler-Distributor – uses about the same efforts and resources in procuring and

selling a commodity; usually finances farmers and traders in supply areas and has agents responsible for procurement; sells commodities to other traders. Several combinations are possible as shown below:

a) Barangay Assembler-Small Distributor (BA-SD) b) Barangay Assembler-Medium Distributor (BA-MD) c) Barangay Assembler-Large Distributor (BA-LD) d) Municipal Assembler-Small Distributor (MA-SD) e) Municipal Assembler-Medium Distributor (MA-MD) f) Municipal Assembler-Large Distributor (MA-LD) g) Provincial Assembler-Small Distributor (PA-SD) h) Provincial Assembler-Medium Distributor (PA-MD) i) Provincial Assembler-Large Distributor (PA-LD) j) Regional Assembler-Small Distributor (RA-SD) k) Regional Assembler-Medium Distributor (RA-MD) l) Regional Assembler-Large Distributor (RA-LD) m) Interregional Assembler-Small Distributor (IRA-SD) n) Interregional Assembler-Medium Distributor (IRA-MD) o) Interregional Assembler-Large Distributor (IRA-LD)

Note: An assembler remains only an assembler and not an assembler-distributor

if the trader sells exclusively to only one trader. Examples of traders who are purely assemblers are interregional, regional, provincial and municipal assemblers who sell to only one processor/exporter with whom they have contract quotas to fulfill.

4. Agent/canvasser – receives cash advance from the trader; procures on behalf of the

trader; add his/her profit margin to the procurement price from the farmer.

5. Retailer – a type of trader who sources his/her stock either directly from the farmer

or distributors and sells directly to consumers. 6. Processor – transforms a raw commodity to a different product form (with value-

added).

7. Exporter - a type of trader whose outlet/s for his/her product is/are outside the country.

marketing cost mango - national statistics office of the ... · marketing cost structure for mango...

Documents