Fulltext access denied for pi 1729044344 and pageNo 37
	        

and its table. There seems to be a tendency for the larger companies to make a slightly better showing. If a ratio of .32 be taken as marking a dividing line, the proportion of cases above that point will be as follows: Size, 50 i Size, 5-9 Size, 10-49 millions millions millions and over Percentage of cases above a ratio of 32... 41% 49% 54% The same showing appears in the averages (modes) which are, .20, 29, and .35, respectively, for the three sizes of companies. In addition to these characteristics there are two other points worthy of note. The first has to do with the concentration in an interval of 24 per cent (.08 to .32) in the small companies of some 55 per cent of the small company cases. On the other hand a 24 per cent interval for the other companies extends from the ratio .24 to .48—much higher in the scale—and includes about 50 per cent of the cases. The other point is the relatively large proportion of cases (13%) for the largest com- panies which falls in the lowest ratio-group. This unusual condition in the first ratio-group tends to prevent the modal average from satisfac- torily expressing the total number of cases in a typical figure. THE RATIO BY YEARS Judging by the general outlines of the bars in Chart 2d, the effect of different years upon the distribution of the ratios along the scale TT Bomenu or Geuness Resgancn Lnwersirr or lipimors -2d “= YT RAGE LY or a i, 3" 13 NS 54 SAB 8B SR 82854 4 + & § ¢ 3 38% 3X I RR JeARYIZY se, ER 19/7 19/9 1927 192% _ Ratios Lxpressed as Rercentages Cuart 2d—FreqQuENcy DISTRIBUTIONS OF THE REVENUE-TO-NET-WORTH Ratios oF Pusric UriLity CoMPANIES BY SAMPLE YEARS [ 19 1