1

Chapter 1

INTRODUCTION

Background of the Study

Okra (Abelmoschus esculentus), is an economically important vegetable

crop grown in tropical and sub-tropical parts of the world. This crop is suitable

for cultivation as a garden crop as well as on large commercial farms. It is

grown commercially in India, Turkey, Iran, Western Africa, Yugoslavia,

Bangladesh, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Burma, Japan, Malaysia, Brazil, Ghana,

Ethiopia, Cyprus and the Southern United States. Moreover, India ranks first

in the world with 3.5 million tonnes (70% of the total world production) of Okra

produced from over 0.35 million hectare land (FAOSTAT, 2008).

It is a tropical to subtropical crop and is sensitive to frost, low

temperature, water logging and drought conditions. The cultivation from

different countries have certain adapted distinguishing characteristics specific

to the country to which they belong. In addition, Okra is usually consumed for

its green tender fruits as a vegetable in a variety of ways. These fruits are rich

in Vitamins, calcium, potassium and other mineral matters. The mature Okra

seed is a good source of oil and protein has been known to have superior

nutritional quality. Furthermore, Okra seed oil is rich in unsaturated fatty

acids such as linoleic acid, which is essential for human nutrition. Its mature

fruit and stems contain crude fibre, which is used in the paper industry (D. K.

Chanchal, S. Alok et al., 2018).

 2

Hence, Okra is an important vegetable crop which contributes shares of

the total vegetable production. The government has provided priority to

Agriculture sector to increase the vegetable production by giving subsidiary to

the farmers on different inputs such as seeds, fertilizers, irrigation etc. to

achieve sufficiency on Okra production. Okra is also widely known and traded

in the market considering it’s nutritional benefits and uses which can be

classified as household consumption or processing purpose. Gaining strategic

technique on how to market Okra and evaluating the needs and improvements

needed to fill in the marketing process, are the reasons that this study is being

conducted.

Statement of the Problem

1.) What is the Socio-Demographic Characteristics of Okra Traders in

terms of:

a. Age;

b. Sex;

c. Civil Status;

d. Educational Attainment;

e. Type of Traders;

f. Number of Years in Marketing; and,

g. Source of Capital?
 3

2.) What are the Marketing Practices of Okra Traders in terms of;

a. Product;

b. Price;

c. Place;

d. Promotion; and,

e. People?

3.) What is the Sales Revenue of Okra among the different Traders in terms of:

a. Volume (kg);

b. Value (P); and,

c. Unsold Goods?

4.) Is there any significant difference in the Sales Revenue of Okra when

respondents are grouped according to Socio-Demographic

Characteristics?

5.) Is there any significant difference between Sales Revenue of Okra

Traders when respondents are grouped according to Marketing

Practices?

6.) What are the Problems commonly encountered by the Okra Traders

and their suggested Solutions to the Problems?

 4

Significance of the Study

This study which focused on the Marketing of Okra can provide valuable

information to the following individuals and groups:

Farmers. It may be their tool guide to improve their techniques to meet

more costumers and get higher returns of investment. They can create

competitive advantage for their product and improve their production, selling

practices as well as their mode of pricing.

Traders. This study would provide information on how they are going to

add prices considering the cost they incur. It will determine the level of

Marketing of the commodity. It may provide information or some solutions to

common problems being faced by most traders.

Consumers. They could evaluate the product being purchased if they are

paying right prices while taking in consideration the activities involved in the

market-chain.

Policy Makers and Authorities. It may help them to come-up with the

formulation and implementation of policies protecting the rights of farmers,

traders and consumers. Another is to enhance the profitability of farmers,

traders and consumers without compromising the budget and satisfaction of

the consumer.

Future Researchers. They may use this study as a reference and

guiding tool for further studies related to this research.

 5

Scope and Limitation of the Study

The study is limited to the Marketing of Okra in Davao City Public

Markets. The research was conducted in the three Major and Minor Markets in

Davao City, namely: Bankerohan, Calinan, Toril, Mintal, Puan and Matina

Public Markets. The respondents of this study were eighteen (18) traders who

trade Okra. The researcher provided survey questionnaire and conducted an

interview with the Okra Traders. Moreover, the reliability of the results of this

study is dependent on the honesty and veracity of the respondent’s responses

to the interview schedule. This study is limited only to the period from January

2019-May 2019.

Definition of Terms

The following terms used in the study are operationally defined as

follows:

Age refers the number of years the respondents have existed since birth.

Civil Status refers to the marital status of the respondents categorized in

this study as single, married or widowed.

Comprador/ Assembler refer to a trader whose primary occupation is

buying the commodities from farmers and sell it to other Traders.

Educational Attainment refers to the highest level of education attained

by the Respondents, categorized as College Graduate, College Level, High

School Graduate, High School Level and Elementary Level.

Marketing Practices refer to activities performed by the traders in terms

of Product, Price, Place, Promotion and People.

 6

Okra refers to the subject commodities of the study. It is studied through

the production and consumption in the Philippines.

People refer to persons who are involved in marketing the commodity.

Place of Origin refers to the source and destination of the traded

commodity.

Policy Makers refers to persons who are responsible for making policies

especially, in government.

Price refers to the amount of money used in exchange for the

commodity.

Product refers to the commodity used in the study.

Public Market refers to the place where agricultural products are sold.

Retailers refer to those who buy goods from wholesalers and sell them to

the consumers in small quantities. They are the closest to consumers in the

marketing channel.

Sales Revenue refers to the total sales in terms of volume, value and

unsold goods.

Socio-Demographic Characteristics refers to the personal

characteristics of the Respondents in terms of Age, Sex, Educational

Attainment, Civil Status, Type of Trader and Type of Commodity Traded.

Source of Capital refers to the source of the amount used to start the

trading business of Okra.

Types of Traders refers to sellers of Okra products categorized as

Comprador, Viajero, Wholesaler and Retailer.

 7

Value refers to the monetary worth of something.

Viajero/Distributor refers to the people who transport the commodity

especially from the farm to the market.

Volume refers to the amount of the products that is produced or sold.

Years of Trading Experience refers to the number of years that the

respondents have engaged in buying and selling of Okra.

Wholesalers are those merchant middlemen who buy and sell food

grains in large quantities.

 8

Chapter 2

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE AND THEORETICAL

FRAMEWORK

This chapter presents the related readings, literature and studies, theory

base, conceptual framework and hypothesis of the study.

Related Literature and Studies

Okra, Abelmoschus esculentus is an important vegetable crop widely

grown in tropical, subtropical, and warm temperate regions of the world (Bawa

et. al., 2016).

Okra’s center of origin was most likely West Africa but transfer to parts

of India and South-east Asia occurred early on in the crop's development. It is

a traditional vegetable of many tropical and subtropical countries but following

its increasing popularity its production has extended to more temperate areas

such as the southern USA. It is commonly known as lady's finger (Fordham

and Hadley, 2003).

According to Capinera, J.L. (2001), Okra is grown for the seed pod,

which, like snap bean, is harvested before it matures. It is unusually tall for

a vegetable crop, often attaining a height of two meters. It is a relatively minor

vegetable crop from a national perspective and so production statistics are

infrequent. Okra is frequently used in dishes worldwide, from the Caribbean to

China. Its popularity is increasing all the time, particularly due to its various

uses. The different uses include pickled vegetable, as an ingredient in soups,

 9

and side dishes, utilized as a vegetable oil and used as a traditional therapy for

diabetes and many more (John Staughton, 2019).

From the Marketing standpoint, according to Arthur B. Adams (1916)

agricultural products may be divided into three classes, as follows: (1) The

Staples; (2) The Semi-staples; and (3) The Perishable Food Products. Okra as a

Perishable product loses its quality and value over a specified time even when

handled correctly throughout the supply chain. It requires special handling,

storage techniques and equipment to prevent damage, spoilage and

contamination.

Internationally, According to AGRIEXCHANGE (2018), the total area and

production under Okra is reported to be 1,148 thousand hectare and 7,896.3

thousand tons. It is mainly grown in India, Nigeria, Sudan, Pakistan, Ghana,

Egypt, Benin, Saudi Arabia, Mexico and Cameroon. Largest area and

production is in India followed by Nigeria. The lowest total area that produced

Okra is Saudi Arabia with 4,200 hectare and the lowest total production

produced is in Cameroon with 43,000 tons.

Furthermore, Okra can be a profitable crop when recommended

production practices are followed. It can return an income over a 10 to 12 week

period after harvest starts.

In the Philippines, Okra is widely grown throughout the year because it

is resistant to either drought or water logging. It is grown in area of 3,570

hectares with production of 29,716 metric tons (mt) all over the country

(Bureau of Agricultural Statistics, 2010). Central Luzon has the highest

 10

production of Okra in the country of about 10,851 mt or 14.6 mt/ha. with an

area of 743 hectares. Exportation of Okra to Japan started in 2006 with an

estimated export value of US$ 7-8M at an average export price of US$ 12-

14/box of 4-6 kg net weight. According to Agrimag (2014), fresh Okra for the

export industry in Tarlac province has now burgeoned to become worth P680

million (in annual income), producing some 4 million metric tons of fresh Okra

a year. Over a thousand farmers and contract growers in almost the same area

are involved in its production, employing 5,000 others as pickers, sorters, and

packagers.

In Region 11, the biggest producer of vegetables are Kapatagan, Digos

City, Davao del Sur; Marahan in Marilog District in Davao City; and

Maragusan in Compostela Valley, according to Rey Acain, president of the

Vegetable Industry Council of Southern Mindanao (VICSMin). He said both

Kapatagan and Maragusan produce semi-temperate vegetables or the so-

called salad type such as lettuce, cabbage and broccoli and tropical

vegetables, or the so-called pinakbet type such as okra, eggplant and squash.

In Davao City, the top five vegetables consumed daily are cabbage, eggplant,

ampalaya, squash and okra (Gregorio G. Deligero, 2016).

