TEXAS BUSINESS REVIEW VOL. XLII, NO. 11, NOVEMBER 1968 Editor, Stanley A. Arbingast; Associate Editor, Robert H. Ryan; Managing Editor, Graham Blackstock liJditorial Board: Stanley A. Arbingast, Chairman; John R. Stockton; Francis B. May; Robert H. Ryan; Graham Blackstock CONTENTS ARTICLES 309: THE BUSINESS SITUATION IN TEXAS, by Francis B.. May 312: PERSONAL INCOME IN TEXAS, by Robert H. Ryan 320: SECURITIES REGISTRATIONS, TEXAS; FISCAL YEAR 1968, by Ernest W. Walker 322: RETAIL SALES, THIRD QUARTER 1968, by Dennis W~' Coop~r 324 : BUILDING REVIEW, SEPTEMBER 1968, by Robert H. Ryan ,..:; ' TABLES 310 : BUSINESS-ACTIVITY INDEXES FOR 20 SELECTED CITIES 310: SELECTED BAROMETERS OF TEXAS BUSINESS 311 : POST AL RECEIPTS SELECTED TEXAS CITIES 314: TOTAL AND PER CAPITA PERSONAL INCOME, BY TEXAS SMSA'S AND NON-SMSA'S, FOR SELECTED YEARS, 1929­1966 315 : PERSONAL I NCOME BY MAJ.OR TYPE OF PAYMENT AND BROAD •INDUSTRIAL SOURCE, BY TEXAS SMSA'S AND N ON-SMSA'S, 1966 319: HOURS AND EARNINGS IN TEXAS . 320: DOLLAR VALUE AND PERCENT INCREASE OF ALL APPLI­CATIONS AND ORIGINAL APPLICATIONS AUTHORIZED FOR SALE DURING FISCAL 1960-1968 320: SECURITIES REGISTRATIONS IN TEX~S, 1966-1968 321 : DOLLAR VALUE OF RENEWALS, FISCAL YEARS 1960-1968 321: NUMBER AND DOLLAR VALUE OF APPLICATIONS WITH­DRAWN OR DENIED, FISCAL 1967-1968 321: NUMBER OF LI(;EN~ES ISSUED BY THE SECURITIES BOARD, FISCAL YEARS 1960-1968 322: RETAIL-SALES TRENDS BY KIND OF BUSINESS . ' 323: CREDIT RATIOS IN DEPARTMENT AND APPAREL STORES 323: PRELIMINARY ESTIMATES OF TOTAL RETAIL SALES 324: ESTIMATED VALUES OF BUILDING AUTHORIZED IN TEXAS CHARTS 309: TEXAS BUSINESS ACTIVITY 311: INDUSTRIAL PRODUCTION, TEXAS 311 : CRUDE-OIL RUNS TO STILLS, TEXAS 311: CRUDE-OIL PRODUCTION, TEXAS 311: INDUSTRIAL ELECTRIC-POWER USE, TEXAS 316: PER CAPITA PERSONAL INCOME IN TEXAS METROPOLITAN AREAS, 1966 318: PROJECTION OF FAMILY INCOME DISTRIBUTIONS IN TEXAS, 1955-1980 320: SECURITIES REGISTRATIONS IN TEXAS, 1960-1968 325: TOTAL BUILDING AUTHORIZED IN TEXAS 325: RESIDENTIAL BUILDING AUTHORIZED IN TEXAS 325: NON RESIDENTIAL BUILDING AUTHORIZED IN TEXAS MAP BUREAU OF BUSINESS RESEARCH Director: John R. Stockton Associate Director and Resources Specialist: Stanley A. . Arbingast Assistant to the Director: Florence Escott Consulting Statisti.cian: Francis B·: May Administrative Assistant: Margaret Robb Research Associates: Frances Allen, Charles 0. Bettinger, Cynthia Bettinger, Michael Bonine, Graham Blackstock, Dennis W. ·Cooper, Willetta Dement, William Grub·en, James Harrison, Robert Ittner, Geneva Johnson, Ida M. Lambeth, Robert M: Lockwood, Robert H. Ryan, Lamar Smith, Jr., Tim Throckmorton Research Assistants: David Baylor, Susan Godwin, Thomas .,. Hicks, Terry' Throckmorton ~. Statistical A ssistants : Mildred Anderson, Constance Cool­edge, Glenda Riley '1 Statistical Technicians: Doris Dismuke, Mary Gorham Cartographers: Patricia Middendorf., Douglas Winters, Jr. ' ~· Librarian: Merle Danz Administrative Secretary: .Ellen Young Senior Secretaries: Carolyn Harris, Jeanette Pryor Senior Clerk Typists : Rosa Gonzalez, Carolyn Langston, Shirley Rosendahl Senior Clerk: Salvador B. Macias Clerks: James Donaho, David King 0 ffset Press Operators : Robert Dorsett, Daniel P. Rosas Published monthly by the Bureau of Business Research, Graduate School of Business, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas 78712. Second-class postage paid at Austin, Texas. Content of this publi­cation is not copyrighted and may be reproduced freely, but acknow­ledirment of source will be appreciated. The views expressed by authors are not necessarily those of the Bureau of Business Research. SubscriP· 313: ESTIMATED CONCENTRATION OF HIGH-AND LOW-INCOME tion. $3.00 a year; individual copies, 25 cents. FAMILIES IN TEX~S, 1967 .. The Bureau of Business Research is a member of the Associated University Bureaus of Business and Economic Research. THE BUS I NESS SITUATION IN T EXAS Francis B. May Texas business activity has declined for two consecutive months. After reaching an all-time high of 236 percent of its 1957-1959 monthly average value in July, the seasonally adjusted Texas business-activity index declined 8 percent in August and 1 percent in September. This decline in activ­ity suggests that the rate of growth of the state's economy is slackening, a conclusion supported by a two-month de­cline in crude-oil production and a three-month decline in crude runs to stills. This is not to say that a recession is imminent. Two of these indexes are above their September 1967 levels. It is just that the state's economy is a little less vigorous. A condition of lessening vigor is not without precedent during the seven years and eight months of the current cyclical upswing. The credit crunch of 1966 produced a recession in the Texas homebuilding industry and slowed the rate of nonresidential building in 1967. This prevented the total level of business activity from rising as much as it would have risen without the drag from the construction sector. A glance at the table of barometers of Texas business shows that September business activity was at a level of 216.1 percent of its 1957-1959 base value. At this figure the seasonally adjusted index was 11.5 percent above that for September 1967. During the first three quarters the index averaged 13 percent above the January-September 1967 level. Crude-oil production in September, at 108.6 percent of its 1957-1959 base value, was 5 percent below the August index and 7.3 percent below the September 1967 value. A rise in crude-oil stocks and a substantial 34.6-percent rise in crude-oil imports in the three-month period ended August 31 contributed to the need for a reduction in Texas output. From July 1967 to July of this year Texas crude­petroleum production ranged from 124.8 percent to 108.8 percent. Compared to the 1958-1966 period these were rela­tively high levels of production. The high levels after June 1967 resulted from disruption in world oil flows by the Arab-Israeli War. The Suez Canal has been closed since that war, blocking the usual route of the smaller oil tank­ers. This resulted in a drop in crude-oil imports into this country until recently. Total imports of crude oil for January-May of this year were 15.1 percent below imports during the like 1968 period. Imports during J1me, July, and August raised the eight-month total to a level 3.5 per­cent above that of January-August 1967. The world oil industry has adjusted to the closing of the Suez Canal, with imports resuming their prewar pattern of growth. This means that the future rate of increase in Texas oil output will be about 1.5 percent a year instead of the 1966-1967 increase of 7.4 percent. Crude-oil runs to stills fell 2 percent in September, on the basis of seasonally adjusted data. At 128.6 percent of average monthly runs during its 1957-19fie base period the index was 2.3 percent above that of September 1967. The index has been above the level of the corresponding 1967 month during the entire January-September period. Al­though demand for most petroleum products has been at high levels, refinery output of kerosene and distillate has been at high enough levels to result in an increase in product stocks. Kerosene and distillate stocks were up 13.2 percent and 21.5 percent, respectively. The high level of kerosene stocks is not troublesome because demand for jet fuel is at high levels. Distillate stocks are a problem 2SO 200 lSO 100 so 0 TEXAS BUSINESS ACTIVITY Index Adjusted for Seasonal Variation-1957-1959=100 2SO 200 lSO 100 so 0 because of relatively low demand. This may result in price decline for this product unless winter comes to the North and Northeast early. Total electric-power use in September changed by less than a percentage point. The slight decline from 236.8 to 236.1 percent left the index 15.0 percent above the Septem­ber 1967 value. The January-September 1968 index, averag­ing 7 percent above the first nine months