The measures of carrier sophistication and status, market
familiarity, and method of load arrangement (OEXPER, OWNOP,
SHUTTLE, and BROKER) all prove to be of low explanatory value.8
The weak results for these variables had been expected in view
of the competitive nature of the market. Indeed, their lack of
significance may be viewed as evidence of market efficiency in
that there is no indication that similar services are priced
differently based upon supplier (as opposed to service) char-
acteristics.

 Remuneration for each pickup and each drop is estimated to
be $38.92 and $52.35, respectively. Both parameter estimates
are large relative to their standard errors. The somewhat
higher estimated return for drops than for pickups was expected
due to the frequent practice at the northern terminals of
charging gate or entry fees, and of lumping (i.e., forced pay-
ment for unloading a vehicle).



 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS


 The three objectives of the study were to investigate the
 effect on rates of:


 1. distance,
 2. number of pickups and drops, as well as carrier type and
 method of load arrangement, and
 3. shipping urgency.


 The results with respect to distance indicate a tapering rate/
 distance gradient. Three possible rationales for such gradi-
 ents are differences in equipment depending on distance, price
 discrimination, and volume discounts due to the reduced fre-
 quency of search and repositioning with longer hauls. As full
 size tractor/trailers were used by all of the carriers in the
 survey, the first rationale is not possible. Likewise the