According to Bengtsson, et. al., (1998), the properties of many

horticultural crops are far more varied than grains and pulses. The case with

fruits and vegetables, loss of moisture may cause the crop to become

unmarketable. Yet with high moisture content, storage of these crops is more

difficult since there is a greater likelihood of insect and fungal problems. The
 11

majority of fruits and vegetables are highly perishable commodities with a short

storage life. Consequently, the major requirements for the storage of

perishables are the need to lower temperature substantially and to retain

moisture in the produce. Okra requires 7.00C - 10.0oC storage temperature,

90% – 95% relative humidity level and up to 7 - 10 days storage life. This is

also almost the same with the storage temperature, relative humidity level and

storage life of Baguio Beans with 5.0-7.0oC, 90-95%, 7-10 days respectively,

and Cauliflower with 0oC storage temperature, 90-95% RH level and 2-4 weeks

expected storage life.

5 P’s of Marketing

According to business.gov (2018), the 5 P’s are key marketing elements

designed to help one think about business strategically. Put broadly, Marketing

is a mix of business activities that aims to build brand and business in a

consistent way. The better understanding of the target market, the less time

and expense spent. Especially for small, single-person business, don't waste

time or money on shotgun approaches to Marketing.

Product

Product refers to the goods and services offered by a business. Product

decisions include function, packaging, appearance, warranty, quality, etc. (CFI

Inc., 2015). Customers need to understand the features, advantages, and

benefits that can be enjoyed by buying the good or service. When thinking
 12

about a product, consumers tend to consider the key features, benefits, and

the importance of a product.

Price

Price is the money charged for a product or service. It is everything that a

customer has to give up in order to acquire a product or services.

Pricing of a product has an important role; it is a competitive weapon to

help a business exploit market opportunities. Pricing has to be also consistent

with the other elements of the Marketing mix, since it contributes to the

perception of a product or service by customers. Moreover, setting price that is

too high or too low will - at best - limit the business growth. At worst, it could

cause serious problems for sales and cash flow (Riley, 2009).

Place

The distribution or the methods and location use for products or services

to be easily accessible to the target customers. It could also be a process of

moving products from the producer to the intended user. In other words, it is

how product is bought and where it is bought. This movement could be

through a combination of intermediaries such as distributors, wholesalers and

retailers (Martin, 2014).

Promotion

The Marketing term used to describe all marketing communications activities

and includes personal selling, sales promotion, public relations, direct marketing,

trade fairs, exhibitions, advertising and sponsorship. Promotion needs to be precisely

 13

coordinated and integrated into the businesses global communications message, and

this is called Integrated Marketing Communications (IMC). IMC integrates the

message through the available channels to deliver a consistent and clear message

about a company’s brands, products and services. Any movement away from the

single message confuses the consumer and undermines the brand. It is entirely

responsible for communicating the Marketing proposition (Marketing Teacher, 2019).

People

One of the essential elements of the Marketing mix is People. This

includes everyone who is involved in the product or service whether directly or

indirectly. Not all of these People get in touch with the customers. But all

these people have their own roles to play in the production, marketing,

distribution, and delivery of the products and services to the customers

(Marketing mix, 2013).

Sales Revenue

From the result of the study of Quennie Padillo (2016) entitled,

Marketing of Cauliflower in Davao City, in terms of the test of difference in

Sales Volume when grouped according to Socio-Demographic Characteristics,

it reveals that there is no significant difference between the Age, Sex, Civil

Status, Educational Attainment, Type of Trader, Years of Trading Experience,

and Source of Capital. However, there is a significant difference in Business

Location. This implies that Socio-Demographic Characteristics of the Traders of

 14

Cauliflower do not have significantly different Sales Volume except for Business

Location.

Still from the result of the study of Quennie Padillo (2016), the Test of

Difference in Sales Revenue in term of Value when grouped according to Socio-

Demographic Characteristics it revealed that there is no significant difference

in Sales Value in terms of Age, Sex, Civil Status, Educational Attainment,

Number of Years in Marketing, Source of Capital, and Type of Trader. However,

Business Location revealed that there is a significant difference in Sales Value.

It means that the Sales Value of the Traders of Cauliflower in Davao City Public

Markets were not significantly different in terms of Socio-Demographic

Characteristics except for Business Location.

Marketing Practices

From the result of the study of Quennie Padillo (2016) entitled Marketing

of Cauliflower in Davao City. The Test of Difference in Sales Revenue in terms

of Volume when grouped according to Marketing Practices revealed that Source

of the commodity is significant. Destination is significant while Promotion, is

not significant. In People, most of them are comprador. In Place, Sales Volume

Outside Davao City is significantly higher compared to Sales Volume from

within Davao City.

Theoretical Framework

Market is a medium that allows buyers and sellers of a specific good or

service to interact in order to facilitate an exchange. This type of Market may

 15

either be a physical Marketplace where people come together to exchange goods

and services in person (Investopedia, 2018).

Marketing is one of the most important aspects to consider before

producing any kind of agricultural product. Marketing begins when the farmer

first think a crop to be produced to earn a profit and at the same time to satisfy

the needs of the market. Agricultural marketing includes all those services

involve in moving the farm product from the point of production to the point of

consumption which affects the price of the product (Agri. Tech. Educational

Project, 1989).

Marketing approach is “the science and art of exploring, creating, and

delivering value to satisfy the needs of a target market at a profit. Marketing

identifies unfulfilled needs and desires. It defines measures and quantifies the

size of the identified market and the profit potential. It pinpoints which

segments the company is capable of serving best and it designs and promotes

the appropriate products and services” ( Kotler, 2011).

Conceptual Framework

Figure 1 shows the conceptual paradigm of the study. The dependent

variable is the Sales Revenue based on Volume and Value. The independent

variables are the Marketing Practices in terms of Product, Price, Place,

Promotion and People. The moderating variables are the Socio-Demographic

Characteristics of the respondents.

 16

Independent Variable Dependent Variable

Marketing Practices
Sales Revenue
 Product
 Price  Volume (kg)
 Place  Value (P)
 Promotion  Unsold Goods
 People

Socio-Demographic
Characteristics
 Age
 Sex
 Civil Status
 Educational
Attainment
 Type of Trader
 Number of Years
in Marketing
 Source of Capital

Figure 1. Conceptual Framework of the Marketing of Okra in Davao City

Public Markets
 17

Hypothesis of the Study

The following are the null hypotheses of the study:

1. There is no significant difference in the Sales Revenue of Okra Traders

when respondents are grouped according to Socio-Demographic

Characteristics.

2. There is no significant difference in the Sales Revenue of Okra Traders

when respondents are grouped according to Marketing Practices.

 18

Chapter 3

METHODOLOGY

Presented in this chapter are research design, source of data, data

gathering instrument, sampling technique, procedure of the study and

statistical treatment of data.

Research Design

In this study, the researcher used Descriptive-Correlational research

design which describes and interpret the needed data and information. This

research design used survey questionnaire and personal interviews with the

respondents. Descriptive research design is a scientific method which involves

observing and describing the behavior of a subject without influencing it in any

way (Shuttleworth, 2008). Correlational research involves the measurement of

two or more relevant variables and an assessment of the relationship between

or among those variables (Stangor and Walinga, 2012).

Sources of Data

There were two types of data gathered; primary data and secondary

information. The primary sources of data were taken from the responses of

Okra Traders in the different local markets particularly in the Major Markets

namely, Bankerohan, Toril and Calinan and in the Minor Markets namely,

Matina, Puan and Mintal. The secondary data are obtained from books, thesis,

internet and other reading materials. There were nine (9) respondents per
 19

Major Markets and nine (9) respondents per Minor Markets for a total of

eighteen (18) respondents.

Data Gathering Instrument

The primary data used in the study were gathered through the use of

structured interview schedule. The interview schedule consisted of three parts.

The first part is the Socio-Demographic Profile of the respondents. The second

part is the Marketing Practices applied to the commodity. The third part is the

Sales Revenue plus the Problems encountered by the traders in Marketing. The

information from this interview schedule served as input in determining the

result of the study.

Sampling Technique

The study used Simple Random Sampling in gathering of samples

which composed of Okra Traders. It was done through personal interviews with

written questionnaires to acquire the data needed. There were eighteen (18)

chosen traders, which were taken as sample size based on the criteria set by

the researcher from all of the selected Public Markets in Davao City.

Procedure of the Study

First, the researcher searched for an available commodity in the market

which is a researchable topic. Second, after the approval of the topic by the

adviser, the researcher established three (3) chapters of the manuscript

together with the formulation of the Problem Statement and Survey

Questionnaire as well as the necessary permission letters. Then, the researcher

 20

presented it during the Proposal Defense. The proposal, consisting of the first

three chapters of the study together with the interview schedules for the

Traders was defended before the panel members for comments and

suggestions.

After such, corrections and suggestions were integrated. The researcher

then asked permission from the authorities to conduct the survey in the areas

specified. Then, the data was tabulated, analysed and interpreted. The result

was later presented to the panel of evaluators for Final Defense. After the Final

Defense, the researcher edited the drafts then proceeded to a grammarian for

English critiqueing. The researcher submitted the final draft to the Adviser for

final checking and sought the approval of the Thesis advisory committee.

Lastly, bookbinding was made for the final submission of the thesis.

Statistical Treatment of Data

The following stati stical tools were used in the analysis of data.

Frequency distribution and Percentages were used to present the Socio-

Demographic Profile and Marketing Practices. Mean and Standard Deviation

were used to present the Sales Revenue. Finally, Analysis of Variance (ANOVA),

T-test, Correlation (Pearson r) were used to test the difference and relationship

of Socio-Demographic Profile, Marketing Practices and Sales Revenue.

 21

Chapter 4

PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA

This chapter shows the presentation, analysis and interpretation of data

gathered. The discussions are sequenced according to the problem stated in

the Statement of the Problem.

SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS

This portion introduces the characteristics of Okra Traders in terms of

Age, Sex, Civil Status, Educational Attainment, Type of Trader, Number of

Years in Marketing and Source of Capital.

Age. Table 1 presents the Age distribution of Okra Trader Respondents.

The total number of Traders was 18. Out of this total, there are 22% Aged 20

years old and below, 28% Aged 21-40 years old, 44% Aged 41-60 years old and

lastly, there are 6 percent Aged 61 years and above.

This indicates that most of Trader Respondents are matured adults

which belong to the Age category of 41-60 years old.

 22

Table 1

Distribution of Respondents According to Age

Age Number of Respondents Percentage (%)

20 years & below 4 22.2

21-40 years old 5 27. 8

41-60 years old 8 44.4

61 years & above 1 5.6

Total 18 100

Figure 2 denotes that most of the Okra Traders in Major and Minor

Markets belong to the Age category of 41-60 years old. The least number of

Okra Traders belong to the Age of 60 years old and above.

50

45

40

35

30

25 Frequency
20 Percentage

15

10

0
20 years and 21-40 years old 41-60 years old 61 years and
below above

Figure 2. Distribution of Respondents According to Age

 23

Sex. Table 2 presents the distribution of Okra Trader Respondents

according to Sex. It reveals that out of the total 18 Trader Respondents, 39%

of them are Male and 61% are Female.

Table 2

Distribution of Respondents according to Sex

Sex Number of Respondents Percentage (%)

Male 39 40

Female 61 60

Total 18 100

Figure 3 shows that the majority of Okra Trader Respondents are Female

with 61%, followed by the Male with 39%. Hence, most of the Trader

Respondents are Female.

70

60

50

40
Frequency
30 Percentage

20

10

0
Male Female

Figure 3. Distributions of Respondents According to Sex

 24

Civil Status. Table 3 presents the distributions of Trader Respondents

according to Civil Status. Based on the results 50% of okra Traders are Married

33% are Single, 11% are Separated and 6 percent Widowed. Thus, it simply

implies that Married Traders are the majority of the Respondents in this study.

Table 3

Distribution of Respondents According to Civil Status

Civil Status Number of Respondents Percentage (%)

Single 6 33

Married 9 50

Separated 2 11

Widowed 1 6

Total 18 100

Figure 4 shows that the highest percentage of the Traders according to

Civil Status are those who are Married, followed by those who are Single, then

those who are widowed. Thus, majority of the Respondents are Married in Civil

Status.
 25

60

50

40

30 Frequency
Percentage

20

10

0
Single Married Separated Widowed

Figure 4. Distribution of Respondents According to Civil Status

Educational Attainment. Table 4 shows the distribution of Respondents

according to Educational Attainment. It reveals that 6 percent of the

respondents reached Elementary level, Elementary Graduate and College Level.

There are also 28% who reach High School Level, 44% High School Graduate

and 11% who obtained Vocational Course. Thus, most of the respondents are

High School Graduate.

 26

Table 4

Distribution of Respondents According to Educational Attainment

Educational Attainment Number of Respondents Percentage (%)

Elementary Level 1 6

Elementary Graduate 1 6

High School Level 5 28

High School Graduate 8 44

College Level 1 6

Vocational Course 2 11

Total 18 100

Figure 5 shows the distribution of respondents according to Educational

Attainment. It presents that the most of the respondents are High School

Graduate with a percentage of 44%.

 27

50
45
40
35
30
25
20
15 Frequency
10
Percentage
5
0

Figure 5. Distribution of Respondents According to Educational Attainment

Type of Trader. Table 5 shows the distribution of the Respondents

according to Type of Trader. It reveals that 6 percent of the Respondents are

Wholesaler, 78% are Retailer and 17% of them are Comprador. Thus, majority

of the Respondents are Retailers.

 28

Table 5

Distribution of Respondents According to Type of Trader

Type of Trader Number of Respondents Percentage (%)

Comprador 3 17

Wholesaler 1 6

Retailer 14 78

Total 18 100

As shown in Figure 6, the highest percentages of the Respondents

according to Type of Trader are the Retailers with 78% followed by Comprador

with 17% and the lowest percentage are the Wholesaler with 6 percent. Hence,

majority of the Respondents are those who are Retailers.

90

80

70

60

50
Frequency
40 Percentage

30

20

10

0
Comprador Wholesaler Retailer

Figure 6. Distribution of Respondents According to Type of Trader

 29

Number of Years in Marketing. The distribution of the Traders

according to Years in Marketing presented in Table 6 shows that 33% have

experience of 1-10 years, 44% for 11-20 years, 6 percent for are 21-40 years,

11% for 31-40 years and 6 percent for 41-50 years. Thus, most of the

respondents had experience of at least 11-20 years in marketing business.

Table 6

Distribution of Respondents According to Number of years in Marketing

Number of years in Marketing Number of Respondents Percentage (%)

1-10 years 6 33

11-20 years 8 44

21-30 years 1 6

31-40 years 2 11

41-50 years 1 6

Total 18 100

Figure 7 show the distribution of respondents according to Number of

Years in Marketing. It presents that most of the respondents have traded for

11-20 years with a 44%.

 30

50

45

40

35

30

25 Frequency
Percentage
20

15

10

0
1-10 years 10-20 years 21-30 years 31-40 years 41-50 years

Figure 7. Distribution of Respondents According to Number of Years in

Marketing

Source of Capital. The distribution of Traders according to Source of

Capital is presented in Table 7 which shows that 61% come from self-finance,

11% from Cooperatives, 28% comes from Private Money Lenders. Thus, Self-

financing is practiced by the majority of Okra Traders.

Table 7

Distribution of Respondents According to Source of Capital

Source of Capital Number of Respondents Percentage (%)

Self-finance 11 61

Cooperatives 2 11

Private money Lenders 5 28

Total 18 100
 31

Figure 8 Show the distribution of Respondents according to Source of

Capital. It presents that majority of the Respondents’ source of their capital is

Self-financing.

70

60

50

40
Frequency
30
Percentage

20

10

0
Self-finance Cooperative Private Money
Lenders

Figure 8. Distribution of Respondents according to Source of Capital

MARKETING PRACTICES

This portion of the study discussed the Marketing Practices of Okra

Traders in terms of the 5 P’s of Marketing namely; Product, Price, Place,

Promotion and People. This was used to determine the Marketing Strategies

done by the Traders.

Product. The distribution of Respondents according to Product

presentation as shown in Table 8 shows that majority of the respondents sells

their product in by Kilo basis.

 32

Table 8

Distribution of Respondents According to Product Presentation

Product Presentation Number of Respondents Percentage (%)

Per Kilo 11 61

Per Bundle 7 39

Total 18 100

Figure 9 show that majority of the Okra Trader Respondents are selling

their Product on a per kilo basis with 61%.

70

60

50

40
Frequency
30 Percentage

20

10

0
Per Kilo Per Bundle

Figure 9. Distribution of Respondents According to Product Presentation

Price. Table 9 shows the Average Price of Okra in the Major and Minor

Markets of Davao City. It reveals that in Buying Okra, the Average Price was
 33

P58.61 per kilo with a standard deviation of 16.16. In Selling, the Average Price

is P101.94 per kilo with a standard deviation of 40.00, and the Average Mark-

up price P43.61 per kilo with a standard deviation of 30.86.

Table 9

Distribution of Trader Respondents According to the Average Price

Categories Mean (P) Standard Deviation

Buying 58.61 16.16

Selling 101.94 40.00

Mark-up 43.61 30.86

Place.

Source. Table 10 presents the Source of Okra. There are 83% of the

Traders who sourced their product within Davao City and 17% were sourced

outside Davao City

Destination. It shows that the distribution of Trader Respondents

according to Place of Destination. Among the total eighteen (18) Trader

Respondents, 17% of them displayed and sold their product in Bankerohan,

Calinan, Toril, Puan, Mintal and Matina. This was intentionally done to have

equal representation of the commodities in each Public Market.

 34

Table 10

Distribution of Respondents According to Place of Source

Place Number of Respondents Percentage (%)

Source

Within Davao City 15 83

Outside Davao City 3 16

Total 18 100

Destination

Bankerohan 3 17

Calinan 3 17

Toril 3 17

Puan 3 17

Mintal 3 17

Matina 3 17

Total 18 100

Promotion. Table 11 presents the type of Promotion applied by the

Traders of Okra in order to make their product more saleable in the market. As

shown there are 17% of trader respondents who practice discount promotion;

28% trader respondents who practice Add-on promotion, and 56% of the trader

respondents do not practice promotion in selling their commodity.

 35

Table 11

Distribution of Trader Respondents According to Promotion

Promotion Number of Respondents Percentage (%)

Discount 3 17

Add-on 5 28

None 10 56

Total 18 100

Figure 10 shows that majority of the Okra Trader Respondents do not

practice promotion in their business.

60

50

40

30 Frequency
Percentage

20

10

0
Discount Add-on None

Figure 10. Distribution of Trader Respondents According to Promotion

 36

People. Shown in Table 12 are the names of the Traders of Okra in

Davao City Public Markets. The People involved in trading of Okra are

Lamatan, Sunny Fernandez, Cybell Echalico, Jerry Gudilos, Charlie Lantong,

Myra May Cabilao, Eddie Mendez, Esperedion, Ruel Ngoho, Bregy Boy Dela

Cerna, Mariel Pelpinosas, Angelina Gutana, Elvira Lorain, Adela Quizan,

Antonio Liloc, Analisa Amoy, Lovely Abido and Sunny Lopez. Most of them are

retailers, one is a Wholesaler from Toril, and three are Compradors from

Bangkerohan.
 37

Table 12

People and their Role in Marketing of Okra

Place Name Role

Bangkerohan Eddie Mendez Comprador

Bangkerohan Esperedion Comprador

Bangkerohan Ruel Ngoho Comprador

Calinan Jerry Gudilos Retailer

Calinan Charlie Lantong Retailer

Calinan Myra May Cabilao Retailer

Matina Elvira Lorain Retailer

Matina Adela Quizan Retailer

Matina Antonio Liloc Retailer

Mintal Bregy Boy Dela Cerna Retailer

Mintal Mariel Pelpinosas Retailer

Mintal Angelina Gutana Retailer

Puan Analisa Amoy Retailer

Puan Lovely Abido Retailer

Puan Sunny Lopez Retailer

Toril Sunny Fernandez Wholesaler

Toril Cybell Echalico Retailer

Toril Lamatan Retailer

 38

SALES REVENUE

The Sales Revenue is assessed in this Study in terms of Sales Volume,

Sales Value and Unsold Goods.