of last year, has been above the corresponding 1967 index each month dur­ing the entire January-September period. The September decline, slight as it was, occurred despite a 1-percent rise in industrial electric-power use. Domestic and commercial consumption of electricity were the lagging sectors, partly because of a relatively cool summer. Industrial electric-power consumptioi:i for all of this year has averaged 8 percent above the first three quarters of 1967. It has exceeded the corresponding 1967 month in each month of this year. There is a strong correlation be­tween industrial power consumption and industrial produc­tion. The rise in power consumption during the year has paralleled a rise in output. The rise in manufacturing out­put has been accompanied by a rise in employment. Sea­sonally adjusted manufacturing employment averaged 6 percent above that of 1967 during the first three quarters of this year. Sales of ordinary life insurance in September were at virtually the same levels as in August. They were 11.7 percent above September 1967. Sales have been very strong all year, averaging 16 percent above the level for the first nine months of last year. The strong rise in personal in­come this year has supported this rise in insurance sales. Texas has a higher rate of population increase than the nation. This fact and the effect of inflation in diminishing the purchasing power of estates have both added to the in­centive of family heads to increase their insurance hold­ings. Urban building permits issued in September declined 6 percent after seasonal adjustment. A 35-percent drop in BUSINESS-ACTIVITY INDEXES FOR 20 SELECTED TEXAS CITIES (Adjusted for seasonal variation-1957-1959 = 100) Per cent change Year-to-date Index Sep 1968 Year-to-date Aug average 1968 1968 Sep 1968 from Aug 1968 average 1968 from 1967 Abilene .... . ...134.6 131.2 133.1 3 - 4 Amarillo ...... . 200.6 196.9 189.4 2 13 Austin . . .......324.8 260.9 255.5 25 26 Beaumont .. .. ..192.1 196.0 189.8 - 2 2 Corpus Christi ..141.4 151.6 155.0 - 7 11 Corsicana ......160.4 142.9 160.0 12 7 Dallas . .........266.9 261.5 254.9 2 17 El Paso .... . . ..142.1 140.5 137.1 5 Fort Worth ....187.4 165.3 168.3 13 16 Galveston .. .. ..139.8 111.5 130.5 25 13 Houston . . . . .. . . 247.9 222.5 232.1 11 13 Laredo .. .. . .. .. 208.5 228.5 215.1 - 9 12 Lubbock .. ......179.1 176.1 158.5 2 2 Port Arthur .. ..111.9 112.3 112.6 ** 1 San Angelo . . ..161.1 157.7 156. 7 9 San Antonio . ... 194.7 191.4 193.3 15 Texarkana .. ....245.3 234.3 232.7 5 10 Tyler .. .. .. . . ..166.6 154.l 157.2 8 7 Waco .. .. .. ... . 174.8 178.1 171.6 2 10 Wichita Falls . . 134.9 139.5 136.1 3 5 *" Change is less than one half of 1 percent. 310 nonresidential permits caused the decline. Residential per­mits rose 19 percent. During the first nine months of this year residential construction has been supporting the index of total construction, averaging 30 percent above the 1967 level. As a result of the strong showing of residential con­struction authorized during the first three quarters the index of total construction authorized has averaged 7 percent above the 1967 index despite a 14 percent lower average for nonresidential building permits. High interest rates and high construction costs have not deterred families from building new homes. This is a result in part of the inflationary psychology of consumers today. The consumer price index has been rising steadily with brief intermis­sions since early in 1965. Since early 1967 the index has risen rapidly. The result has been to create in the minds of consumers an expectation that prices will continue to rise. In August the index rose slightly less than in the two preceding months, but there is as yet no assurance that a decline to an increase rate of 1.1 to 1.2 percent per year is likely. As a result, people buy now with the expectation that the current price is less than the future price. This is a state of affairs that makes inflation very difficult to con­trol. It explains why consumers will reduce their saving in order to buy goods, particularly consumer durable goods. Another spur to homebuilding is that a home is a good investment. Throughout the post-World War II period land values and building costs per square foot have risen. The shelter services derived from home occupancy, plus the resale value of a home, places home ownership into favor­able comparison with alternative uses of the money. SELECTED BAROMETERS OF TEXAS BUSINESS (Indexes-Adjusted for seasonal variation-1957-1959 = 100) Percent change Year-to-date Index Sep 1968 Aug 1968 Year-to-date average 1968 Sep 1968 from Aug 1968 average 1968 from 1967 Tei0 2>0 700 700 ISO ISO 100 100 so 1955 1956 1957 1958 1959 1960 1961 1962 1963 196' 196' 1966 1967 1968 * Manufactures and m.inera.ls lincludmg cr ude-oil and n.atural-ga~ p r oducuon). ?IOOTE: Shaded area• 1nd1cate period• of de chne of to tal bu1ine11 acuv1ty 1n the United States. SOURCE: Federal Reserve Bank of Dallu. CRUDE-OIL RUNS TO STILLS, TEXAS POSTAL RECEIPTS SELECTED TEXAS CITIES 350 Percent change 300 Aug 24, 1968-Aug 24, 1968­Sep 20, 1968 Sep 20, 1968 2>0 from from Aug 24, 1968-Jul 27, 1968-Aug 26, 1967-700 Classification Sep 20, 1968 Aug 23, 1968 Sep 22, 1967 ISO Alice .. ......... ..... $21,093 -4 38 Alvin ........... .... 17,502 28 18 100 Ballinger . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,189 13 -3 Breckenridge 9,693 -11 Carrizo Springs . .. .. . 4,470 49 20 Carthage .... . . .. .• . . 8,573 -6 34 Center 8,333 -19 3 Childress 6,859 -8 Cleveland 8,189 -17 11 Coleman .......•..... 9,437 42 39 Columbus ......•..... 5,786 15 20 350 Com merce 12,575 3 45 Cuero 7,185 5 13 300 Dalhart 7,852 6 12 Dumas ... . . .. ... ... . 12,333 9 16 7SO El Campo .. .....•.. .. 16,034 1 24 Electra ......... .•... 5,455 36 6 700 Falfurrias . . . ... ... . 6,196 20 44 ISO Fort Stockton .. .•.... 9,322 15 Gainesville 24,202 30 Galena Park . . . .. .. . 10,656 1 16 100 Gilmer ..... ........ . 7,528 -30 32 Hale Center ... ... . . . . 2,034 -21 -12 Hearne . ... . . . ...•... 5,208 26 12 Hempstead .. .• ..•.. . 5,979 6 -33 Hillsboro 10, 758 7 12 Hurst 22,664 7 43 Kenedy ........ ..... . 5,201 8 24 lndei .Adj u sted lot S e• • on•f V•ri• tion-1'51·19S, • JOO 1955 1956 1957 1951 1959 1960 1961 1962 1963 19~' 1965 1966 1967 1961 NOTE: Shaded area• indicate pe riod• of dechne of tot.l.1 bu.tine•• acUVlty HI the United State•. INDUSTRIAL ELECTRIC-POWER USE, TEXAS 350 300 2>0 700 ISO 100 so 350 300 250 200 ISO 100 so Kermit .. . ....... . .. . Kerrville . . . . . . . . . . . . La Grange . . . . . . . . . . Lake Jackson ... . . . .. Marlin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Navasot.. Perryton .. .•..... ... Pittsburg .......• .... Plano ............... . Port La vaca ... .. .. . Rusk . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Seminole . . . . . . . . . . . . Taft . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . Terrell .... .... ...... Wharton ... ..... .... Winnsboro . . . • . . . . . . . Yoakum ............. 