RETAIL TRADE ANALYSIS, 1998

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This retail trade analysis was prepared for the City of Fairmont, Minnesota. The main purpose of the study was to determine the status of Fairmont's retail sector and to delineate the trade area geographically so that business people, city officials, developers and other interested parties could make informed decisions regarding the future of the business district.

Figure 1 summarizes the status of retailing in Fairmont as of 1998 (the latest data available) compared to other Minnesota towns of the same size.

Sales in the automotive group were nearly $13.3 million above average, compared to peer towns. Other areas of strength in order were: food ($4.6 million above average); eating and drinking ($2.6 million above average) and services ($2.1 million above average). The below average categories in order were: general merchandise ($6.5 million below average); home furnishings ($1.7 million below average), building materials ($250,000 below average) and apparel ($190,000 below average). Other key findings are listed below.

1. Overall in 1998, the retail sector in Fairmont had sales of about $177 million or about $2.4 million less than the average town of its size in Minnesota.

2. From 1996 to 1998 the fastest growing segments of Fairmont's retail sector were 1) miscellaneous, with a gain of $11.2 million; 2) automotive ($8 million gain); general merchandise ($4.6 million gain); food ($1.9 million gain); services ($1.2 million gain) and eating and drinking ($646,000 gain).

3. The declining portions of Fairmont's retail sector from 1996 to 1998 were 1) building materials ($1.6 million decline); 2) home furnishings ($1.5 million decline); and 3) apparel ($768,863 decline).

4. A pull factor analysis of 11 peer towns ranks Fairmont number seven in overall sales. Fairmont's highest ranking is automotive at number four and its worst ranking is furniture at number 8.

5. Martin County slipped from an $8.2 million surplus (net inflow of retail trade) in 1996 to a $17.8 million leakage (net outflow of retail trade) in 1998.

6. In 1998 Martin County had surpluses of trade in automotive, general merchandise and building materials. The county experienced leakages in all other categories.

7. In 1977 Fairmont's overall pull factor was 1.81 (equivalent to selling to 181 percent of Fairmont's population). However, Fairmont's pull factor declined to 1.26 by 1987, but has since increased to 1.46 in 1997.

8. Fairmont's general merchandise pull factor has gradually increased from 1.65 in 1977 to 1.9 in 1997, but lags well behind the average of 3.14 for peer towns.

9. Fairmont's food pull factor declined from 2.94 in 1977 to 1.71 in 1987 before again climbing to 1.87 in 1997, which is slightly below the average of 1.98 for the peer group.

10. The major conclusion of the study is that there are significant opportunities for expansion among general merchandise stores, home furnishings stores, building materials stores, apparel stores, and probably food stores. The probability for success in these categories is greatly enhanced because of the relative strengths in automotive, eating and drinking, and services. In addition, Fairmont is geographically positioned to carve out a much larger trade area with the addition of more retail facilities.

INTRODUCTION

The main purpose of this retail trade analysis is to inform business people, developers, city officials and other interested citizens of the history and current status of Fairmont's retail sector. By knowing the relative strengths and weaknesses of Fairmont's retail sector, it is hoped that merchants will build upon strengths and capitalize on the areas of opportunity. The following paragraphs will attempt to answer some of the questions most frequently asked about these analyses.

Data Sources

The sales figures for Fairmont and other Minnesota towns for 1996 and 1998 came from sales tax reports compiled by the Minnesota Department of Revenue. The Department did not publish a 1997 sales tax report because of budget constraints. These sales are for calendar years, running from January 1 to December 31.

The sales reported for earlier years came from the U.S. Census of Retail Trade. This census is conducted every five years and formats have been consistent for many years. It would have been preferable to use Department of Revenue sales tax figures from the more distant past, but they were either not available or of an inconsistent format.

Population figures came from the Minnesota State Demographer's office. The State Demographer produces annual population and household estimates in the years between official census years.

Income figures came from Survey of Buying Power, Sales and Marketing Management Magazine. These figures are updated and published every year.

Terminology

Current Dollar Sales

Current dollar sales are sales as reported by the state. In other words, no correction has been made for price inflation. In general this measure of sales is not very satisfactory for comparisons over time since it does not take into consideration changes in population, inflation, or the state's economy. Current dollars are also known as “nominal dollars.”