Sales Volume and Value. Table 13 shows the average Sales Volume of Okra at

238.97 kg.; the Sales Value is P17, 043.06, and the average Unsold Goods is

1.86 kg per week.

Table 13

Average Sales Volume, Sales Value and Unsold Goods of Okra (per week)

Commodity Volume (kg) Value (P) Unsold Goods (kg)

Okra 238.97 17,043. 06 1.86

 39

Test of Difference in the Sales Revenue of Okra in terms of Volume when

grouped according to Socio-Demographic Characteristics

The Table 14 below represents the findings of the test of significant

difference in the Sales Revenue of Okra when respondents are grouped

according to Socio-Demographic Characteristics. The test shows that there is

no significant difference in Sales Volume when respondents are grouped

according to Age with an F-value of 1.470, Sex with T-value of 1.080, Civil

Status with an F-value of .855, Educational Attainment that has an F-value of

.862, Number of years in Marketing with an F-value of 1.659 and Source of

Capital that has an F-value of .664.

The only variable that has significant difference in Sales Volume is the

Type of Trader with an F-value of 302.643 and a p-value of .000.This implies

that Sales Volume of a comprador is significantly higher than a retailer or a

wholesaler.

In the study of Quennie Padillo (2016) it was revealed that Age, Sex, Civil

Status, Educational Attainment, Type of Trader, Number of Years in Marketing

and Source of Capital of the Cauliflower Traders do not have significantly

different Sales Volume except for Business Location. Therefore the study of

cauliflower conforms to the conducted study which found that the Type of

Trader is a significant variable.

 40

Table 14

Test of Difference in Sales Revenue in terms of Volume according to Socio-

Demographic Characteristics

Socio-Demographic Categories Mean Test Statistic p-

Characteristics (kg) value
Age 20 years and 76 F= 1.470ns .265
below
21-40 years old 76
41-60 years old 448
61 year old and 34
above

Sex Male 364 t= 1.080ns .296

Female 159

Civil Status Single 91 F= .855ns .487

Married 389
Separated 96
Widowed 60

Educational Attainment Elem level 1,000 F= .862ns .533

Elem Grad 70
High School level 238
High School Grad 228
College level 125
Vocational 47

Type of Trader Wholesaler 122 F=302.643** .000

Retailer 66
Comprador 1,083

Number of years in 1-10 yrs 75 F=1.659ns .219

Marketing
11-20 yrs 329
21-30 yrs 1,000
31-40 yrs 79
41-50 yrs 60

Source of Capital Self-Finance 173 F=.664ns .530

Cooperative 524
Private Money 270
Lender
ns Difference is not significant
** Difference is significant at the 0.01 level
 41

Test of difference in the Sales Revenue in terms of Value when grouped

according to Socio-Demographic Characteristics.

Table 15 represents the test of difference in the Sales Revenue in terms

of Value according to Socio-Demographic Characteristics. The results revealed

that there is no significant difference in the Sales Revenue in terms of Value

when respondents are grouped according to Socio-Demographic

Characteristics. Type of Trader is the only variable that is highly significant

with an F-value of 154.849 and a p-value of .000. This implies that the Sales

Value of a Comprador is significantly higher compared to that of a Retailer and

a Wholesaler.

Age has an F-value of 1.186 which is not significant; Sex has a t-value of

.850 which is not significant; Civil Status has an F-value of .831 which is not

significant; Educational Attainment has an F-value of .777 which is not

significant; Number of Years in Marketing has an F-value of 1.515 which also

not significant and lastly, Source of Capital that has an F-value of .435 which

is also not significant.

In the Study of Quennie Padillo (2016) it indicates that there is no

significant difference in Sales Revenue in terms of Value when respondents are

grouped according to Socio-Demographic Characteristics. The result of the

previous study opposes the conducted study in regards to the significance of

the Type of Trader.

 42

Table 15

Test of Difference in the Sales Revenue in terms of Value according to Socio-

Demographic Characteristics

Socio-Demographic Categories Mean Test p-

Characteristics (kg) Statistic value
Age 20 years and 9,533 1.186ns .351
below
21-40 years old 7,093
41-60 years old 28,510
61 year old and 5,100
above

Sex Male 23,012 t= .850ns .408

Female 13,245

Civil Status Single 9,262 .831ns .499

Married 25,879
Separated 6,895
Widowed 4,500

Educational Attainment Elem level 60,000 .777ns .585

Elem Grad 5,250
High School level 16,978
High School 16,943
Grad
College level 11,205
Vocational 4,945

Type of Trader Wholesaler 8,540 154.849** .000

Retailer 6,928
Comprador 67,083

Number of years in Mkt. 1-10 yrs 7,648 1.515ns .255

11-20 yrs 22,824
21-30 yrs 60,000
31-40 yrs 6,895
41-50 yrs 4,500

Source of Capital Self-Finance 14,167 .435ns .655

Cooperative 31,645
Private Money 17,530
Lender
ns Difference is not significant
** Difference is significant at the 0.01 level
 43

Test of difference in Sales Revenue in terms of Volume when respondents

are grouped according to Marketing Practices

Table 16 represent the findings of the test of difference in the Sales

Revenue in terms of Volume when respondents are grouped according to

Marketing Practices. It shows that the Product is being sold per kilo with an F-

value of 19.759 and a p-value of .000. This implies that selling a commodity in

kilo is highly significant than selling the commodity in bundle. For the Source,

the commodity that acquire within Davao City has much volume with a t-value

of -3.162 and a p-value of .006. This implies that Sales Volume within Davao

City is significantly higher than those compared to Sales Volume outside Davao

City. In Destination of the Okra, it has an f-value of 97.843 which is significant

and a p-value of .000. This indicates that Bangkerohan has the highest volume

among other destinations such as Matina, Puan, Toril, Mintal, and Calinan. In

terms of Promotion, discount and add-on are significant it has an f-value of

6.203 and a p-value of .011. This implies that having add-on and discount

involves higher volume of trade. For Type of Trader, most of them are Retailers

with an F-value of 302.643 and a p-value of .000. This implies that Okra

Traders are mostly in retail business. In the Study of Quennie Padillo (2016) it

was revealed that Sales Volume Outside Davao City is significantly higher than

the Sales volume within Davao City. Bangkerohan Sales Volume is significantly

higher than those of other markets. The result of the Cauliflower study in

terms of Source contradicts with the findings presented in the current study.

However, it conforms to the result stated regarding destination of the product.

 44

Table 16

Difference in Sales Revenue in terms of Volume according to Marketing

Practices

Marketing Practices Categories Mean (kg) Test Statistics P value

Product Bundle 51 19.759** .000

Kilo 359

Source Within Davao 133 -3.162** .006

Outside Davao 769

Destination Matina 83 97.843** .000

Puan 91

Mintal 63

Toril 66

Calinan 47

Bankerohan 1,083

Promotion Discount 792 6.203* .011

Add on 240

Type of Trader Wholesaler 122 302.643** .000

Retailer 66

Comprador 1,083

**Difference is significant at 0.01 level

* difference is significant
 45

Test of difference in Sales Revenue in terms of Value when respondents

are grouped according to Marketing Practices.

Table 17 represent the findings of the test of difference in the Sales

Revenue in terms of Value when Respondents are grouped according to

Marketing Practices. It shows that the Product is being sold per kilo with an F-

value of 16.303 and a p-value of .000. This implies that the value of Okra is

highly significant per kilo than selling Okra in bundle. For Source, the

commodity within Davao City has a t-value of -3.131 and a p-value of .006.

This implies that the Sales Value within Davao City is much higher than those

of outside Davao City. In Destination of the commodity Bangkerohan has the

highest value among Matina, Puan, Toril, Mintal and Calinan. It has with an f-

value of 52.708 which is significant and a p-value of .000. This implies that

Bangkerohan Sales Value is significantly higher than the other public markets.

In terms of Promotion, discount and add-on are significant it has an f-value of

6.401 and a p-value of .010. This indicates that Sales Value is significantly

high when add-ons and discount are involved. For Type of Trader, most of them

are Retailers with an F-value of 154.849 which is significant and a p-value of

.000. From the study of Quennie Padillo (2016), it was revealed that Sales

Value outside of Davao City is significantly higher compared to Sales Value

within Davao City. Bangkerohan Sales Value is significantly higher than those

of other markets. The result of the Cauliflower study in terms of Source

contradicts with the findings presented in the current study. However, it

conforms to the result stated regarding destination of the product.

 46

Table 17

Difference in Sales Revenue in terms of Value according to Marketing Practices

Marketing Practices Categories Mean (kg) Test Statistics P value

Product Bundle 7,575 F=16.303** .001

Kilo 23,068

Source Within Davao 10,726 t=-3.131** .006

Outside Davao 48,630

Destination Matina 7,893 F=52.708** .000

Puan 7,775

Mintal 7,725

Toril 7,435

Calinan 4,347

Bankerohan 67,083

Promotion Discount 50,818 F=6.401** .010

Add on 16,020

Type of Trader Wholesaler 8,540 F=154.849** .000

Retailer 6,928

Comprador 67,083

**Difference is significant at 0.01 level

 47

Relationship between Sales Revenue and Marketing Practices in terms of

Price

Table 18 represents the findings of the relationship between Sales

Revenue in terms of Volume and Value and Marketing Practices in terms of

Price. In Buying (volume), it has an r-value of -.634 with a p-value of .005.