8,860 19,084 6,480 10,196 9, 602 6,861 11,468 6,464 15,257 13,455 7,015 5,566 4,821 13,944 12.153 6,954 22,639 35 17 16 3SO 20 300 250 17 8 27 700 18 -15 26 ISO -6 17 35 -1 -10 -1 27 61 so -11 3 3 15 12 64 -5 32 1955 NOTE: 350 300 2>0 700 ISO so PERSONAL INCOME IN TEXAS Robert H. Ryan There is a mythical land called Texas-a land of solid gold toothpicks and solid brass boasting, where front yards gush with petroleum and back yards graze herds of Here­fords. And there is another mythical Texas, a dingy waste of toil and serfdom, where most of the people live in grinding poverty. The real Texas, of course, contains the elements of both these extremes. But for the most part Texas is increasingly, and resolutely, middle class in its standards of living. A close view of the way income is distributed among Texans and the way it probably will be dealt out in the future reveals clearly enough the increasing prosperity developing in the state and the economic leveling that is taking place. The map on the facing page charts the broad expanses of Texas where 30 percent of all families receive cash incomes under $3,000 and the scattered pockets of prosperity where 20 percent or more of the families have incomes over $10,000. (This map is based on estimates by a private sta­tistical group, not an official agency, but in most cases the estimates are probably fairly realistic.) Curiously enough, no counties in Texas happen to meet both criteria, although a good many meet neither. In general the more prosperous counties of the state, those with heavy shading, have major industrial cities or high-level petroleum or agricultural production. With very few exceptions the rural farm counties without heavy petroleum production fall into the lower-income category shown by lighter shading. A more detailed map prepared on the same basis would indicate three conspicuous zones of the state where incomes are substantially lower than elsewhere. The first of these would include the lower reaches of the Rio Grande Valley, almost all the counties south and west of Bexar County (San Antonio) and Nueces County (Corpus Christi). This area includes the nation's three poorest standard metropolitan statistical areas in terms of 1966 per capita personal income, accord­ing to the U.S. Bureau of the Census. Further, the three most populous metropolitan areas of South and West Texas -San Antonio, El Paso, and Corpus Christi-also rank among the nation's twenty lowest SMSA's in per capita income. The part of Texas where all of these cities lie was originally a ranchland of rather low productivity, very sparsely populated. Today the cities that dot this area have shown some industrial growth; however, they have in­creased in population so rapidly that their rising income is not great enough to provide an adequate livelihood for all the residents. Most Texans are now facing candidly the causes of eco­nomic depression in this part of their state. The primary influence has been the rapid immigration of unskilled Mexi­cans into South Texas over several decades. These immi­grants have tended understandably to concentrate in Spanish-speaking colonies in South Texas cities. Handi­capped by lack of training and by a lack of facility in the English language, they have failed to keep pace economi­cally with most Texans. Further, many of the Spanish. speaking families have come rather recently from environ­ments in their native country so lacking in opportunity, or even hope, that they are often resigned to accepting a standard of living that seems shockingly inadequate to most Anglo-Americans. The McAllen-Pharr-Edinburg SMSA illustrates the effect of this situation on one Texas metropolitan area. Here the per capita personal income for residents in 1966 was $1,250, compared with levels above $3,900 in San Francisco-Oakland and New York and nearly $3,700 in Midland, Texas. Texas' second low-income zone stretches down the east­ern side of the state, a belt of farmlands once cropped and overcropped and now used to a large extent for pasture. Remaining in this section of the state are rural residents who never prospered even when crop farming was more extensive and who now find little employment of any sort. However, many of the low-income residents of rural East Texas are persons past middle age for whom the future has lost its luster. They are sad rejects from the processes of economic change-farm mechanization, industrialization, and urbanization. The population supported by farming in most of these counties has declined, and generally the population as a whole is declining, too. Thus, painful as the process may be, the economy is in a sense mending itself. The same process is underway in a belt of counties that stretches across the state just north of Central Texas. Waco is the metropolitan center of this belt, but its econ­omy, based on industry, is far from typical of the condi­tions that prevail in most of the nearby rural counties. These, too, have always been farm counties but are now moving away from the types of farming that require high inputs of human labor. For about as long as most observers can remember Texans have received lower incomes on the average than Americans at large. This was the case long before World War IL It seemed for a time that war and postwar indus­trialization was helping close the gap between per capita income here and in the nation as a whole. But during the past decade the relative status of Texas per capita income has steadily worsened. Government estimates of Texas in­come published in the spring of 1968 indicated that Texans in the aggregate were receiving 7.6 percent more income than a year earlier. The U.S. increase was 6.9 percent. Although Texas appeared to be doing well, this appearance was deceiving. Texas population was growing enough more rapidly than that of the nation as a whole that, even with an aggregate gain in income, Texans were actually fall­ing behind the national gain in income on a per capita basis. In 1958 the average Texan received $1,851 in personal income, compared with a U.S. average of $2,068. The mar­gin between the two per capita figures then was $217. Even with increasing incomes in Texas the margin between the ESTIMATED CO CE TRATION OF HIGH-A D LOW-INCOME FAMILIES IN TEXAS, 1967 .,,,..., ""'""­ ....... Ht-;>Y "'=• - oua._,., ,... ~ GU "( wi,..i., c.­ Du fS....r.!i ..... c.c.,. =.:rfroe Oool.y ..... Ptnnw c ...uro Hd "'"'°' ""'"" ...., ._ H.J. Floyd """"' ........ LIA>bod. '""­ "'""" ..., .,_ y..... ..... ·~ --.... '°""' D Counties in which 30 pe rcent or more of ell fami lies receive income under $3 ,000 D Counties in wh ich 20 percent or more of o ll fami lies receive in come over $10 ,000 One measure of affluence is charted on this map. The data, taken from Sa.lea Management Surv ey of Buying Power, 1968. (Copyright 1968. Further reproduction is forbidden.), are based on indirect measures of income rather than the direct survey techniques used by the Bureau of the Census. Because the 1960 Census figure (for 1959) are now nine years old, and income distribution has changed dramatically since 1959, this map is presented as a reasonably representative picture of recent conditions in the state. TOTAL AND PER CAPITA PERSONAL INCOME, BY TEXAS SMSA'S AND NON-SMSA'S FOR SELECTED YEARS, 1929-1966 Total personal income Millions of dollars ~Percent of United Average annual rates of growth ~States Standard metropolitan area 1929 1940 1950 1959 1962 1965 1966 1929­1940 1940­1950 1950­1959 1959­1962 1962­1965 1965­1966 1959­1966 1929-1 1966 1929 1966 Abilene .......... . .... . Amarillo .... . ......... . Austin .. .. ........... . . 26 51 44 26 46 58 114 171 201 231 330 379 267 382 437 292 440 554 311 513 603 - .1 0. 8 2.5 15.9 13.9 13.2 8.2 7.6 7.3 5.0 5.1 4.9 3.0 4.8 8.2 6.5 16.7 9.0 4.3 6.5 6.9 7.0 6.5 7.3 .03 0.06 .05 .05 0.09 .10 lleaumont-Port Arthur-Orange ..... . .... . .. . 95 97 354 624 703 808 884 .2 13.9 6.5 4.1 4.7 9.5 5.1 6.2 .11 .15 Ilrownsville-Harlingen-San Benito .... . ... . . . Corpus Christi . ........ . Dallas .. . ..... . . . .• . .. . . 28 35 386 26 58 375 117 269 1,451 180 446 2,743 184 511 3,195 241 632 3,981 262 680 4,350 -.7 4.8 -.3 16.4 16.6 14.5 4.9 5.8 7.3 .8 4.6 5.2 9.4 7.3 7.6 8.7 7.7 9.3 5.5 6.2 6.8 6.2 8.4 6.8 .03 .04 .45 .05 .12 .75 E l Paso ... . ........... . ~·ort Worth ... . ........ . Galveston-Texas City-. . . . Houston .. . .......... .. . Laredo .. .. ........ .. .. . Lubbock .... . . . ... . ... . McA llen-Pharr-Edinburg Midland .. .. ... . .. . .... . 80 162 51 373 14 19 22 8 69 144 51 480 14 24 29 10 287 647 177 1,729 43 157 122 62 536 1,230 276 3,234 72 309 178 170 593 1,333 313 3,732 78 357 197 203 670 1,672 377 4,687 98 447 234 236 802 1,831 408 5,113 109 486 258 250 -1.4 -1.0 .1 2.3 -.5 2.4 2.5 1.9 15.3 16.2 13.2 13.7 12.0 20.4 15.3 19.9 7.2 7.4 5.1 7.2 6.0 7.8 4.3 11.8 3.4 2.7 4.4 4.9 3.1 5.0 3.4 6.0 4.2 7.9 6.4 7.9 7.7 7.7 6.0 5.1 19.7 9.5 8.3 9.1 11.3 8.7 10.3 5.9 5.9 5.9 5.8 6.8 6.2 6.7 5.5 5.6 6.4 6.8 5.8 7.3 5.6 9.2 6.8 9.7 .09 .19 .06 .43 .02 .02 .03 .01 .14 .32 .07 .88 .02 .08 .04 .04 Odessa . .. ... ........ . . . 3 9 66 199 207 246 265 11.9 21.9 13.1 1.2 6.0 7.6 4.2 13.3 .00 .05 San Angelo ........ .. .• . 22 18 82 112 137 163 177 - 2.0 16.6 3.5 7.0 5.8 8.7 6.7 5.8 .03 .03 San Antonio .. ......... . 190 174 713 1,176 1.381 1,703 1,937 -.8 15.2 5.7 5.5 7.3 13.7 7.4 6.5 .22 .33 Sherman-Denison 27 24 82 127 143 177 193 - 1.4 13.3 4.9 4.1 7.3 9.3 6.2 5.4 .03 .03 Texarka na, Tex.-Ark. . . . 31 25 92 133 161 209 233 - 1.7 13.8 4.2 6.5 9.2 11.3 8.3 5.6 .04 .04 Tyler ................. . 21 26 92 151 180 217 237 2.3 13.3 5.6 5.9 6.6 8.8 6.6 6.8 .02 .04 Waco . . . . . .. . . ........ . 54 43 161 270 305 369 389 - 2.0 14.0 5.9 4.2 6.5 5.5 5.4 5.5 .06 .07 Wichita Falls ........ . . . 51 42 197 249 307 328 388 - 1.7 16.7 2.6 7.3 2.2 18.2 6.6 5.7 .06 .07 Sum of SMSA's• ... .. . . . 2,397 2,399 9,442 18,000 20,881 25,510 28,032 .0 14.7 7.4 5.1 6.9 9.9 6.5 6.9 2.79 4.83 Non-SMSA area•• . .. . . . 1,833 1,648 5,402 8,285 9,452 11,048 11,889 - 1.0 12.6 4.9 4.5 5.3 7.6 ~.3 5.2 2.14 2.05 Per capita income 1929 1940 1950 Dollars 1959 1962 1965 1966 1929 Percent of the national average 1940 1950 1959 1962 1965 1966 Percent increase 1950­1966 1959­1966 192 196 9­6 Abilene ... . ........... . ... . 401 387 1,319 1,952 2,043 2,311 2,514 57 66 89 90 86 84 85 91 29 527 Amari llo .. . ... .. ...... . ... . 965 753 1,942 2,249 2,311 2,621 2,982 137 128 130 104 98 95 101 54 33 209 Austin .. . ........... . ...... 577 525 1.234 1.800 1,886 2,218 2,407 82 89 83 83 80 80 81 95 34 317 Beaum ont-Port Arthur- Orange . ............. .. . . 647 594 1,478 2,040 2,146 2,530 2,758 92 101 99 94 91 92 93 87 35 326 Brownsville-Harlingen- San Ben ito ... . ........ . •. 363 309 926 1,212 1,214 1,593 1,725 51 52 62 56 51 58 58 86 42 375 Corpus Christi ......... . .. . 462 476 1,323 1,702 1,906 2,204 2,365 66 81 89 79 80 80 80 79 39 412 Dallas .... . .........• . ..... 769 654 1,838 2,484 2,638 2,989 3,201 109 111 123 115 111 108 108 74 29 316 El Paso .... . ............•.. 617 525 1,474 1,775 1,762 1,991 2,288 88 89 99 82 74 72 77 55 29 271 Fort Worth ............... . 708 563 1,639 2,198 2,258 2,682 2,887 100 95 110 102 95 97 97 76 31 308 Galveston-Texas City ...... . 796 628 1,550 2,002 2,125 2,405 2,596 113 106 104 93 90 87 88 67 30 226 Houston ........... . ...... . 844 752 1,830 2,316 2,395 2,755 2,929 120 127 123 107 101 100 99 60 26 247 Laredo .. .. ... . .... .. .. . . ·. 348 298 751 1,126 1,170 1,290 1,379 49 51 50 52 49 47 47 84 22 296 Lubbock . .. . .... .. . . ...... . 487 472 1.538 2,011 2,117 2,417 2,616 69 80 103 93 89 88 88 70 30 437 McAllen-Pharr-Edinburg ... . 292 275 753 1,005 1,055 1,163 1,250 41 47 51 47 45 42 42 66 24 328 Midland . .. ............... . 1,037 863 2,396 2,552 2,914 3,509 3,698 147 146 161 118 123 127 125 54 45 257 Odessa ................... . 673 605 1,555 2,246 2,279 2,666 2,856 95 103 104 104 96 97 96 84 27 324 San Angelo ....... .. .... .. . 620 450 1,387 1,766 1,927 2,228 2,411 88 76 93 82 81 81 81 74 37 289 San Antonio .. . ....... . ... . 597 477 1,341 1,662 1,767 2,097 2,313 85 81 90 77 75 76 78 72 39 287 Sherman-Denison ...... . ... , 422 339 1,158 1,762 1,888 2,314 2,471 60 57 78 82 80 84 83 113 40 486 Texarka na, Tex.-Ark. . ... . . . 392 309 955 1,430 1,649 2,017 2,235 56 52 64 66 70 73 75 134 56 470 Tyler .......... .. .... ... . . . 391 382 1,218 1,764 1,938 2,309 2,502 55 65 82 82 82 84 84 105 42 540 Waco .... . ... . ... . ...... . . . 555 425 1,221 1,814 1,970 2,338 2,551 79 72 82 84 83 85 86 109 41 360 Wichita Falls .. ......... • .. 608 517 1,858 1,951 2,169 2,521 2,968 86 88 125 90 92 91 100 60 52 388 Sum of SMSA's• .......... . 664 560 1,524 2,074 2,193 2,544 2,748 94 95 102 96 93 92 93 80 32 314 Non-SMSA area•• ...... . .. . 343 301 1,029 1,602 1,730 1.972 2.110 49 51 69 74 73 71 71 105 32 515 • Includes three SMSA's in Oklahoma, two in Arizona, and one in New Mexico. •• Includes nonmetropolitan parts of Oklahoma. Arizona, and New Mexico, as well as Texas. Source: "Metropolitan Area Incomes, 1929-66," Survey of Current Bus·iness, August 1968, pp. 25-48, Office of Business Economics, U.S. De­ partment of Commerce. PERSONAL INCOME BY MAJOR TYPE OF PAYME!'<:....--~-~ so / ' IOI 2-111 J ,4 'Ill ~ ~ IU1 1961 O•i1 i •ol•otio1101iu1 ­ Figure 1 It is interesting to note that in the growth experiences of the various types of securities comprising the total, securities registered by mutual investment companies in­creased by only 6.1 percent in 1967 over 1966, but gained by 60.1 percent in 1968 over 1967. A similar situation pre­vailed with approved original applications of Texas com­panies and "other" companies; these securities increased 136.6 percent in 1968 over 1967, but in 1967 they increased only 43 percent over 1966. Securities submitted for ap­proval by Texas companies continued to increase through­out 1968, rising to $255.1 million, which represented an increase of 137.3 percent over 1967. This is indeed a phenomenal growth rate when one considers the relative TABLE 2 SECURITIES REGISTRATIONS IN TEXAS, 1966-1968 First half Percent Second half Percent Full year Percent 1966-1967 1967-1968 change 1966-1967 1967-1968 change 1966-1967 1967-1968 change Original applicat ions: Mutual investment companies .......... .... $ 99.7 $187.3 87.9 $188.0 $273.2 45.8 287.7 460.5 60.1 All other corporate securities Texas companies ·········· ·· ·········· 21.7 85.5 294.0 45.3 72.3 59.6 67.0 157.8 135.5 Other com panies ..................... . 32.1 104.9 226.8 75.4 150.2 99.2 l07.5 255.1 137.3 Subtotal . .. . . . ... . . . . . .. . .... ...... 53.8 190.4 253.9 120.7 222.5 84.3 l74.5 412.9 136.6 Total original applications ·············· ·· $153.5 $377.7 146.1 $308.7 $495.7 60.6 ·162.2 873.4 90.0 Renewal applications . ............. .. ... .... Mutual investment companies ............. $ 86.1 $103.3 20.0 $ 66.2 $ 95.6 44.4 l52.3 198.9 30.6 Other corporate securities Texas com panies .. .................. .. 1.9 1.1 - 4.2 6.3 6.7 6.3 8.2 7.8 -48.8 Other companies ······ ·· ··· ·· ········· .7 6.3 800.0 .8 1.3 62.5 1.5 7.6 406.7 Subtotal ....... .. ....... ..... .... .. 2.6 7.4 184.6 7.1· 8.0 5.3 97.0 15.4 58.8 Tota l renewals ... ........ ..... .. ... ....... $ 88.8 $110.7 24.7 $ 73.2 $103.6 41.5 l62.0 214.3 32.3 GR AND TOTAL: ........ ... ..... .... .. .... $242.3 $488.4 101.6 $381.7 $599.3 57.0 624.2 1,087.7 74.3 unimportance of these securities during the early years of the present decade. The Securities Act requires all securities that are not sold within a twelve-month period to be reregistered if the seller wishes tc continue offering them for sale. The data in Table 3 reveal the relative importance of the dollar volume of renewals since 1960. It is important to note that the relative importance of renewals declined to their lowest level in 1968, when they constituted only 19.7 percent of the total dollar volume of securities authorized for sale. This would signify that the environment in Texas is becoming more conducive to business expansion, since management is currently able to sell securities within a shorter period of time, thus lowering the "cost" of selling securities to the public. While it is extremely difficult to predict the effectiveness of any market, it seems logical to conclude that Texas is developing into a very strong capital market. TABLE 3 DOLLAR VOLUME OF RENEWALS FISCAL YEARS 1960-1968 Renewals as All applications Renewals percent of Years (in$ millions) (in$ millions) total 1960 264.1 70.1 26.5 1961 351.6 83.1 23.6 1962 357.3 100.5 28.1 1963 249.3 97.9 39.3 1964 321.1 104.7 32.6 1965 385.1 101.8 26.4 1966 539.9 146.8 27.2 1967 624.2 162.0 26.0 ;968 1,087.7 214.3 19.7 The data in Table 4 reveal that the number as well as the dollar value of withdrawals showed a sizable growth during 1968; however, this is not surprising since