Constant Dollar Sales

Constant dollar sales reflect changes in price inflation. The method used in this report uses the Consumer Price Index to deflate sales data. Constant dollar sales indicate the real sales level with respect to some base year. This is a more realistic method of evaluating sales over time than current dollar comparisons, but still does not account for changes in population or changes in the state's economy. Constant dollars are sometimes referred to as “real dollars.”

Per Capita Sales

Per capita (or “per person”) sales are calculated by dividing current dollar sales by the population estimate. In areas where population is subject to substantial change, this is a better measure of sales activity than sales alone. However, it still does not reflect changes in the state's economy.

Pull Factor

The pull factor was developed by Iowa State University Extension Service to provide a precise measure of sales activity in a locality. It is derived by dividing the per capita current dollar sales of a town or county by the per capita sales for the state. For example, if a town's per capita sales were $20,000 per year and the state per capita sales were $10,000 per year, the pull factor is 2.0 ($20,000 ¸ $10,000). The interpretation is that the town is selling to 200 percent of the town population in full-time customer equivalents.

Pull factors are good measures of sales activity because they reflect changes in population, inflation, and the state's economy. The pull factors listed in this report are not adjusted for purchasing power; they are simply the ratio of local per person sales to the state average. Income levels are accounted for in the expected sales and potential sales formulas, described below.

Effective Buying Income (EBI)

A statistic developed by Survey of Buying Power, Sales & Marketing Management (Bill Communications, Inc.), EBI is defined as income (wages, salary, dividends, interest, pensions, etc.) less taxes and certain other non-taxable items. Commonly it is referred to as “income after taxes” or “disposable personal income.”

Index of Income

This index is calculated by dividing local per capita income by state per capita income. It is a relative measure of income, with the base being 100 (sometimes expressed in a decimal format, such as 1.00). For example, an index number of 1.20 would indicate that per capita income in that area is 20 percent above the state average.

Expected Sales

Expected sales is an estimate of the sales level a town should achieve if it were performing on a par with towns of a similar size in its state. In essence, it is a retail performance benchmark. In addition to population and income variables, expected sales incorporates the typical strength of comparable communities via the typical pull factor component as shown in the equation below:

For example, if a town had a population of 10,000, the state per capita sales were $10,000, the typical pull factor was 1.30, and the index of income was 1.00, expected sales would be approximately $130 million per year (10,000 x $10,000 x 1.30 x 1.00). This provides a means of comparing what is expected for a town of a certain size to what is actually happening.

Variance Between Actual Sales & Expected Sales

The variance between actual and expected sales is how much retail sales differ from the “norm” (i.e., the amount above or below the standard established by the expected sales formula). The set of similarly sized towns in the state is the “peer group” to which the comparison is being made.

Discrepancies between expected and actual sales occur for a variety of reasons. Transportation patterns, proximity to larger population centers, and the quality of management and marketing, are just a few factors that can cause the retail sales of a particular town to deviate substantially from expected sales. It is important that decision-makers consider these influences when constructing policies, plans, or projects. The variance between actual and expected sales is expressed in dollars, percentages, and customer equivalents. The use of the analysis will dictate which measure best conveys the information, though all are equivalent.

Potential Sales

Potential sales is a term used with reference to counties. The formula is:

Potential sales is an estimate of the amount of money that would be spent on retail goods and services by residents of the county. The potential sales concept for counties is similar to the expected sales calculations for towns, though it differs in that potential sales does not utilize a measure of typical pulling power (like the typical pull factor that is used in the expected sales equation). Since a county is a large, well-defined region within which retail business takes place, counties are compared to other counties without adjustments for trade area size (the pull factor is set at 1.0).

Surplus or Leakage

If the estimate of available sales in a municipality does not match what is actually spent, then business is apparently going elsewhere. This is the “surplus” or the “leakage”, which is calculated by finding the difference between potential county sales and actual county sales. This statistic attempts to quantify the actual net inflow or net outflow of money.

The “trade area population gain or loss” statistic transforms surplus and leakage dollar figures into full-time customer equivalents. Note that the equivalent gain or loss of customers and the dollar gain or loss to county are gross measures, while surplus or leakage as a percent of potential sales is a relative measure.

STUDY RESULTS

The results of the study are presented below. The categories are 1) current analysis for Fairmont, 2) current analysis for Martin County, 3) historical analysis for Fairmont and surrounding towns and 4) trade area maps for Fairmont.

