This approach has been employed in two studies of the deregulated general freight motor carrier industries: Blair, Kaserman, and McClave in Florida, and Beilock and Freeman in Arizona. In both studies pre and post deregulation rates were examined across several routes, carriers, and weight and com- modity classes. In both studies rate differentials between commodity classes, which are in part based on value, were found to persist after deregulation. These findings were cited as supportive of the expedited service hypothesis. While Blair, Kaserman, and McClave's and Beilock and Free- man's findings are consistent with the expedited service hypo- thesis, they fall well short of being conclusive evidence for two principal reasons. First, while there is no obvious reason for hypothesizing that insurance costs would be abnormally high in these markets, it cannot be stated with certainty what pro- portion of the observed rate differentials are due to insurance cost differentials or to expedited service cost differentials. This failing is not particularly serious for two reasons. First, as just stated, it is highly unlikely that insurance costs in both the Arizona and Florida intrastate markets would greatly exceed those found by Fauth for the nation as a whole. Moreover, even if it is insurance cost differentials and not expedited services which are responsible for these results, the basic point still holds that price discrimination is not the culprit. A far more serious criticism with using the intrastate Florida and Arizona markets to make inferences about the source of value-of-service price structures is that it is not entirely clear that these markets are not operating as though rate bu- reaus still exist. There are two reasons for suspecting this. First, the habits of decades may not die over just a few years. The fact that most carriers still employ the standard commodity classifications in itself suggests a reticence to deviate from long-established norms. One reason for such reticence in the initial months after deregulation in Florida was that some