Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-g7gxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-04T18:06:36.229Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Factors Affecting the Price of Hay at a Pennsylvania Auction

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 May 2017

Bill Grisley ,
Spiro E. Stefanou  and
Ted Dickerson
Bill Grisley
Affiliation:
The Pennsylvania State University
Spiro E. Stefanou
Affiliation:
The Pennsylvania State University
Ted Dickerson
Affiliation:
The Pennsylvania State University
Get access

Abstract

The effect that selected characteristics of a Pennsylvania hay auction has on winning bids of loads of hay are presented in this paper. Survey data from 107 buyers over the period September 1982 to April 1983 were used. Hay type, perceived quality, and the intended use of the hay were found to be significant factors in explaining prices paid per ton. Sellers could increase their revenues by producing alfalfa hay, alfalfa and legume-grass hay of higher quality, and attending marketing days with a larger number of horse feed buyers.

Type
Research Article
Information
Northeastern Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics , Volume 14 , Issue 1 , April 1985 , pp. 48 - 56
Copyright
Copyright © 1985 Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

This research was funded by the Pennsylvania Forage and Grassland Council.

The authors wish to acknowledge the helpful comments of two anonymous reviewers and the editor. All remaining errors are the responsibility of the authors.

References

Buccola, S. T. “Price Trends at Livestock Auctions.” American Journal Agricultural Economics 64 (1982):63–69.Google Scholar
Engelbrecht-Wiggans, R. “Auctions and Bidding Models: A Survey.” Management Science 26 (1980):119–242.Google Scholar
Kuehn, J. P. An Analysis of the West Virginia Livestock Pricing Mechanism, Division Res. Mgmt., Room No. 77, West Virginia University, 1979.Google Scholar
Milgram, P. R., and Weber, R. J. “A Theory of Auctions and Competitive Bidding.” Econometrica 50 (1982):1089–1122.Google Scholar
Pennsylvania Crop Reporting Service. 1982 Crop and Livestock Annual Summary. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Department of Agriculture.Google Scholar
Riley, J., and Samuelson, W. “Optimal Auctions.” American Economic Review 71 (1981):381–92.Google Scholar
Schotter, A. “Auctioning Bohm-Bawerks Horses.” International Journal Game Theory 3 (1974):195–215.Google Scholar
Sosnick, S. H. “Bidding Strategy at Ordinary Auctions.” Journal Farm Economics 45 (1963):163–82.Google Scholar
Sosnick, S. H. “On the Distribution of Price Changes at a Bull Auction.” Journal Farm Economics 47 (1965):1306–20.Google Scholar
Traylor, H. D. An Analysis of Two Types of Variation in Cattle Prices at Auction Markets in Louisiana, Louisiana Agricultural Experiment Station Circular 182, 1955.Google Scholar
U.S. Department of Agriculture. Agricultural Statistics, 1983. SRS, Washington, D.C., 1983.Google Scholar
Vickey, W. “Counterspeculation, Auctions, and Competitive Sealed Tender.” Journal Finance 16 (1961):8–37.Google Scholar
Williamson, K. C., Carter, R. C., and Gaines, J. A. “Effects of Selected Variables on Prices of Calves in Virginia Feeder Calf Sales.” Journal Farm Economics 43 (1961):697–705.Google Scholar