While Buying (value), it has an r-value of -.601 with p-value of .008. In Selling

(volume), it has an -.492 r-value a .038 p-value. Selling (value), has an r-value

of -.427 and a p-value of .077. In Mark-up (volume), it has an r-value of -.333

with a p-value of .177. While in Mark-up (value), it has -.267 r-value and .284

p-value.

There is a negative correlation between Sales Revenue and Price. This

indicates that the higher the Price in terms of Buying, Selling and Mark-up the

lesser the Volume and Value of the commodity.

 48

Table 18

Relationship between Sales Revenue and Marketing Practices in terms of

Price

Price Categories r-value p-value

Buying

Volume -.634** .005

Value -.601** .OO8

Selling

Volume -.492* .038

Value -.427 .077

Mark-up

Volume -.333ns .177

Value -.267ns .284

**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).
 49

Chapter 5

SUMMARY OF FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND

RECOMMENDATIONS

This chapter presents the summary of findings, conclusions and

recommendations of the study.

Summary of Findings

The study was composed of eighteen (18) respondents from Davao City

Public Markets, specifically three (3) respondents per Major and Minor

Markets. Based on the Socio-Demographic Characteristics of the respondents,

most of the Traders were aged 41-60 years old; female; married; high school

graduate; retailer; has 11-20 years of experience and self-finance is the main

source of their capital.

As to Marketing Practices, most traders presented their products in per

kilo basis. Price of Okra was averaged P58.61 in Buying, P101.94 in Selling

and P43.61 in Mark-up, respectively. Furthermore, most of the traders were

Retailers. In terms of Promotion, most of the traders do not practice promotion.

The sources of Okra were purchased mostly within Davao City.

In Sales Revenue per week the average Sales Volume of Okra were

238.97 kg. The average Sales Value of Okra is P17,043.06 and the average

unsold goods were 1.86 kg.

In addition, the common Problems encountered by most of Okra Traders

are low quality of Okra; easily rotten; water contact blackens the okra and

many were left unsold. These Problems were commonly encountered and
 50

endured by Okra traders. Traders usually provide tightly sealed plastic to

prevent moisture forming into the plastic. The product with low quality, slightly

blacken were cut and pack to be sold as “Sari-Sari” to lessen losses acquired by

the traders. Moreover, others serve the remaining for household consumption.

For those that are already rotten and matured enough to the point that it is not

edible, will be thrown away.

Conclusions

Based on the findings of the study the researcher came up with the

following conclusions.

1. There is significant difference in the Sales Revenue of Okra Traders

when grouped according to Socio-Demographic Characteristics in

terms of Type of Trader. Therefore, hypothesis number one is rejected.

2. There is significant difference in the Sales Revenue of Okra Traders

when respondents are grouped according to Marketing Practices in

terms of Product, Price, Place, Promotion and People.

Therefore, hypothesis number 2 is rejected.

Recommendations

Based on the findings of the study, the researcher would like to

recommend the following:

Okra Traders should consider organizing their utilization of the 5P’s the

Product, Price, Place, promotion and People. The utilization is effective yet it

could still be improved. They should try to join Trainings and Seminars that
 51

would help them in running their business. In this way, they can widen and

improve their knowledge and skills about the business, acquire some strategies

in order to compete with their competitors to gain better profit.

Meanwhile, since Traders have common Problems like perishability of the

product and unsold goods, the researcher recommend that they should look for

some alternatives just like processing the unsold okra crops as “Sari-Sari” (mix

vegetables) and sell it at lower Price or to at least break-even instead of lose.

Another, Traders should check the product quality because Okra is a highly

perishable crop that has optimum post-harvest handling system that

maintains quality in four to seven days. At the same time, Traders should

extend their patience when dealing with customers who ask for lower Prices so

that they could also find even more buyers and “suki”. In general, Traders

should always consider budgeting and planning the volume of the commodities

they buy to ensure profitability and not loses.

 52

REFERENCES

Adams, A (1916). Marketing perishable farm products.

Agricultural Technique Educational Project (1989). Agricultural

Business.

Agriculture Monthly’s (2014). “Fresh Okra Export: The Sunshine Industry of

Tarlac”.

Agriexchange (2015). Okra.

Bengtsson, L.P. and Whitaker H. (1998). Farm structures in tropical climates.

Bureau of Agricultural Statistics. Production area, production (mt.) and other

data. 2010.

Business.gov.au (2018). The 5 Ps of marketing.

CFI Education Inc. 5 P’s of Marketing Product, Price, Promotion, Place and
People.

Charles Stangor and Jennifer Walinga (2012). Introduction to Psychology: 1st

Canadian Edition.

Chanchal DK, Alok S, Kumar M, Bijauliya RK, Rashi S and Gupta S.

(2018). A brief review on Abelmoschus esculentus Linn. Okra.

Chauhan, D.V.S. (1972). Vegetable Production in India. 3rd ed. Ram

Prasad and Sons. Agra.

Deligero, G. (2016). Davao veggie farmers face big challenges.

Department of Agriculture, (2017). Okra Production Guide.

ECHO (2003): Plant information sheet, N. FT. Meyers, USA.

Eronmwon, I., G.O. Alufohai, and C.I. Ada-okungbowa. (2014).

Structure, conduct and performance of plantain marketing in
Edo State, Nigeria. Journal of Applied Science and
Environmental Management.

FAOSTAT, (2008).
 53

Gemede H.F., Ratta N., Haki G.D., Woldegiorgis A., Beyene F.

Nutritional Quality and Health Benefits of “Okra” (Abelmoschus
esculentus): A Review. International Journal of Nutrition and Food
Sciences. Vol. 4, No. 2, 2015.

Investopedia, (2018). What Is Market?.

Jim Riley (2009). What is price and why is it so important in the marketing
mix?.

John L. Capinera, in Handbook of Vegetable Pests, 2001.

Kotler, Phillip (2011) Principles of Marketing with My Marketing Lab.

Layade A.A., M. A. Badmus & R. B. Ibe (2017) Marketing Analysis of

Fresh Okra, International Journal of Vegetable Science.

Londre, L. (2009).

Markose, B.L. and Peter. K.V (1990). Okra. Review of research on

vegetable and Tuber crops. Technical Bulletin 16. Kerala
Agricultural University Press Mannuthy, Kerala, 109 pp.

Martin (2014). Marketing Mix | Place in Four P’s.

Marketing Teacher Ltd. (2000). Promotion.

Marketing Mix (2013). Definition of the 4P's and 7P's.

Pardillo, Q. (2016). Marketing of Cauliflower in Davao City.

Undergraduate Thesis of University of Southeastern Phillippines

R. Fordham, P. Hadley (2003). VEGETABLES OF TEMPERATE CLIMATES

Stem and Other Vegetables.

Sa’eed Halilu Bawa and Neela Badrie (2016). Nutrient profile, bioactive
components, and functional properties of okra (Abelmoschus esculentus
(L.) Moench).

Staughton J. and Voltolina, V. (2019). Top 6 Nutritional Benefits Of

Okra.

Shuttleworth M, (2008). Descriptive Research Design.

Trochim, M.K. (2006).

 54

https://archive.org/stream/cu31924032466645/cu31924032466645_djvu.txt

www.Agriculturalbusiness.Marketing.com

https://www.agriculture.com.ph/2018/03/01/fresh-okra-export-jelfarm-
pioneers-the-the-sunshine-industry-of-tarlac/

http://agriexchange.apeda.gov.in/Market%20Profile/one/OKRA.aspx#

http://www.fao.org/3/s1250e/s1250E0y.htm

https://www.business.gov.au/marketing/advertising/the-5-ps-of-marketing

https://corporatefinanceinstitute.com/resources/knowledge/other/5-ps-
marketing/

https://opentextbc.ca/introductiontopsychology/chapter/2-2-psychologists-
use-descriptive-correlational-and-experimental-research-designs-to-
understand-behavior/

http://edgedavao.net/on-the-cover/2009/04/13/davao-veggie-farmers-face-
big-challenges/

http.www.echonet.org

http://fao.org

http://www.sciencepublishinggroup.com/j/ijnfs

https://www.tutor2u.net/business/blog/qa-what-is-price-and-why-is-it-so-
important-in-the-marketing-mix

https://www.sciencedirect.com/book/9780121588618/handbook-of-
vegetable-pests

http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19315260.2016.1196286

www.londremarketing.com
https://www.cleverism.com/place-four-ps-marketing-mix/

https://www.marketingteacher.com/promotion/

https://www.sciencedirect.com/referencework/9780122270550/encyclopedia-
of-food-sciences-and-nutrition
 55

https://www.sciencedirect.com/book/9780128029725/fruitsvegetables-and-
herbs

https://www.organicfacts.net/health-benefits/vegetable/health-benefits-of-
okra.html

https://explorable.com/descriptive-research-design

https://marketingmix.co.uk/people/

www.socialresearchmethods.net
 56

Appendix A

LETTER OF PERMISSION

University of Southeastern Philippines

College of Development Management
Mintal, Davao City

Sir/Madam,
This is to introduce MARIEN S. BAGUIO, a fourth year student of University of
Southeastern Philippines, College of Development Management, Mintal, Davao
City, who will conduct a research, entitled, “MARKETING OF OKRA IN
DAVAO CITY PUBLIC MARKET”, as partial requirement of her Undergraduate
Thesis under the course of Bachelor of Science in Agricultural Business.

In this connection, the undersigned would like to request your good office to
allow her to conduct a survey for the Marketing of Okra in your barangay to
gather the needed information in the study.

Rest assured that the data collected would be treated with outmost
confidentiality and will be used for academic purposes only.

Thank you very much.