Current Analysis for Fairmont

Several merchandise categories for Fairmont are analyzed for 1998 (the latest data available) and compared to 1996 (The Minnesota Department of Revenue did not publish data for 1997). Expected sales are computed for Fairmont and compared to actual sales to determine if there is a surplus or leakage of retail trade. This process was discussed in the introduction.

Building Materials

The building materials category includes lumberyards, hardware stores, paint stores and other miscellaneous building materials stores. This category is a strong attraction to farmers, many of whom will conduct other shopping in town. It is also an important category in keeping local do-it-yourselfers in town to shop. Figure 2 is a bar graph showing the expected sales, actual sales and surplus or leakage for 1996 and 1998. In 1998 Fairmont was slightly below average (a leakage of $250,000) for towns of this size, however, its position slipped considerably from 1996 when it had a $5.1 million surplus. Expected sales grew from $10.7 million in 1996 to $14.5 million in 1998, but actual sales dropped from $15.8 million to $14.2 million during this period.

The 1998 Fairmont trade area map for building materials is shown in Appendix A1. The primary trade area (80 percent probability of buying in Fairmont) includes a population of 13,726 with total personal income of $334 million. The secondary trade area (60 percent probability of buying in Fairmont) includes a population of 5,754 with $128 million of personal income. The tertiary trade area (40 percent probability of buying in Fairmont) includes 7,110 population with income of $169 million. In total, Fairmont's trade area for building materials includes a population of 26,590 with a total personal income of $631 million.

General Merchandise

The general merchandise category is made up primarily of department stores such as K Mart, Wal-Mart, J.C. Penney, Sears, etc. and variety stores such as Dollar General and Family Dollar. This is an important category to a town the size of Fairmont, because these stores are the equivalent of anchor stores in a shopping mall; they are strong attractants to shoppers. Figure 3 compares 1996 sales to 1998 sales. In 1996 Fairmont's general merchandise sales were slightly below average (a $680,000 leakage), but slipped to a leakage of $6.5 million by 1998. Actual sales did grow from $26.9 million in 1996 to $31.5 million in 1998. However, expected sales grew at a much faster rate from $27.6 million to $38 million. Assuming that Fairmont should be able to generate general merchandise sales well above average, there is little doubt that either existing merchants should expand store space or a new general merchandise store should be built.

Appendix A2 shows the trade area map for general merchandise for Fairmont for 1998. The primary trade area includes 14,319 people with an annual total personal income of $346 million. The secondary trade area has a population of 5,716 and a personal income of $130 million. The tertiary trade area has a population of 10,637 and a personal income of $238 million. The total trade area for general merchandise has a population of 30,672 with an annual personal income of $715 million.

Food Stores

The food store category consists primarily of grocery stores, but also includes bakeries, dairies, etc. This category is also extremely important to a healthy retail sector. People spend more money in grocery stores and shop there more frequently than any other type of store. Figure 4 shows that Fairmont's food sales have declined from a surplus of $8.1 million in 1996 to $4.6 million in 1998. Actual sales increased slightly from $31.5 million in 1996 to $33.4 million in 1998. This obviously did not keep pace with expected sales which rose from $23.3 million in 1996 to $28.8 million in 1998. It is imperative that existing grocery stores take action to increase sales or that a new grocery store be introduced into the community in order to meet the demand generated by more and more small town residents shopping for groceries in larger towns.

Appendix A3 shows the trade area map for food store sales. The primary trade area has a population of 12,650 and an annual personal income of $312 million. The secondary trade area population is 2,915 with a personal income of $62 million. The tertiary trade area population is 8,757 with a personal income of $198 million. The population for the total trade area is 24,322, having personal income of $571 million.

Eating and Drinking

Eating and drinking establishments are obviously restaurants, taverns and bars. This is a rapidly growing part of our economy since more and more people are eating away from home. Fairmont is relatively strong in this category, but has slipped, compared to peer towns. Figure 7 is a bar chart depicting the fact that Fairmont's surplus of sales in this category slipped from $3.0 million in 1996 to $2.6 million in 1998. Actual sales increased from $11.5 million to $12.1 million during this period, but failed to keep pace with expected sales which increased from $8.5 million to $9.5 million. Even though Fairmont is well above average in this category now, it could grow even more if other key segments such as general merchandise and food were strengthened.