all activ­ity increased substantially. In other words, no significance is placed on the fact that withdrawals increased 152 per- TABLE 4 NUMBER AND DOLLAR VOLUME OF APPLICATIOXS WITHDRAWN OR DENIED, FISCAL 1967-1968 (Volume in millions of dollars) Withdrawals Denials Method of 1967 1968 1967 1968 certification No. Vol. No. Vol. No. Vol. No. Vol. Amendment 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 Coordination 51 21.5 107 59.9 3 0.5 1 •• * Notification 0 o.o o.o 0 0.0 Qualification 18 1.9 15 2.1 0.1 0.5 Renewals 1.7 3 1.3 0.0 0 0.0 Totals 70 25.1 126 63.3 0.6 0.5 .. . $56,000 $34,000 cent in 1968 primarily because the total value of all securi­ties rose some 75 percent during this period and the dol.lar volume of all withdrawals constitutes only 5.8 percent of the total authorized for sale. Denials in 1968, as in 1967, are insignificant. This situation tends to support the con­clusion made in this column of the November 1967 issue of this Review, that applicants are becoming more sophisti­cated in the preparation and submission of requests. NOVEMBER 1968 It is assumed that a direct correlation exists between a "good" securities market and the number of licenses granted by the Securities Board. This assumption is borne out by the increased activity of the Licensing Division as indicated by Table 5. The number of licenses granted to salesmen in 1968 rose 1,088 or 26.2 percent over the num­ber granted in 1967. The number of licenses granted to dealers in oil and gas continued to decline, as it has done T BLE 5 XUMBER OF LICE. ' SES ISSUED BY THE SECURITIES BOARD, FISC L YEARS 1960-1968 Types of dealers 1960 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 1968 Corporate dealers 630 635 729 693 489 452 435 436 501 Individual dealers 440 363 392 337 275 260 227 207 201 Dealers in oil and gas 1,480 1,310 1,244 1,179 1,108 1,021 966 892 819 Salesmen 3,618 3,986 4,441 3,989 2,897 3,393 3,677 4,148 5,236 Investment advisors 12 11 12 17 21 24 29 23 42 Real estate investment trust 0 2 2 2 Totals 6,180 6,305 6,819 6,218 4,793 5,153 5,336 5,708 6,801 continuously since 1960. The increase of 65 licenses issued to corporate dealers as well as the increase of 19 licenses granted to investment advisers were the only other changes of any significance in this very important functional area. The data clearly indicate that the securities industry in Texas has come of age. While it is unlikely that we can expect future growth to be as dramatic as that experienced in 1968, we can expect it to be extremely favorable. Obvi­ously the general economic environment that prevailed throughout the United States influenced the increase in the volume of securities approved for public sale but it should be emphasized that the high level of economic activity in Texas was a major factor in this growth. PRICES RECEIVED BY FARMERS ALL FARM PROD CTS. TEXAS Jnde::r. Adj u .sted for Se•sona/ V•t1•tlon-1910 -191 4=100 H O I I I I I 350 300 I I I I I I I 300 '. I I r -­ / I ,......, I - I I ~ V"\ -r- v I •I r H O 200 I I I I I I I I I I I I 200 150 I I I I I I I I 150 100 I I I I I 100 "' I I I I I I I 50 I I I I I 19 55 19.56 19.57 19.58 19.59 1960 1961 1962 1963 196' 196.5 1966 1967 1968 ~OTE: Sha.ded <1:'ea.a mdJca.te p.:rtod• o! c!ech::ie o! to~! b-.a inesa .ll.Ctivlty ln t...,e Unitef-month deposits (t housands)t . . $ A nnua l rate or-deposit tu rnover... . . 2, 96 12.9 3 -21 4 28 Nonfarm employment (area) . . . . . . . Manufactur ing em ployment (a rea ) . Percent unem ployed (area ) . . . . . . . . . 42,200 4,440 5.1 6 2 13 -22 Weslaco (pop. 15,649) Postal receip • ...... . ............. $ Building permits, less federa l contr acts $ 13,2 1 250, 56 - 3 126 39 Bank debits (thousa nds) .. .. .. . . .. . $ 16,355 40 59 Alamo (pop. 4,121) Building permits, less federal cont racts $ 6,275 292 E nd-<>f-month deposits (thousands) t . . $ An nual rate of deposit tu rnover . 12,5 4 15.7 I 31 10 Bank debits (thousands) . .. . . ... . .. $ 2,544 3 60 :'.\IIDLASD S:'.\ISA End-of-month deposits (t housands)! .. Annual rate of deposit turnover.. . $ 1,755 I . 17 6 8 55 (:'.\Iidland; pop. 66,4 7 ') Bui lding permits, less federal con racts $ 406,225 Bank debits (thousands) 'I .... .. .. $ I, 01,596 -19 43 10 Donna (pop. 7,522) E nd-<>f-month deposits (t housands)t . . $ 130,5 7 Postal r eceipts• .. . . . . . . . ... .. . . . . .. $ Building permits, less federal contracts $ Bank debits (t housands) . . . . .. . . . . .. $ End-of-month deposits (t housands)t .. $ 5,343 39,450 2,591 4,013 20 -36 3 10 6 Annual rate of deposit turnover . . . . onfarm employment (area b . . . . . . Manufacturing em ployment (a rea) b P ercent unemployed (area) b . . . . . . 13.6 61,500 4, 90 2.9 - 5 3 1 3 6 4. Annual rate of deposit tu rnover.. .. . 7.3 :'.\UDLAND (pop. 62,625) Postal receipts . ... .. ............... $ 144,306 9 5 EDINBURG (pop. 18,706) Postal receipts• . . . . . . . . . . · · $ Building permits, less federal contracts $ Bank debits (thousands ) $ End-of-month deposits (t housa nds) t .. $ 22,033 201.540 23. 14 13,645 5 -24 14 23 117 76 1 Bu ilding permits, less feder al contracts $ Bank debits (thousands) ... . . . ..... . $ E nd-of-month deposits (thousands) ~ .. $ A nnual rate of deposit turnover. ... . Nonfarm placements .. . 406,225 142, 49 129,542 13.1 06 19 4 2 5 43 15 7 14 Annual rate of deposit Nonfa rm p lacements tur nover. 23.! 194 4 5 12 ODESSA S:'.\ISA (Ector; pop. 88,194 •) Elsa (pop. 3,847) Building permits, less federal contracts $ Bank debits (th~usands) . ..... · · · · · $ End-of-m onth deposits (thousands ) t .. $ Annual rate of deposit turnover ..... . 2,6 4 5,279 2,263 2 .2 -71 64 45 -2 60 -3 124 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 905,715 Bank debits (thousands) II ... ..... $ 1,3 6,504 E nd-of-month deposits (thousands)t . . $ 69,161 Annua l r ate of deposit turnover . .. . Nonfarm employment (area ) b ..... . :'.lianufacturing em ployment (a rea) b 20.2 61,500 4, 90 -41 •• 2 •• 2 ** 7 10 I 3 P ercent unemployed (a rea) b ..... . 2.9 - 3 For a n explanation of symbols see p. 326. NOVEMBER 1968 333 Percent change Percent change Local Business Conditions Local Business Conditions Septl968 Septl968 Sept from from Sept 1968 Sept 1968 Sept from from City and item 1968 Aug 1968 Sept 1967 City and item 1968 Aug 1968 Sept 1967 Schertz (pop. 2,281) ODESSA (pop. 86,937 ' ) Retail sales .............. ........ . . -15t -13 3 Postal receipts• .. ... ....... ........ $ 3,409 -17 60 Postal receipts ....... ....... ....... $ 112,222 2 18 Bank debits (thousands) ......... . . $ 709 9 23 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 905,715 -41 81 End-of-month deposits (thousands)t . . $ 1,128 4 11 Bank debits (thousands) ........... $ 108,271 2 8 Annual rate of deposit turnover .. . . 7.4 9 9 End-of-month deposits (thousands) i . . $ 70,028 8 7 Annual rate of deposit turnover .... . 19.3 3 Nonfarm placements . . .. . ..... . ... . 668 8 30 Seguin (pop. 14,299) Postal receipts• . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 17,107 -11 13 Building permits, less federa l contracts $ 133,142 -89 34 Bank debits (thousands) . .... ....... $ 17,648 25 SAN ANGELO SMSA End-of-month deposits (thousands)t .. $ 17,527 3 8 (Tom Green; pop. 75,210 ") Annual rate of deposit turnover ..... 12.2 2 17 Retail sales .................... ... . Gasoline and service stations ... ... . 5 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 375,006 2 148 SHERMAN-DENISON SMSAx Bank debits (thousands) II .. ...... $ 1,068.732 1 19 End-of-month deposits (thousands)t .. $ 65.530 3 13 (Grayson; pop. 80,95'7 •) Annual rate of deposit turnover ... . 16.5 2 6 Retail sales -19 Nonfarm employment (area) ... .... . 23,450 . 2 Apparel stores ....... . . . ......... . -17 Manufacturing employment (area). 3,800 1 •• Automotive stores . . . ........ . . .. . -34 13 Percent unemployed (area) ..... ... . 3.0 -14 17 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 904,814 8 -16 Bank debits (thousands) II ........ $ 980,820 4 14 End-of-month deposits (thousands)t .. $ 58,594 Annual rate of deposit turnover .. . . 17.3 8 SAN ANGELO (pop. 58,815) Retail sales -151 -9 1 Gasoline and service stations .. . . -5t -5 1 DENISON (pop. 25,766 ') Postal receipts• .......... ........ . . $ 143,755 13 23 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 375,006 2 148 Postal receipts• ...... ... .......... . 37,243 12 31 Bank debits (thousands) ......... ... $ 87,459 2 21 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 200,689 -70 -33 End-of-month deposits (thousands)t .. $ 65,989 2 13 Bank debits (thousands) .... . . ..... $ 27,255 3 8 Annual rate of deposit turnover ..... . 16.1 8 End-of-month deposits (thousands)t .. $ 19,159 8 Annual rate of deposit turnover ... . . 17.4 4 Nonfarm placement.s . ............. . 255 20 13 SAN ANTONIO SMSA (Bexar and Guadalupe; pop. 852,491 3) SHERMAN (pop. 30,660 ') Retail sales -9 19 Apparel stores .... .............. . 14 Postal receipts• ......... ........... $ 45,714 -8 17 Automotive stores ...... ...... ... • -12 21 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 704,125 129 -1 Eating and drinking places ..... . -13 14 Bank debits (thousands) ........ . .. . $ 46,026 2 27 General-m-erchandise stores ....... . 29 6 End-of-month deposits (thousands) t . . $ 27,773 12 Lumber, building-material, Annual rate of deposit turnover .... . 20.0 14 and hardware dealers ..... ..... . 7 40 Nonfarm placements ....... . . . .... . 424 51 130 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 8,985,292 7 21 Bank debits (thousands) II ........ $14,469,876 1 17 End-of-month deposits (thousands)t .. $ 610.866 5 15 Annual rate of deposit turnover .... 24.2 •* 4 TEXARKANA SMSA Nonfarm employment (area) 274,100 •• 6 Ma nufacturing employment (area ) . 31,475 •• (Bowie, excluding Miller, Ark.; pop. 70,413 •)8 Percent unemployed (area) .. . 3.5 - 8 -10 Retail sales .. . .. . .. .. . .. ... . . .. . . . -22 - 9 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 162,420 -57 -55 Bank debits (thousands) II $ 1,560,792 8 22 End-of-month deposits (thousands )t . . $ 66,324 1 14 SAN ANTONIO (pop. 655,006 ') Reta il sales Apparel stores Automotive stores .. ........ .... . . -lOtt -ltt -15tt 10 2 13 11 14 18 Annual rate of deposit turnover . . . . Nonfarm employment (area) ...... . Ma nufacturing employment (area). Percent unemployed (area) .... . . . . . 23.7 44,500 15,460 2.2 - 8 •• •• 12 10 8 25 -19 Eating a nd drinking places .. ... . -11tt 13 14 General-merchandise stores -17tt -29 6 Lumber, building-material, and ha rdwa re stores -6tt Posta l receipts • ...... .. $ 1,214,381 Building permits, less federa l contracts $ 8,492,363 Bank debits (thousa nds) . . . . . . . . $ 1.132,856 End-of-month deposits (thousands)t . . $ 581,796 Annual rate of deposit turnover. 23.8 3 12 2 4 3 45 26 22 18 15 TEXARKANA (pop. 50,006 ' ) Retail sales ................... . .. . . P osta l receipts• ... .. .... ...... ..... $ Building permits, less federal contracts $ Bank debits (thousands) . .......... $ End-of-month deposits (thousands)t .. $ Annual rate of deposit turnover . . . .. -15t 89,407 146,770 114,500 28,979 25.0 -23 1 -57 -9 19 -38 20 15 7 For an explanation of symbols see p. 326. Local Business Conditions Percent change Local Business Conditions Percent change Sept1968 Sept196 Sept 196 Sept 196 City and item Sept 196 from Aug 196 from Sept 1967 City and item Sept 196 from Aug 196 from Sept 1967 TYLER SMSA WACO (pop. 103,462) (Smith; pop. 99,881 •) Reta il sales ... - 151 6 23 Retail sales . .. .. .. . .. . . . ...... . .• . . 3 19 Apparel stores - 26t 7 Apparel stores . .. . ...... . .. .. . . . . 12 1 Automotive stores ...... . . .. .. . .. . -2it 2 35 Drugstores .. . .. . .............. . . . 3 10 Postal receipts• . . . . . . .. ... . .. . ..... S 267,690 21 Building permits, less federal contracts S 474,10 16 Building permits, less federal contracts S J,757,061 22 55 Bank debits (thousands) 11 . ....... S 1, 99,34 12 Bank debits (thousands) ... ... . . .. . . S 1 1,309 I 9 End-of-month deposits (thousandsH .. S 96,61 5 14 End-of-month deposits lthousands)t .. S 104 ,301 3 6 Annual rate of deposit turnover . . . . 20.4 1 Annual rate of deposit turnover . 21.2 Nonfarm employment (area) 36,150 Manufactu ring employment (area) . Percent unemployed (area). . . ...... . 10,070 2.4 - 17 4 4 WICHITA FALLS S'.\ISA (Archer and Wichita; pop. 126,794 ") TYLER (pop. 51,230) Retail sales - 4 Retail sales .. .... . . . . . . . .... . . .. . . Apparel stores .. .. . .• • . . . •... .. .. Drugstores . . .... . . . ..... . Postal receipts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ Building permits, less federal contracts S Bank debits (thousands) . . . ........ S End-of-month deposits (thousands H .. $ -15 -26 -1 150,19 474,10 141,9i7 87,624 3 12 3 26 16 19 1 10 17 5 13 14 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 602.240 Bank debits (thousands) II ... .... $ 2,154,46 End-of-month deposits (thousandsH . . S l 15,7i0 Annual rate of deposit turnover Nonfarm employment (area ) Manufactu ring employment (area). Percent unemployed (area) I .5 50,200 4,940 2.1 -45 - 67 •• 7 16 Annual rate of deposit turnover . . ... 20.3 4 3 Nonfarm placements ........... . .. . 656 22 6 Burkburnett (pop. 7,621) Buildfog permits, less federal contracts $ 75,0 -22 1 4 WACO S.MSA Bank debits (thousands) ......... .. . S 7,916 - 9 4 Retail sales ... (:\1cLennan; pop. 151,871 ") 23 End-of-month deposits Annual rate of deposit (thousands) t .. S turnover ..... . 5,417 17.5 -12 10 7 Apparel stores Automotive stores . . . . . . ......... . 35 Iowa Park (pop. 5,152 ') $ l, 13,261 Building permits, less federal contracts Bank debits (t housands) II End-of-month deposits (t housandsH .. $ $ 2,485,032 Annual rate of deposit turnover ... . Nonfa rm employment (area) . ... . . 119,325 20.9 5 .600 19 55 14 6 4 Building permits, less federal contracts $ Bank debits (thousands) ........... $ End-of-month deposits (thousands) t . . $ Annual rate of deposit turnover ..... 0 3,449 3, 03 11.1 10 4 11 4 5 Ma nufacturing employment (area) . 13,9 0 1 11 Percent u nemployed (area ) . . . 3.9 3 WICHITA FALLS (pop. 115,340 ') McGregor (pop. 4,642) Retail sales ...... . ............. ... . Postal receipts• ......... ...... $ -15• 153,34 - 4 5 4 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 12, 50 50 Building permits, Jess federal contracts S 527,152 -46 71 Bank debits (thousands) . . . . ...... $ 4,527 16 30 Bank debits (thousands ) .... ....... S 150,240 7 8 End-of-month deposits (thousandsH .. $ ,015 End-of-month deposits (thousandsH .. $ 99,039 4 Annual rate of deposit turnover . . . 6. 17 33 Annual rate of deposit turnover ..... I .I ALPHABETICAL LISTING OF NON-SMSA CITIES, \VITH DATA ALBAKY (pop. 2,174) A -GLETO~ (pop. 9,131) Postal receipts• ...... ......... ..... S 1 ,162 47 94 Building permits, less federal ccntracts $ 0 Building permits. less federal contracts$ 9 ,200 29 -66 .. Bank debits (thousands) ............ S 1 7 .629 6 53 Bank debits (thousands) S 2. 6 ~nd-of-month dep06its (thousands)t .. $ 4,153 End-of-month deposits (thousands)t .. S 12,61 -7 ~nnual rate of deposit turnover. .3 2 Annual rate of deposit turnover ... 16.9 16 ALPINE (pop. 4,740) Postal receipts• . . . . . . . . ...... ... S 7,624 9 ATHE1 S (pop. 7,086) Building permits, less federal contracts S 690,44 Postal receipts• ..... . . . . 16,322 20 Bank debits (thousands) ........ .... S 5,152 16 31 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 77,700 70 125 5,799 6 21 Bank debits (thousands) . . S 12,449 3 Annual rate of deposit turnover I 1.0 12 End-of-month deposits (thousands) t .. S 11,439 14 Annual rate of deposit turnover 13.6 10 9 End-of-month deposits (thousands) t .. S ANDREWS (pop. 11,135) BAY CITY (pop. 11,656) Postal receipts• .............. ...... S 10,15 15 14 Postal receipts• ....... ............. S 19,506 11 13 Building permits, Jess federal contracts S 77,5 0 I 3 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 15, 00 10 Bank debits (thousands) . . . .... ... . S 7,0 6 4 12 Bank debits (thousands) ... ........ S 25,797 13 End-of-month dep06its (thousands)t .. S 7,261 15 End-of-month deposits (thousands t .. S 29,645 4 7 Annual rate of deposit turnover . .. .. 12.5 17 Annual rate of deposit turnover .. ... . 10.6 2 9 Nonfarm placemen ·s Iii 137 163 For an explanation of symbols see p. 326. Local Business Conditions Percent change Local Business Conditions Percent change Septl968 Septl968 Sept 1968 Sept 1968 Sept from from Sept from from City and item 1968 Aug 1968 Sept 1967 City and item 1968 Aug 1968 Sept 1967 BEEVILLE (pop. 13,811) Postal receipts• .. . . ....... . .. . Building permits, less federa l contracts Bank debits (thousands) ... . ... .. .. S End-of-month deposits (thousands)t . . $ Annual rate of deposit turnover . .... Nonfarm placements 17 ,201 113,621 15,647 17,113 10.9 102 -- 3 45 9 40 37 23 11 10 11 BRYAN (pop. 32,891 ') Postal receipts• . . ..... ...... . .... .. $ Building permits, less federal contracts$ Bank debits (thousands) .. . . . . . ... .. $ End-of-month deposits (thousands)t . . $ Annual rate of deposit turnover .. Nonfarm placements 40,114 4,478,230 56,289 30,703 22.5 401 - 10 5 4 30 33 23 11 12 14 BELLVILLE (pop. 2,218) CALDWELL (pop. 2,202 ') P ostal receipts .... .. ...... . . . . . . . .. S 3,750 27 Building permits, less federal contracts 50,850 77 112 Bank debits (thousands ) ........... $ 3,252 15 7 Bank debits (thousands) .. . . .. . ..... $ 5,643 8 15 End-of-month deposits (t housands) t . . 4,781 1 2 End-of-month deposits (thousands) t .. S 5,940 ** Annual rate of deposit turnover .. . . . 8.1 - 16 Annual rate of deposit turnover. 11.4 14 CAMERON (pop. 5,640) BELTON (pop. 8,163) Postal receipts• Building permits, less federal contracts End-of-month deposits (thousands)t .. $ 12,715 25,350 10,579 - 19 71 -- 3 34 19 Postal receipts• . . . . . . . . . . . $ Building permits, less federal contracts $ Bank debits (thousands) . . . . ... .... $ End-of-month deposits (thousands )t . . $ Annual rate of deposit turnover ... 5,995 4,800 6,517 6,169 12.7 --- 11 2 9 ** 11 -3 -81 1 4 2 BIG SPRING (pop. 31,230) Retail sales -15 t .. 9 CASTROVILLE (pop. 1,508) Building permits, less federa l contracts $ 38,750 103 Postal receipts• ... 38. 734 - 8 15 Ba nk debits (thousands) .. ........ . $ 1,458 16 54 Building permits, less federal contracts 56,369 - 37 157 End-of-month deposits (thousands)t . . $ 1,385 6 5 Bank debits (thousands) . . . . .. .. .... $ 48,947 6 Annual rate of deposit turnover. 12.3 11 45 End-of-month deposits (thousands)t .. $ A.nnual rate of deposit turnover . . . 28,912 21.1 8.. 10 CISCO (pop. 4,499) ~onfarm placements 21 8 22 44 Postal receipts• ............... ..... $ 5,692 3 12 Bank debits (thousands) ............ $ 4,680 7 5 BONHAM (pop. 7,357) End-of-month deposits (thousands)t .. $ 4,720 17 18 Postal receipts• . . . . . ..... S 9,930 16 38 Annual rate of deposit turnover..... 12.8 - 10 -7 Building permits, less federal contracts S Bank debits (thousands) ........ . .. $ 168,000 9,91 8 500 4 770 16 COLLEGE STATION (pop. 18,590 ') End-of-month deposits (thousands)t .. S Annual rate of deposit turnover .. ... 9,538 12.3 2 2 13 P ostal receipts• ... . ......... .. .. . .. $ Building permits, less federal contracts $ 48,493 239.378 78 58 39 15 Bank debits (thousands) .... . ...... . $ 8,363 - 15 BORGER (pop. 20,911) Postal receipts• ...... . .... $ 23,970 - 16 36 End-of-month deposits (thousands) t .. $ Annual rate of deposit turnover . . ... 6,387 15.9 - 18 16 -11 Building pe!"mits, less federal contracts S Nonfarm p:acements 26,550 86 - 75 10 - 18 45 COLORADO CITY (pop. 6,457) Postal receipts• .. . .......... . ... . . . $ 7,728 14 2 BRADY (pop. 5,338) Bank debits (thousands) .. . . ...... . End-of-month deposits (thousands)t .. S 5,370 6,477 1 9 2 P ostal receipts* . ................... $ Building permits , Jess federal contracts $ 8,077 52,975 32 112 68 142 Annual rate of deposit turnover . . .. 9.9 8 Ba nk debits (thousands) .. . . . S End-of-month deposits (thousar.ds)t . . S 8,054 7,480 •• 7 8 COPPERAS COVE (pop. 4,567) P ostal receipts• ... . .. . . .. . . . . .... . . $ 7,047 - 5 2'1 Annual rate of deposit turnover. 12.9 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 34,130 21 -67 Bank debits (thousands) ..... . . .... $ 3,145 11 17 BRENHAM (pop. 7,740) End-of-m onth deposits (thousands)t .. $ 2,614 34 69 P ostal receipts• .. . .. .. $ 13,543 9 14 Annual rate of deposit turnover . 16.5 - 6 -17 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 99,777 532 Bank debits (thousands) ... $ 15,856 1 7 CORSICANA (pop. 20,344) End-of-month depos its lthousands)t .. S 17 ,418 8 8 Postal receipts* .......... ... ..... . . $ 51,689 33 28 Annual rate of deposit turnover . . . 11.4 3 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 198,992 - 35 82 Bank debit" (thousands) . . . . ....... $ 26,864 2 BROWNFIELD (pop. 10,286) Postal receipts• .. $ flank debit, (thousands ) . $ 11,766 18,624 16 19 4 9 End-of-month deposits (thousands)t .. $ Annual rate of deposit tu rnover . Non farm placements 23,387 13.9 22 3 37 End-of-me n th deposits (thousands)t .. Ann ual rate of deposit turnover . 14,662 16.4 17 11 CRYSTAL CITY (pop. 9,101) Building permits, less federal contracts S 145,518 595 122 BROWNWOOD (pop. 16,974) P osta l receipts• ..... $ 32,231 12 39 Bank debits (thousands) ... . . . . ... . $ End-of-month deposits (thousands)t. $ Annual rate of deposit t urnover. 3,802 2,958 15.4 -- 1 1 •• 8 -4 12 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 157 ,900 70 112 Bank debits (thousands) $ End-of-month deposits (thousands); .. $ Annual rate of deposit turnover. 25,553 14,030 22.0 12 2 11 30 26 DECATUR (pop. 3,563) Building permits, less federa l contracts $ Bank debits (thousands) . ... . . . . . .. $ 23,825 4,465 - 43 2 16 Nonfarm placements 133 6 2 End-of-month deposits (thousands)t . . $ 4,765 2 4 For a n explanation of symbols see p. 326. Annual rate of deposit turnover.... 11.1 Percent change P ercent change Local Business Conditions Local Business Conditions City and item Sept 1968 Sept1968 from Aug 1968 Sept1968 from Sept 1967 City and item Sept 196 Sept 196 from Aug 196 Sept 196 from Sept 1967 DEL RIO (pop. 18,612) GIDDINGS (pop. 2,821) Postal receipts• . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . s 24,506 18 32 Postal receipts• . . . . . . . . . . . . . S 5,7 3 -12 36 Building permits, less federal contracts s 333,905 214 329 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 16, 67 14 32 Bank debits (thousands ) ... . ..... . . S 16,716 6 14 Bank debits (thousands) . . . . . . . S 4,921 - 4 End--0f-month deposits (thousandsH . . S 19,770 1 9 End-of-month deposits (thousands)t .. S 5,70 10 Annual rate of deposit tur nover . . . .. 10. l 6 2 Annual rate of deposit turnover..... . 10. DIMM ITT (pop. 2,935) GLADEWATER (pop. 5,742) Postal receipts• ....... . ..... . ...... S 7,1 6 19 -10 Bank debits (thousands) ....... . . .. S 13,9 3 24 63 Building permits, less federal contracts S 35, 762 140 -77 End-of-month deposits (thousands)t . . S 9,142 2 32 Bank debits (thousands) . . . . . . . . . . . . S 5,397 7 Annual rate of deposit turnover . ... 20.6 3 32 End-of-month deposits (thousands)t .. S 5,661 13 Annual rate of dePQSit turnover . ... . 12.1 13 2 Nonfarm em ployment (area) c .. . . . 34,600 3 EAGLE LAKE (pop. 3,565) Manufacturing em ployment (area) c Percent unemployed (area) c . ...... . 9, 10 2.6 2 •• - 12 16 Bank debits (thousands) . . . . . . .. S 7,626 48 77 End--0f-month deposits (thousands)t . . S Annual rate of deposit turnover. . . . . 6,65 14.8 16 23 11 72 GOLDTHWAITE (pop. 1,383) Posta1 receipts• ................ . . . . S 4,010 6 53 Bank debits (t housands) .. . ........ S 5,055 13 1 End-of-month deposits (thousands t . . S 4,3 4 9 -27 EAGLE PASS (pop. 12,094) Annual rate of deposit turnover . .. 