Very Truly yours,

(Sgd.) HECTOR B. CADENA

Adviser
 57

Appendix B

LETTER TO THE RESPONDENTS

University of Southeastern Philippines

College of Development Management
Mintal, Davao City

______________ ___________
______________ Date

Dear Respondents,

Greetings of Peace!

I am, MARIEN S. BAGUIO, a fourth year student of Bachelor of Science in

Agricultural Business, from University of Southeastern Philippines, College of
Development Management, Mintal, Davao City. I am presently working on my
undergraduate thesis, entitled, “MARKETING OF OKRA IN DAVAO CITY
PUBLIC MARKET” as partial requirement of the course.

In this connection, I would like to ask for your cooperation to answer the
survey questionnaire to the best of your knowledge. The collected data would
serve as primary data in this research. Rest assured that the data collected
would be treated with outmost confidentiality and will be used for academic
purposes only.

Your kind consideration on the above matter is highly appreciated.

Thank you very much!

Respectfully yours,

MARIEN S. BAGUIO
Researcher

Noted by:

(Sgd.) HECTOR B. CADENA

Adviser
 58

SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE
MARKETING OF OKRA IN DAVAO CITY PUBLIC MARKETS
Instruction: Please check and supply the necessary data on the space
provided:

I. SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS

Name: Age:
Sex: Civil Status:
Educational Attainment: Types of Trader:
Number of Years in Marketing: Sources of Capital:

II. MARKETING PRACTICES

Product Per Piece Per Kilo Etc.

Price Buying Selling Mark-up

Place Source Destination

Promotion Free Delivery Discount Credit Add-On Etc.

People Place Name Role

III. SALES REVENUE (Per Week)

Price per Kilo Sales (Volume) Sales (Value) Unsold Goods (kg)
 59

IV. PROBLEMS ENCOUNTERED AND SUGGESTED SOLUTIONS

Problems:
Problem 1:
Problem 2:
Problem 3:

Solutions:
Solution 1:
Solution 2:
Solution 3:

THANK YOU AND GOD BLESS

 60

Appendix D

LIST OF RESPONDENTS

Bangkerohan
1. Eddie Mendez
2. Esperedion
3. Ruel Ngoho

Calinan
1. Charlie Lantong
2. Jerry Gudilos
3. Myra May Cabilao

Matina
1. Adela Quizan
2. Antonio Liloc
3. Elvira Lorain

Mintal
1. Angelina Gutana
2. Bregy Boy Dela Cerna
3. Mariel Pelpinosas

Puan
1. Analisa Amoy
2. Lovely Abido
3. Sunny Lopez

Toril
1. Cybell Echalico
2. Lamatan
3. Sunny Fernandez
 61

Appendix E

STATISTICAL OUTPUT

Frequencies

Age
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Valid 20 yrs & below 4 22.2 22.2 22.2
21-40 yrs 5 27.8 27.8 50.0
41-60 yrs 8 44.4 44.4 94.4
61 yrs & above 1 5.6 5.6 100.0
Total 18 100.0 100.0

Sex
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative
Percent
Valid Male 7 38.9 38.9 38.9
Female 11 61.1 61.1 100.0
Total 18 100.0 100.0

CivilStatus
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative
Percent
Valid Single 6 33.3 33.3 33.3
Married 9 50.0 50.0 83.3
Separated 2 11.1 11.1 94.4
Widowed 1 5.6 5.6 100.0
Total 18 100.0 100.0

Educational Attainment
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Valid Elem level 1 5.6 5.6 5.6
Elem Grad 1 5.6 5.6 11.1
High School level 5 27.8 27.8 38.9
High School Grad 8 44.4 44.4 83.3
College level 1 5.6 5.6 88.9
Vocational 2 11.1 11.1 100.0
Total 18 100.0 100.0
 62

Type of Trader
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative
Percent
Valid Wholesaler 1 5.6 5.6 5.6
Retailer 14 77.8 77.8 83.3
Comprador 3 16.7 16.7 100.0
Total 18 100.0 100.0

Years in Marketing
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative
Percent
Valid 1-10 yrs 6 33.3 33.3 33.3
11-20 yrs 8 44.4 44.4 77.8
21-30 yrs 1 5.6 5.6 83.3
31-40 yrs 2 11.1 11.1 94.4
41-50 yrs 1 5.6 5.6 100.0
Total 18 100.0 100.0

Source of Capital
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative
Percent
Valid Self 11 61.1 61.1 61.1
Cooperative 2 11.1 11.1 72.2
Private Money Lender 5 27.8 27.8 100.0
Total 18 100.0 100.0

Product
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative
Percent
Valid Bundle 7 38.9 38.9 38.9
Kilo 11 61.1 61.1 100.0
Total 18 100.0 100.0

Source
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative
Percent
Valid Within Davao 15 83.3 83.3 83.3
Outside Davao 3 16.7 16.7 100.0
Total 18 100.0 100.0
 63

Destination
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative
Percent
Valid Toril 3 16.7 16.7 16.7
Calinan 3 16.7 16.7 33.3
Puan 3 16.7 16.7 50.0
Mintal 3 16.7 16.7 66.7
Matina 3 16.7 16.7 83.3
Bankerohan 3 16.7 16.7 100.0
Total 18 100.0 100.0

Promotion
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative
Percent
Valid Discount 3 16.7 16.7 16.7
Add on 5 27.8 27.8 44.4
None 10 55.6 55.6 100.0
Total 18 100.0 100.0

Role
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative
Percent
Valid Wholesaler 1 5.6 5.6 5.6
Retailer 14 77.8 77.8 83.3
Comprador 3 16.7 16.7 100.0
Total 18 100.0 100.0

Descriptive

Descriptive Statistics
N Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Deviation
BuyingPrice 18 35.00 100.00 58.6111 16.16146
SellingPrice 18 60.00 150.00 101.9444 40.00511
Markup 18 15.00 90.00 43.6111 30.86048
Valid N (listwise) 18

Descriptive Statistics
N Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Deviation
Volume 18 32.50 1250.00 238.9722 393.56341
Value 18 2275.00 81250.00 17043.0556 23581.72299
UnsoldGoods 18 .00 16.00 1.8611 3.82256
Valid N (listwise) 18
 64

Descriptives
N Mean Std. Std. 95% Confidence Mini Maxi
Deviatio Error Interval for Mean mum mum
n Lower Upper
Bound Bound
Volu 20 4 76.000 35.2443 17.6221 19.918 132.08 40.00 124.5
me yrs 0 8 9 3 17 0
&
bel
ow
21- 5 75.900 61.2315 27.3835 -.1290 151.92 32.50 184.0
40 0 3 7 90 0
yrs
41- 8 448.00 532.337 188.209 2.9543 893.04 35.00 1250.
60 00 97 89 57 00
yrs
61 1 34.000 . . . . 34.00 34.00
yrs 0
&
ab
ove
Tot 1 238.97 393.563 92.7637 43.257 434.68 32.50 1250.
al 8 22 41 9 7 67 00
Valu 20 4 9532.5 2381.06 1190.53 5743.6 13321. 6000. 11205
e yrs 000 594 297 928 3072 00 .00
&
bel
ow
21- 5 7093.0 3978.20 1779.10 2153.4 12032. 2275. 12800
40 000 563 764 053 5947 00 .00
yrs
41- 8 28510. 32641.1 11540.4 1221.2 55798. 3290. 81250
60 0000 9308 0449 797 7203 00 .00
yrs
61 1 5100.0 . . . . 5100. 5100.
yrs 000 00 00
&
ab
ove
Tot 1 17043. 23581.7 5558.26 5316.1 28769. 2275. 81250
al 8 0556 2299 541 406 9705 00 .00

ANOVA
Sum of df Mean F Sig.
Squares Square
Volume Between 630757.036 3 210252.345 1.470 .265
Groups
Within Groups 2002409.700 14 143029.264
Total 2633166.736 17
Value Between 1.915E9 3 6.384E8 1.186 .351
Groups
Within Groups 7.538E9 14 5.385E8
Total 9.454E9 17
 65

T-Test

Group Statistics
Sex N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean
Volume Male 7 363.9286 436.69998 165.05708
Female 11 159.4545 361.94934 109.13183
Value Male 7 23012.1429 25474.82153 9628.57750
Female 11 13244.5455 22697.43493 6843.53412

Independent Samples Test

Levene' t-test for Equality of Means
s Test
for
Equalit
y of
Varianc
es
F S t Df Sig. Mean Std. 95% Confidence
ig (2- Differenc Error Interval of the
. taile e Differe Difference
d) nce Lower Upper
Vol Equal 1. . 1. 16 .296 204.474 189.36 - 605.90
um variance 70 2 08 03 338 196.95 646
e s 2 1 0 841
assume 0
d
Equal 1. 11 .323 204.474 197.87 - 639.42
variance 03 .1 03 267 230.47 701
s not 3 18 896
assume
d
Val Equal 1. . .8 16 .408 9767.59 11496. - 34138.
ue variance 24 2 50 740 03351 14602. 09976
s 3 8 90495
assume 1
d
Equal .8 11 .425 9767.59 11812. - 35556.
variance 27 .7 740 85164 16021. 96758
s not 88 77277
assume
d
 66