Appendix A6 shows the trade area map for eating and drinking sales. The primary trade area has a population of 13,667 with personal income of $331 million while the secondary trade area has a population of 4,408 with personal income of $100 million. The tertiary trade area contains a population of 6,747 with a personal income of $159 million. In total the eating and drinking trade area encompasses a population of 24,822 with a personal income of $590 million.

Automotive

The automotive category consists of both new and used car dealers and auto parts stores. This is Fairmont's strongest retail segment and ways should be found to attract customers from these businesses to other businesses in town. As figure 8 shows, Fairmont's surplus of sales in this category increased from $8.5 million in 1996 to $13 million in 1998. Actual sales increased from $42 million to $50 million during this period, while expected sales increased from $33.5 million to $36.6 million. In spite of its strength, the automotive sector does not generate as much benefit to other stores in town as do general merchandise and food stores, primarily because the average consumer goes to automotive stores relatively infrequently.

The trade area map is shown in appendix A7. The primary trade area has a population of 13,667 with personal income of $331 million per year. The secondary trade area has 7,346 people and personal income of $166 million. The tertiary trade area has 7,057 people and personal income of $166 million. The total population of the automotive trade area is 28,070 with personal income of $663 million per year.

Services

The services category consists of a variety of firms from beauty shops and automotive repair shops to bowling alleys, theaters and motels. This is a rapidly growing category as many people now purchase services that they once performed themselves. As figure 9 shows, this is a strong category for Fairmont although it has slipped slightly from 1996 to 1998. The surplus slipped from $3 million to $2.1 million from 1996 to 1998. Actual sales increased from $14.3 million to $15.5 million during this period, but failed to keep pace with expected sales which increased from $11.4 million to $13.4 million. Ways should be sought to induce customers of these businesses to spill over to other existing businesses in Fairmont.

The trade area map for services is shown in appendix A8. It shows that in the primary trade area there is a population of 13,408 with annual personal income of $327 million. The secondary trade area has a population of 4,759 and personal income of $106 million. The tertiary trade area consists of population of 7,224 and personal income of $169 million. In total the trade area for services consists of a population of 25,391 and personal income of $601 million.

Miscellaneous

The miscellaneous category includes various retail businesses that could not logically be classified into the preceding merchandise categories. Figure 10 shows that miscellaneous sales in Fairmont increased substantially from 1996 to 1998, going from a leakage of $2.0 million to a slight leakage of $270,000. During this period actual sales increased from $18.1 million to $29.3 million while expected sales increased from $20.2 million to $30 million.

Total Sales

Total sales, as used here, includes the retail sales for the categories listed above, as well as sales in the personal services category. Total sales would not include sales in professional firms such as lawyers, accountants and doctors. Sales of agricultural products, utilities and other non-retail categories would also be excluded. Figure 11 shows that total sales are slightly below average and slipping compared to peer towns. Total sales surplus was $13 million in 1996 but slipped to a leakage of $2.4 million in 1998. Actual total sales increased from $155 million in 1996 to $176.5 in 1998, but failed to keep pace with expected sales which increased from $141.6 million to $178.9 million during the same period.

Appendix A9 shows the trade area map for total sales in Fairmont. The primary trade area has a population of 13,667 with personal income of $331 million. The secondary trade area has a population of 4,791 with personal income of $109 million. The tertiary trade area has a population of 7,365 and a personal income of $172 million. In total the overall trade area for Fairmont has a population of 25,823 and a personal income of $612 million per year.

The strength of total retail sales in Fairmont presents an attractive situation for certain developers and retail firms. New and expanded businesses that might develop in the weaker categories such as general merchandise and food will probably have an outstanding chance for success because of the overall strength of the city's retail sector.

Table 1 presents summaries of Fairmont's sales by merchandise category for 1996 and 1998. In addition to the sales performance discussed above, there are several other interesting items in the table. For example, the variance between actual and expected sales in percentage terms decreased in every category but automotive and miscellaneous between 1996 and 1998. Also, the number of firms decreased in five of the nine categories as well as for total number of firms. The last column of the table shows the share that each merchandise category has of the total sales. For Fairmont, the automotive category has the largest share of total sales in 1998 at 28.3 percent. In most towns the size of Fairmont, general merchandise and food would make up the largest shares of total sales. It can therefore be concluded that there is considerable room for expansion of the general merchandise and food categories in Fairmont.

