IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/ajagec/v71y1989i4p874-882..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Pricing Accuracy and Efficiency in a Pilot Electronic Hog Market

Author

Listed:
  • W. Timothy Rhodus
  • E. Dean Baldwin
  • Dennis R. Henderson

Abstract

Daily average prices for hogs sold through the Hog Accelerated Marketing System (HAMS), an experimental electronic market, were compared to those for similar grade hogs sold through Peoria terminal and Indiana direct markets. Results indicate that prices received by farmers using HAMS increased by $0.94 to $0.99 per 100 pounds relative to their previous alternative. Using frequency of price change and average amount of price change as measures of efficient pricing behavior, the electronic market exhibited more efficient behavior than the traditional markets, i.e., average prices changed from one day to the next more frequently and by smaller amounts.

Suggested Citation

  • W. Timothy Rhodus & E. Dean Baldwin & Dennis R. Henderson, 1989. "Pricing Accuracy and Efficiency in a Pilot Electronic Hog Market," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 71(4), pages 874-882.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:ajagec:v:71:y:1989:i:4:p:874-882.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.2307/1242665
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Turner, Steven C. & Dykes, Nancy S. & McKissick, John C., 1991. "Feeder Cattle Price Differentials In Georgia Teleauctions," Southern Journal of Agricultural Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 23(2), pages 1-10, December.
    2. Sexton, Richard J., 1993. "Noncooperative Game Theory: A Review with Potential Applications to Agricultural Markets," Research Reports 25183, University of Connecticut, Food Marketing Policy Center.
    3. Wachenheim, Cheryl J. & Saxowsky, David, 2003. "Profits and Risk: Fitting an Old Framework to a New Agriculture," Journal of the ASFMRA, American Society of Farm Managers and Rural Appraisers, vol. 2003, pages 1-10.
    4. Unknown, 1990. "Structural Change in Livestock: Causes, Implications, Alternatives," Research Institute on Livestock Pricing 232728, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics.
    5. Nelson, Robert G. & Turner, Steven C., 1995. "Experimental Examination Of A Thin Market: Price Behavior In A Declining Terminal Market Revisited," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 27(1), pages 1-12, July.
    6. Chris Boessen & Joe Parcell & Jason Franken & John Lawrence & Ron Plain & Glenn Grimes, 2010. "Producer perceptions and attitudes toward hog marketing contracts," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 26(3), pages 405-424.
    7. Cheryl J. Wachenheim & Eric A. DeVuyst, 2001. "Strategic response to mandatory reporting legislation in the U.S. livestock and meat industries: Are collusive opportunities enhanced?," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 17(2), pages 177-195.
    8. Sexton, Richard J., 1994. "A Survey of Noncooperative Game Theory with Reference to Agricultural Markets: Part 2. Potential Applications in Agriculture," Review of Marketing and Agricultural Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 62(02), pages 1-18, August.
    9. Koontz, Stephen R. & Ward, Clement E., 1993. "Electronic Market Use By Oklahoma Lamb Producers," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 18(1), pages 1-16, July.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:ajagec:v:71:y:1989:i:4:p:874-882.. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aaeaaea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.