Descriptives
N Mean Std. Std. 95% Confidence Mini Maxi
Deviatio Error Interval for Mean mum mum
n Lower Upper
Bound Bound
Vol Single 6 91.000 53.5994 21.8818 34.750 147.24 40.00 184.0
ume 0 4 8 8 92 0
Marri 9 389.27 525.575 175.191 - 793.27 32.50 1250.
ed 78 47 82 14.715 08 00
3
Separ 2 96.000 36.7695 26.0000 - 426.36 70.00 122.0
ated 0 5 0 234.36 13 0
13
Wido 1 60.000 . . . . 60.00 60.00
wed 0
Total 1 238.97 393.563 92.7637 43.257 434.68 32.50 1250.
8 22 41 9 7 67 00
Val Single 6 9261.6 3199.41 1306.15 5904.0 12619. 4640. 1280
ue 667 974 764 816 2518 00 0.00
Marri 9 25879. 31558.9 10519.6 1621.0 50137. 2275. 8125
ed 4444 4569 4856 914 7975 00 0.00
Separ 2 6895.0 2326.38 1645.00 - 27796. 5250. 8540.
ated 000 131 000 14006. 7068 00 00
7068
Wido 1 4500.0 . . . . 4500. 4500.
wed 000 00 00
Total 1 17043. 23581.7 5558.26 5316.1 28769. 2275. 8125
8 0556 2299 541 406 9705 00 0.00

ANOVA
Sum of df Mean F Sig.
Squares Square
Volume Between 407613.681 3 135871.227 .855 .487
Groups
Within Groups 2225553.056 14 158968.075
Total 2633166.736 17
Value Between 1.429E9 3 4.764E8 .831 .499
Groups
Within Groups 8.024E9 14 5.732E8
Total 9.454E9 17
 67

Descriptives
N Mean Std. Std. 95% Confidence Mini Maxi
Deviatio Error Interval for Mean mum mum
n Lower Upper
Bound Bound
Vol Elem 1 1000.0 . . . . 1000. 1000.
ume level 000 00 00
Elem 1 70.000 . . . . 70.00 70.00
Grad 0
High 5 238.20 426.077 190.547 - 767.24 34.00 1000.
Schoo 00 69 74 290.84 53 00
l level 53
High 8 227.87 415.904 147.044 - 575.57 32.50 1250.
Schoo 50 41 42 119.82 98 00
l Grad 98
Colleg 1 124.50 . . . . 124.5 124.5
e level 00 0 0
Vocati 2 46.500 16.2634 11.5000 - 192.62 35.00 58.00
onal 0 6 0 99.621 14
4
Total 1 238.97 393.563 92.7637 43.257 434.68 32.50 1250.
8 22 41 9 7 67 00
Val Elem 1 60000. . . . . 6000 6000
ue level 0000 0.00 0.00
Elem 1 5250.0 . . . . 5250. 5250.
Grad 000 00 00
High 5 16978. 24196.1 10820.8 - 47021. 3290. 6000
Schoo 0000 8606 6337 13065. 5331 00 0.00
l level 5331
High 8 16942. 26187.1 9258.55 - 38835. 2275. 8125
Schoo 5000 4625 435 4950.5 5021 00 0.00
l Grad 021
Colleg 1 11205. . . . . 1120 1120
e level 0000 5.00 5.00
Vocati 2 4945.0 431.335 305.000 1069.6 8820.3 4640. 5250.
onal 000 14 00 076 924 00 00
Total 1 17043. 23581.7 5558.26 5316.1 28769. 2275. 8125
8 0556 2299 541 406 9705 00 0.00

ANOVA
Sum of df Mean F Sig.
Squares Square
Volume Between 695898.061 5 139179.612 .862 .533
Groups
Within Groups 1937268.675 12 161439.056
Total 2633166.736 17
Value Between 2.311E9 5 4.623E8 .777 .585
Groups
Within Groups 7.142E9 12 5.952E8
Total 9.454E9 17
 68

Descriptives
N Mean Std. Std. 95% Confidence Mini Maxi
Deviatio Error Interval for Mean mum mum
n Lower Upper
Bound Bound
Vol Whole 1 122.00 . . . . 122.0 122.0
ume saler 00 0 0
Retaile 1 66.392 41.1466 10.996 42.635 90.150 32.50 184.0
r 4 9 3 90 5 2 0
Compr 3 1083.3 144.337 83.333 724.77 1441.8 1000. 1250.
ador 333 57 33 89 877 00 00
Total 1 238.97 393.563 92.763 43.257 434.68 32.50 1250.
8 22 41 79 7 67 00
Val Whole 1 8540.0 . . . . 8540. 8540.
ue saler 000 00 00
Retaile 1 6927.5 3230.69 863.43 5062.1 8792.8 2275. 1280
r 4 000 280 897 535 465 00 0.00
Compr 3 67083. 12268.6 7083.3 36606. 97560. 6000 8125
ador 3333 9322 3333 2098 4568 0.00 0.00
Total 1 17043. 23581.7 5558.2 5316.1 28769. 2275. 8125
8 0556 2299 6541 406 9705 00 0.00

ANOVA
Sum of df Mean Square F Sig.
Squares
Volume Between 2569490.480 2 1284745.240 302.643 .000
Groups
Within Groups 63676.256 15 4245.084
Total 2633166.736 17
Value Between 9.017E9 2 4.508E9 154.849 .000
Groups
Within Groups 4.367E8 15 29115170.278
Total 9.454E9 17

Descriptives
N Mean Std. Std. 95% Confidence Mini Maxi
Deviatio Error Interval for Mean mum mum
n Lower Upper
Bound Bound
Volu 1- 6 74.833 54.8294 22.3840 17.293 132.37 32.50 184.0
me 10 3 3 2 4 33 0
yr
s
11 8 329.43 496.348 175.485 - 744.39 34.00 1250.
- 75 48 69 85.520 52 00
20 2
yr
s
21 1 1000.0 . . . . 1000. 1000.
- 000 00 00
30
yr
 69

s
31 2 78.500 61.5182 43.5000 - 631.21 35.00 122.0
- 0 9 0 474.21 99 0
40 99
yr
s
41 1 60.000 . . . . 60.00 60.00
- 0
50
yr
s
To 1 238.97 393.563 92.7637 43.257 434.68 32.50 1250.
tal 8 22 41 9 7 67 00
Valu 1- 6 7648.3 3809.36 1555.16 3650.6 11646. 2275. 12800
e 10 333 565 701 493 0174 00 .00
yr
s
11 8 22824. 30166.5 10665.4 - 48044. 3290. 81250
- 3750 4810 8536 2395.4 2403 00 .00
20 903
yr
s
21 1 60000. . . . . 6000 60000
- 0000 0.00 .00
30
yr
s
31 2 6895.0 2326.38 1645.00 - 27796. 5250. 8540.
- 000 131 000 14006. 7068 00 00
40 7068
yr
s
41 1 4500.0 . . . . 4500. 4500.
- 000 00 00
50
yr
s
To 1 17043. 23581.7 5558.26 5316.1 28769. 2275. 81250
tal 8 0556 2299 541 406 9705 00 .00

ANOVA
Sum of df Mean F Sig.
Squares Square
Volume Between 889818.184 4 222454.546 1.659 .219
Groups
Within Groups 1743348.552 13 134103.735
Total 2633166.736 17
Value Between 3.006E9 4 7.514E8 1.515 .255
Groups
Within Groups 6.448E9 13 4.960E8
Total 9.454E9 17
 70

Descriptives
N Mean Std. Std. 95% Confidence Mini Maxi
Deviatio Error Interval for Mean mum mum
n Lower Upper
Bound Bound
Volu Self 1 173.31 358.462 108.080 - 414.136 32.5 1250.
me 1 82 50 51 67.5002 6 0 00
Coop 2 523.50 673.872 476.500 - 6578.00 47.0 1000.
erativ 00 76 00 5531.00 66 0 00
e 66
Privat 5 269.60 412.338 184.403 - 781.585 34.0 1000.
e 00 21 25 242.385 5 0 00
Mone 5
y
Lende
r
Total 1 238.97 393.563 92.7637 43.2577 434.686 32.5 1250.
8 22 41 9 7 0 00
Valu Self 1 14166. 22418.4 6759.41 - 29227.7 2275 8125
e 1 8182 5415 825 894.104 406 .00 0.00
2
Coop 2 31645. 40100.0 28355.0 - 391929. 3290 6000
erativ 0000 2556 0000 328639. 4353 .00 0.00
e 4353
Privat 5 17530. 23985.1 10726.5 - 47311.5 4500 6000
e 0000 9335 0456 12251.5 511 .00 0.00
Mone 511
y
Lende
r
Total 1 17043. 23581.7 5558.26 5316.14 28769.9 2275 8125
8 0556 2299 541 06 705 .00 0.00

ANOVA
Sum of Df Mean F Sig.
Squares Square
Volume Between 214017.400 2 107008.700 .664 .530
Groups
Within Groups 2419149.336 15 161276.622
Total 2633166.736 17
Value Between 5.186E8 2 2.593E8 .435 .655
Groups
Within Groups 8.935E9 15 5.957E8
Total 9.454E9 17

Group Statistics
Product N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean
Volume Bundle 7 50.5000 15.19046 5.74145
Kilo 11 358.9091 471.68808 142.21931
Value Bundle 7 7575.0000 2278.56863 861.21799
Kilo 11 23068.1818 28975.29433 8736.37995
 71

Independent Samples Test

Levene's t-test for Equality of Means
Test for
Equality
of
Variances
F Si t df Sig Mean Std. 95% Confidence
g. . Differen Error Interval of the
(2- ce Differen Difference
tail ce Lower Upper
ed)
Vol Equa 19. .0 - 16 .10 - 180.35 - 73.920
ume l 759 0 1.7 7 308.40 197 690.73 00
varia 0 10 909 818
nces
assu
mes
Equa - 10. .05 - 142.33 - 8.5938
l 2.1 033 5 308.40 515 625.41 5
varia 67 909 204
nces
not
assu
mes
Val Equa 16. .0 - 16 .18 - 11095. - 8029.0
ue l 303 0 1.3 2 15493. 91101 39015. 9874
varia 1 96 18182 46237
nces
assu
mes
Equa - 10. .10 - 8778.7 - 4016.7
l 1.7 194 7 15493. 2605 35003. 7627
varia 65 18182 13990
nces
not
assu
mes
 72

Correlations
Correlations
Volume Value BuyingPrice SellingPrice Markup
Volume Pearson 1 .995** -.634** -.492* -.333
Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .005 .038 .177
N 18 18 18 18 18
Value Pearson .995** 1 -.601** -.427 -.267
Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .008 .077 .284
N 18 18 18 18 18
BuyingPrice Pearson -.634** - 1 .687** .382
Correlation .601**
Sig. (2-tailed) .005 .008 .002 .118
N 18 18 18 18 18
SellingPrice Pearson -.492* -.427 .687** 1 .931**
Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed) .038 .077 .002 .000
N 18 18 18 18 18
Markup Pearson -.333 -.267 .382 .931** 1
Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed) .177 .284 .118 .000
N 18 18 18 18 18
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-
tailed).
*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-
tailed).