Figure 12 summarizes the 1998 retail surpluses or leakages for Fairmont for nine merchandise categories and for total sales in percentage terms. The strongest category in percentage terms is automotive at 36.5 percent surplus, followed by eating and drinking (27.8%), food (15.9%), and services (15.6%). The weakest categories are home furnishings (-29.1%), general merchandise (-17.1%) apparel (-6.8%), building materials (-1.7%) and miscellaneous (-0.9%). Total sales showed a 1.3 percent leakage, compared to the average for similar size peer towns.

Figure 13 shows the dollar changes in merchandise categories between 1996 and 1998 for Fairmont. The miscellaneous category had the biggest dollar increase at $11.2 million, followed by automotive at $8.0 million, general merchandise at $4.6 million, food at $1.9 million, services at $1.2 million and eating and drinking at $647,000. The biggest declines were experienced by building materials at $1.6 million, followed by home furnishings at $1.5 million, and apparel at $769,000.

Figure 14 compares Fairmont's total retail sales to eight other Minnesota towns of a similar size. The bar chart shows the difference between expected sales and actual sales (ie; the surplus or leakage) in dollars for each of the towns. The ranking of the towns can best be summarized by the next to last column which shows the percentage surplus or leakage. Buffalo is the leader at 92.8%, followed by Fergus Falls at 86.8%, Virginia at 82.6%, Albert Lea at 62.3%, Marshall at 58.1%, and Worthington at 48.3%. The weakest town in the peer group was New Ulm at 33.7% below average, followed by Cloquet at 5.7% below average and Fairmont at 1.3% below average. The last column shows the full-time customer equivalents per year that the towns serve, compared to the average.

Figure 14.

Table 2 shows the pull factors for the peer towns for each of the merchandise categories and for total sales. The pull factor is a proxy measure for the size of the trade areas for the towns. The bottom table ranks the towns according to the strengths of their various pull factors. The pull factor rankings will vary from the surplus or leakage ranking because the pull factors do not take income levels into consideration.

General Merchandise

The top table shows that, in general, the strongest merchandise category for these towns is general merchandise with an average pull factor of 3.14. This means that on average, these towns sell to 314% of the town population in full-time customer equivalents. Bemidji is the leader, with a pull factor of 4.38. Fairmont is in last place with a pull factor of 1.85. However, Wal-Mart recently opened a Supercenter in Worthington, which will increase its general merchandise sales dramatically, and probably pull sales away from Fairmont and other surrounding towns.

Food

Grocery stores (food) are the second strongest category for towns of this size. Bemidji and Buffalo lead peer group towns with pull factors of 2.69 and 2.40, respectively. The average for all towns is 1.98, while Fairmont ranks seventh with a pull factor of 1.87. This means that even though Fairmont has a large trade area for food, it has the potential to grow substantially when compared to peer towns. Adding to this potential is the continuing trend of small town residents abandoning their local grocery stores and travelling to larger towns to shop.

Automotive

Automotive sales rank third in pull factor values for towns of this size. Buffalo is the leader with a pull factor of 4.72 and the average was 1.83. Fairmont ranked fourth among peer towns with a pull factor of 1.67.

Building Materials

Building materials is the fourth strongest merchandise category for the peer towns, with an average pull factor of 1.48. Marshall leads these towns with a pull factor of 2.70. Fairmont is ranked seventh with a pull factor of 1.25.

Miscellaneous

The miscellaneous category is the fifth strongest group, but will not be analyzed here because of the wide variance of the types of businesses included in this category from town to town.

Eating and Drinking

The sixth strongest category, in terms of pull factors, is eating and drinking, with an average pull factor of 1.25. Bemidji ranks number one among the peer towns with a pull factor of 2.42. Fairmont ranks seventh with a pull factor of 1.13.

Furniture

The home furnishings category ranks as the seventh strongest category with an average pull factor of 1.16. Mendota Heights is the clear leader among the peer towns with a pull factor of 4.54. Fairmont ranks eighth among the peer towns with a pull factor of 0.41, meaning that it is selling to the equivalent of only 41 percent of the town population.

