Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-vdxz6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T20:20:26.106Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Costs of Operating a Computerized Trading System for Slaughter Lambs

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 April 2015

James R. Russell  and
Wayne D. Purcell
James R. Russell
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural Economies, Oklahoma State University
Wayne D. Purcell
Affiliation:
Virginia Tech. Department of Agricultural Economics Paper A. E. 8284, Oklahoma State University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Recent interest in thin markets and rapidly advancing technology has focused increased attention on electronic marketing (Henderson et al.; Russell; Schlei), with particular emphasis on computerized trading systems. Decreased costs of access and increased reliability of computer hardware, software, and communication systems are increasing the likelihood that computerized trading systems will be a viable marketing alternative.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics , Volume 15 , Issue 1 , July 1983 , pp. 123 - 127
Copyright
Copyright © Southern Agricultural Economics Association 1983

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.)

References

Baldwin, D. “Slaughter Hogs.” In Proceedings National Symposium on Electronic Marketing of Agricultural Commodities, edited by Sporleder, T. L., pp. 74–91, MP-1463. Texas A&M, 1980.Google Scholar
Chieruzzi, A. “A Cost Comparison of Computerized and Conventional Auction Marketing Systems for Slaughter Cattle.” Master's thesis, Virginia Tech, 1980.Google Scholar
Draper, N. R., and Smith, H.. Applied Regression Analysis. New York: Wiley, 1966.Google Scholar
Ethridge, D. E. “A Computerized Remote-Access Commodity Market: Telcot.” S. J. Agr. Econ. 10(1978):177–182.Google Scholar
Glazener, G. “The Economic Feasibility of Computerized Spot Markets for Feeder Cattle in Texas.” Master's thesis, Texas A&M University, 1979.Google Scholar
Helmreich, D. P., and Epperson, J. E.. Settings for an Agricultural Multicommodity Computerized Exchange. University of Georgia, College of Agr. Exp. Sta. Res. Bull. 273, 1982.Google Scholar
Henderson, D. R., and Baldwin, E. D.. “Marketing slaughter Hogs by Remote-Access Computerized Auction: Theory and Empirical Results.” Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Amer. Agr. Econ. Assoc., July, 1981.Google Scholar
Henderson, D. R., Schrader, L. F., Sporleder, T. L., and Baldwin, E. D.. “The Economic Feasibility and Impacts of Electronic Markets: A Tentative Appraisal.” Paper presented at joint annual meeting of Amer. Agr. Econ. Assoc. and Western Agr. Econ. Assoc., July 1979.Google Scholar
Holder, D. L. “Benefits of a Sheep and Lamb Teleauction in Virginia and West Virginia.” Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Southern Agr. Econ. Assoc., February, 1979.Google Scholar
Kmenta, J.Elements of Econometrics. New York: Macmillan, 1971.Google Scholar
Russell, J. R. “Electronic Marketing: Conceptual, Theoretical, and Empirical Considerations.” Ph.D. dissertation, Virginia Tech, 1981.Google Scholar
Schlei, B. L. “Electronic Trading of Agricultural Products.” Paper presented to the Commonwealth Club, San Francisco, July, 1980.Google Scholar