T-Test

Group Statistics
Source N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean
Volume Within Davao 15 132.9000 243.53140 62.87954
Outside 3 769.3333 628.58677 362.91474
davao
Value Within Davao 15 10725.6667 13972.81185 3607.76451
Outside 3 48630.0000 39550.35651 22834.40898
davao
 73

Independent Samples Test

Levene's t-test for Equality of Means
Test for
Equality
of
Variance
s
F Si t df Sig Mean Std. 95% Confidence
g. . Differen Error Interval of the
(2- ce Differen Difference
tail ce Lower Upper
ed)
Vol Equa 6.8 .0 - 16 .00 - 201.28 - -
ume l 65 1 3.1 6 636.43 017 1063.12 209.73
varia 9 62 333 823 844
nces
assu
med
Equa - 2.1 .21 - 368.32 - 864.38
l 1.7 22 9 636.43 180 2137.25 400
varia 28 333 066
nces
not
assu
med
Val Equa 7.8 .0 - 16 .00 - 12105. - -
ue l 35 1 3.1 6 37904. 59168 63567.0 12241.
varia 3 31 33333 4128 62539
nces
assu
med
Equa - 2.1 .23 - 23117. - 57121.
l 1.6 01 7 37904. 65987 132930. 96846
varia 40 33333 63512
nces
not
assu
med
 74

Descriptives
N Mean Std. Std. 95% Confidence Mini Maxi
Deviatio Error Interval for Mean mum mum
n Lower Upper
Bound Bound
Vol Toril 3 83.333 34.0196 19.641 - 167.84 58.00 122.0
ume 3 0 23 1.1760 27 0
Calina 3 90.500 81.7511 47.199 - 293.58 32.50 184.0
n 0 5 05 112.58 11 0
11
Puan 3 63.166 11.4054 6.5849 34.834 91.499 50.00 70.00
7 1 2 1 3
Mintal 3 66.166 50.6071 29.218 - 191.88 34.00 124.5
7 5 05 59.548 18 0
5
Matina 3 47.333 12.5033 7.2188 16.273 78.393 35.00 60.00
3 3 0 3 3
Banker 3 1083.3 144.337 83.333 724.77 1441.8 1000. 1250.
ohan 333 57 33 89 877 00 00
Total 1 238.97 393.563 92.763 43.257 434.68 32.50 1250.
8 22 41 79 7 67 00
Val Toril 3 7893.3 2983.04 1722.2 483.04 15303. 4640. 1050
ue 333 095 5950 88 6179 00 0.00
Calina 3 7775.0 5278.55 3047.5 - 20887. 2275. 1280
n 000 331 7417 5337.6 6533 00 0.00
533
Puan 3 7725.0 2594.82 1498.1 1279.0 14170. 5250. 1042
000 658 2383 934 9066 00 5.00
Mintal 3 7435.0 3295.78 1902.8 - 15622. 5100. 1120
000 139 2028 752.17 1749 00 5.00
49
Matina 3 4346.6 988.955 570.97 1889.9 6803.3 3290. 5250.
667 68 383 646 688 00 00
Banker 3 67083. 12268.6 7083.3 36606. 97560. 6000 8125
ohan 3333 9322 3333 2098 4568 0.00 0.00
Total 1 17043. 23581.7 5558.2 5316.1 28769. 2275. 8125
8 0556 2299 6541 406 9705 00 0.00

ANOVA
Sum of df Mean Square F Sig.
Squares
Volume Between 2570123.903 5 514024.781 97.843 .000
Groups
Within Groups 63042.833 12 5253.569
Total 2633166.736 17
Value Between 9.042E9 5 1.808E9 52.708 .000
Groups
Within Groups 4.117E8 12 34309304.167
Total 9.454E9 17
 75

Post Hoc Tests

Homogeneous Subsets

Volume
Duncan
Destination N Subset for alpha = 0.05
1 2
Matina 3 47.3333
Puan 3 63.1667
Mintal 3 66.1667
Toril 3 83.3333
Calinan 3 90.5000
Bankerohan 3 1083.3333
Sig. .517 1.000
Means for groups in homogeneous subsets are displayed.

Value
Duncan
Destination N Subset for alpha = 0.05
1 2
Matina 3 4346.6667
Mintal 3 7435.0000
Puan 3 7725.0000
Calinan 3 7775.0000
Toril 3 7893.3333
Bankerohan 3 67083.3333
Sig. .510 1.000
Means for groups in homogeneous subsets are displayed.

Descriptives
N Mean Std. Std. 95% Confidence Mini Maxi
Deviatio Error Interval for Mean mum mum
n Lower Upper
Bound Bound
Vol Disc 3 791.50 591.009 341.219 - 2259.64 124.5 1250.
ume ount 00 09 26 676.64 80 0 00
80
Add 5 239.80 425.253 190.178 - 767.821 34.00 1000.
on 00 10 97 288.22 5 00
15
None 1 72.800 46.2194 14.6158 39.736 105.863 32.50 184.0
0 0 0 6 6 4 0
Total 1 238.97 393.563 92.7637 43.257 434.686 32.50 1250.
8 22 41 9 7 7 00
Val Disc 3 50818. 35913.8 20734.8 - 140033. 1120 8125
ue ount 3333 2406 5599 38396. 2180 5.00 0.00
5514
 76

Add 5 16020. 24587.5 10995.8 - 46549.4 4500. 6000

on 0000 1207 6968 14509. 285 00 0.00
4285
None 1 7422.0 3377.75 1068.14 5005.6 9838.30 2275. 1280
0 000 747 070 979 21 00 0.00
Total 1 17043. 23581.7 5558.26 5316.1 28769.9 2275. 8125
8 0556 2299 541 406 705 00 0.00

ANOVA
Sum of Df Mean F Sig.
Squares Square
Volume Between 1191996.336 2 595998.168 6.203 .011
Groups
Within Groups 1441170.400 15 96078.027
Total 2633166.736 17
Value Between 4.353E9 2 2.177E9 6.401 .010
Groups
Within Groups 5.100E9 15 3.400E8
Total 9.454E9 17

Post Hoc Tests

Homogeneous Subsets

Volume
Duncan
Promotion N Subset for alpha = 0.05
1 2
None 10 72.8000
Add on 5 239.8000
Discount 3 791.5000
Sig. .420 1.000
Means for groups in homogeneous subsets are displayed.

Value
Duncan
Promotion N Subset for alpha = 0.05
1 2
None 10 7422.0000
Add on 5 16020.0000
Discount 3 50818.3333
Sig. .484 1.000
Means for groups in homogeneous subsets are displayed.
 77

Descriptives
N Mean Std. Std. 95% Confidence Mini Maxi
Deviatio Error Interval for Mean mum mum
n Lower Upper
Bound Bound
Vol Whole 1 122.00 . . . . 122.0 122.0
ume saler 00 0 0
Retaile 1 66.392 41.1466 10.996 42.635 90.150 32.50 184.0
r 4 9 3 90 5 2 0
Compr 3 1083.3 144.337 83.333 724.77 1441.8 1000. 1250.
ador 333 57 33 89 877 00 00
Total 1 238.97 393.563 92.763 43.257 434.68 32.50 1250.
8 22 41 79 7 67 00
Val Whole 1 8540.0 . . . . 8540. 8540.
ue saler 000 00 00
Retaile 1 6927.5 3230.69 863.43 5062.1 8792.8 2275. 1280
r 4 000 280 897 535 465 00 0.00
Compr 3 67083. 12268.6 7083.3 36606. 97560. 6000 8125
ador 3333 9322 3333 2098 4568 0.00 0.00
Total 1 17043. 23581.7 5558.2 5316.1 28769. 2275. 8125
8 0556 2299 6541 406 9705 00 0.00

ANOVA
Sum of df Mean Square F Sig.
Squares
Volume Between 2569490.480 2 1284745.240 302.643 .000
Groups
Within Groups 63676.256 15 4245.084
Total 2633166.736 17
Value Between 9.017E9 2 4.508E9 154.849 .000
Groups
Within Groups 4.367E8 15 29115170.278
Total 9.454E9 17
 78

Appendix F

DOCUMENTATION
79
80
 81

CURRICULUM VITAE

PERSONAL INFORMATION

Name : Marien Samson Baguio

Nickname : Bhe.bhe

Date of Birth : May 17, 1997

Place of Birth : Davao City

Fathers Name : Antonio O. Baguio

Mothers Name : Leonora S. Baguio

Address : Purok Rose Baguio Proper, Baguio District

Davao City

EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT

Elementary : Baguio Central Elementary School

Baguio Proper, Baguio District Davao City
Batch 2009-2010
 82

Highschool : Baguio National School of Arts and Trades

Baguio Proper, Baguio District Davao City
Batch 2013-2014

College : University of Southeastern Philippines

Mintal Davao City
Batch 2018-2019

DEGREE SOUGHT : Bachelor of Science in Agricultural Business

STUDIES CONDUCTED : Marketing of Okra in Davao City Public

Market

: Supply and Demand Analysis of Chicken

Meat in the Philippines

: Marketing Performance of Passion Fruit in

Davao City

: Cost and Production Analysis of Lanzones in

Davao City

GROUP AFFILIATION : Agricultural Business Student Organization