Apparel

The apparel category ranks next to last in pull factor strength among the merchandise categories with an average pull factor of 1.04. Bemidji ranks first among the peer towns with a pull factor of 2.28. Fairmont ranks sixth among the towns with a pull factor of 0.70, meaning that Fairmont's apparel sales are the equivalent of selling to only 70 percent of the town population.

Services

The weakest category among the peer towns is services, with an average pull factor of 0.70. This figure is weighted heavily statewide by motels and hotels, which are found in much greater numbers in bigger cities rather than in smaller towns. Virginia is the leading town with a pull factor of 1.93. Fairmont's pull factor ranks seventh at 0.45.

Total Sales

The average pull factor for total sales for the peer towns was 1.64. Bemidji was the leading town with a pull factor of 2.82. Fairmont ranks seventh among the 11 towns with a pull factor of 1.43.

Current Analysis for Martin County

Table 3 shows a retail sales analysis for Martin County for 1996 and 1998. The following discussion analyzes sales by merchandise category.

Building Material

Actual sales for building materials decreased from $20 million in 1996 to $18.4 million in 1998. Potential sales increased from $13.9 million to $16.7 million during this period. Martin County still had a surplus of $1.7 million in 1998, but this is a big decline from its 1996 surplus of $6.1 million. The number of firms increased by one during this period.

General Merchandise

Sales in general merchandise stores increased from $27 million in 1996 to $31.6 million in 1998. This is about the same rate of increase as potential sales, resulting in the surplus remaining nearly constant at $6.5 million. The number of firms dropped from seven to six during this period.

Food

Sales in food stores (grocery stores) dropped from $20.2 million in 1996 to $19.2 million in 1998. Consequently the leakage also worsened from $4 million to $7.1 million. The number of food stored decreased by one from 15 to 14.

Table 3.

Apparel

Apparel store sales dropped from $3.4 million in 1996 to $2.7 million in 1998. Accordingly, the leakage worsened from $1.7 million to $2.9 million during this period. The number of stores decreased by two from 12 to 10.

Home Furnishings

Sales in home furnishing stores decreased from $6.7 million in 1996 to $6.2 million in 1998. Since this was during a time of robust home building, potential sales increased from $11.2 million to $14.5 million, resulting in a worsening of the leakage from $4.4 million to $8.3 million. The number of firms dropped by five from 36 to 31.

Eating and Drinking

Sales in restaurants and bars increased from $13.8 million to $14.2 million from 1996 to 1998, but failed to keep pace with potential sales. Consequently Martin County went from a slight surplus in 1996 to a leakage of $1.6 million in 1998. The number of firms decreased by three from 51 to 48 during this period.

Automotive

Sales of automotive firms were very strong, increasing from $70 million in 1996 to $79.8 million in 1998. The county surplus increased from $29.2 million to $35.8 million during this period. The number of firms decreased from 50 to 48.

Services

Sales in services increased from $18.1 million in 1996 to $20.1 million in 1998, but failed to keep pace with potential sales. Consequently, the leakage in services worsened from $25.1 million to $30.9 million during this period.

Miscellaneous

Sales of miscellaneous retail businesses increased dramatically from $20.7 million in 1996 to $32.3 million in 1998. This sales increase reduced the leakage from $16.4 million to $11 million.

Total Sales

Total sales increased slightly from $218 million in 1996 to $224.3 million in 1998. This increase lagged substantially the increase in potential sales resulting in Martin County going from a total surplus of $8.2 million to a leakage of $17.8 million during this period.

Demographics

Table 4 shows income and population figures as well as trade migration figures for Martin County and surrounding counties. In 1998 Martin County had about $271 million effective buying income (EBI). The median household EBI was $25,420 and the average income per person was 75.6% as high as the state average.

In 1998 Martin County had 22,000 residents spread among 9,100 households, averaging 2.4 persons per household. The Minnesota average was 2.7 persons per household. A closer examination indicates that Martin County and surrounding counties have an older population than the state as a whole.

As was discussed earlier, Martin County had a sales leakage of $17.8 million in 1998. All the comparison counties also had leakages, except for Blue Earth County which had a surplus of $302 million.

Town	1977	1982	1987	1992	1997
Fairmont	$69	$89	$88	$117	$164
Worthington	$63	$91	$99	$137	$170
Blue Earth	$27	$35