14.4 4 44 Postal receipts• ...... . ............. S Building permits, less federal contracts S 13, 92 124,450 6 24 29 33 GRAHA~1 (pop. 8,505) Bank debits (thousands) ... ... . .. . . S 7,652 P ostal receipts• . . .. ................ S 12,65 2 31 End-of-month deposits (thousands)t .. S 4, Building permits, less federal contracts S 75, 00 -24 Annual rate of deposit turnover. ... 19.5 3 Bank debits (thousands) ..... . .... . S 11,511 11 End-of-month deposits (thousands)t . . S 11, 67 1 13 Annual rate of deposit turnover 11.6 3 EDNA (pop. 5,038) GRANB RY (pop. 2,227) Postal receipts• . . ... .. ... . .. .... . .. $ Bank debits (thousands) . . .. . ... . .. . S End--0f-m onth deposits (thousands)t . . $ Annual rate of deposit turnover . . . .. . 6,256 ,1 6 7,209 13.7 -12.. 1 -4 - 22 22 7 Postal receipts• . ..... .. ........ . ... S Bank debits (thousands) .... . ....... S End-of-month dePoSits (thousandsH .. S Annual rate of deposit turnover .... . . 5,37 2,336 3,259 .6 44 -22 -19 11 21 16 GREEKVILLE (pop. 22,134 ') FREDERICKSBURG (pop. 4,629) Postal receipts• .. .. . .. . . . .......... S Building permits, Jess federal contracts S Bank debits (thousands) . . . . . . . . . . S End-of-mon th deposits (thousands)t. S Annual rate of deposit turnover . . . .. 10,026 4 ,115 13,562 11,698 14.3 -11 26 1 6 6 42 54 11 8 7 Postal receipts• ........ . ... . .... . .. S Building permits, less federal contracts S Bank debi s (thousands) . . ......... S End-of-month deposits (thousands)t .. S Annual rate of deposit turnover . on farm placements . . . . . . . . ...... . 3 ,4 5 241, 25 34,429 23,430 1 .4 265 5 9 12 9 -11 61 15 69 22 16 4 70 HALLETTSVILLE (pop. 2,808) Building permits, less federal contracts S 164,900 FRIONA (pop. 3,049 ') Bank debits (thousands) ........... S 3,45 12 9 Building permits, less federal contracts S Bank debits (thousands) . . . .. . .. .. . S 40,000 14,627 -44 25 49 47 End--0f-month deposits (t housandsH .. S Annual rate of deposit turnover. .. ... 6, 729 6.2 2 13 1 9 End-of-month deposits (t housa nds) i .. S Annual rate of deposit turnover . .. . 5,264 32.2 7 25 7 34 HALLSVILLE (pop. 684) Bank debits (thousands) .. . ......... S 1,051 -33 End-of-month deposits (thousandsH .. S 1,307 5 GATESVILLE (pop. 4,626) Annual rate of deposit turnover ... .. . 9.9 - 27 Postal receipts• . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . S 7,091 9 HASKELL (pop. 4,016) Bank debits (thousands) ...... . .. . . S End-of-month deposits (thousands); .. S Annual rate of deposit turnover ..... ,117 7,734 12.6 2 4 2 7 Building permits, less federal contracts S Bank debits (thou ands) ........... S End-of-month deposi s (thousands) t .. S 40,000 5,074 4,977 22 10 6 40 11 Annual rate of deposit turnover . .. 12. 20 31 GEORGETOWN ( pop_ 5,218) Building permits, less feder al contracts S 106,300 352 HENDERSON (pop. 9,666) Bank debits (thousands) ............ S 6,350 10 15 Postal receipts• ............ . ..... . . S 14,597 *• 5 End-of-month deposits (t housands)t .. S 7,775 20 Building permits, less federal contracts S 76, 00 -71 -42 Annual rate of deposit turnover ..... 10.2 12 3 Bank debits (thousands) ...... .... . S 14,447 5 17 End-of-month deposits lthousandsH .. S 16, 30 3 7 For an explanation of symbols see p. 326. Annual rate of deposit turnover . . ... 10.5 Percent change Percent change Local Business Conditions Local Business Conditions City a nd item Sept 1968 Septl968 from Aug 1968 Septl968 from Sept 1967 City and item Sept 1968 Sept 1968 from Aug 1968 Sept 1968 from Sept 1967 HEREFORD (pop. 9,584 ') KIRBYVILLE (pop. 2,021 ') Posta l receipts• ..... . . .. ... .. .. . . . . $ 27 ,065 -2 32 P ostal receipts• .. ......... . . . ..... . $ 5,415 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 233,700 35 Bank debits (thousands) ...... . .. .. $ 3,271 16 71 Ba nk debits (thousands) .. . .. .. .. . .. $ 33,818 -6 19 End-of-m onth deposits (thousands)t .. $ 4,766 8 12 End-of-month deposits (thousands )t . . $ 19,673 27 28 Annua l rate of deposit tu rnover .. . .. 8.6 13 59 Annual rate of deposit turnover ... . . . 23.1 -18 3 HONDO (pop. 4,992) LAMESA (pop. 12,438) Building permits, less federal con tracts 7,720 -77 -77 P ostal receipts• ......... . .......... $ 18,271 29 44 Ba nk debits (thousands) . . .. . .... .. $ 4,273 -31 12 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 650 -99 -96 E nd-of-month deposits (thousands)t .. $ 4,594 8 10 Bank debits (thousands) .. . ... . ..... $ 20,464 35 35 Annual rate of deposit turnover . . ... 10.7 -33 -1 E:nd-of-month deposits (thousands) t .. $ 17,767 18 HUNTSVILLE (pop. 11,999) Annual rate of deposit turnover... . . . Nonfarm placements 15.0 79 21 6 44 3 Postal receipts• . . ...... . .. .. . .. ... . 26,347 16 Building permits, less federal contracts $ Ba nk debits (thousands) . . . . . ... .... $ End-of -month deposits (thousands )t .. $ Annual rate of deposit turnover .. . .. 95,300 19,941 17,382 14.8 -46 16 -8 10 14 37 -14 LAMPASAS (pop. 5,670 ' ) Posta1 receipts• . . . . .. . .. . . ..... . . .. $ Building permits, less federal contracts $ Ba nk debits (thousands) . . ......... $ 7, 71 1,500 8,903 45 -97 32 -98 17 JACKSONVILLE (pop. 10,509 ') End-of-month deposits (thousa nds)t .. $ 7,953 3 7 P ostal receipts• . . . . ... ... . . .. . . . $ 29,920 21 Annual rate of deposit turnover . . . .. 13.6 12 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 140,255 7 95 Ba nk debits (thousands) ........... . $ End-of-month deposits (thousands)t .. $ Annual rate of deposit turnover . .... . 19,353 12,606 18.9 2 LEVELLAND (pop. 12,117 ') P ostal receipts• ... . .. . .. . . . ... . . ... $ B uilding permits, less federa l contracts $ 19,941 73,950 10 -20 126 -88 JASPER (pop. 5,120 ') Bank debits (thousands) .. . . . .... . .. $ 17,1 70 49 -6 Postal receipts• ........... . .. ... . . . 13,674 9 19 End-of-month deposits (thousands)t . . $ 14,002 26 31 Building permits, less federa l contracts $ 20,400 181 Annual rate of deposit turnover ..... 16.4 39 -19 Ba nk debits (thousands) . ........... $ End-of-month deposits (thousands)t .. $ Annual rate of deposit turnover 14,662 9,547 18.4 . .. 26 5 16 LITTLEFIELD (pop. 7,236) Postal receipts• ...... .. ... .. . .. . . . . 9,033 22 41 J UNCTION (pop. 2,441) Building perm its, less federal contracts $ Ba nk debits (thousands) ... . ........ $ 13,400 2,665 4 8 765 33 Bank debits (thousands ) . . . . ... . . .. . $ End-of-month deposits (t housands)t . . $ Annual rate of deposit turnover . . . .. 11,636 10,033 15.3 46 21 43 25 15 25 End-of-mont h deposits (thousands )t . . $ Annual rate of deposit turnover . . . 4,377 7.5 4 25 LLANO (pop. 2,656) KARNES CITY (pop. 2,693) Buildi ng permits, less federal contracts $ Ba nk debits (thousands) . . .. .. .. . ... $ End-of-mont h deposits (thousands ) t .. $ Annual rate of deposit turnover . 26,000 4,040 4,307 11.3 -25 -5 ** -7 27 10 15 Postal receipts• . ... ............ . .. . $ Building permits, less federa l cont racts $ Ba nk debits (thousands) . . . . . .. . . .. . $ End-of-mont h deposits (t housands)t . . $ Annual rate of deposit turnover .... . 4,916 12,500 6,212 4,756 14.6 16 4 13 1 58 20 -7 19 KILGORE (pop. 10,092) LOCKHART (pop. 6,084) P ostal receipts• ...... . ............. $ 20,405 3 29 Posta l receipts• . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 6,973 19 -3 Bu ilding permits, less federal con t racts $ 79,210 72 -32 Building permits, less federa l contracts $ 72,450 94 98 Bank debits (thousa nds) ....... . . .. . $ 14,277 2 Ba nk debits (thousa nds) . ...... . . .. . 6,480 -10 -4 E nd-of-month deposits (thousands)t . . $ 14,832 11 End-of-month deposits (thousands)t . . S 7,887 •• 4 Annual rate of deposit turnover .. . . . . 11.9 2 Annual rate of deposit turnover . . . .. 9.9 -12 -10 N onfa rm em ployment (area) c 34,600 1 Ma n ufact uring em ployment (area) c Percent unem p loyed (a rea) c . 9,810 2.6 2. 12 16 LONGVIEW (pop. 52,242 ') Retail sa les . . ..... . ..... . ... . . . -15t -4 24 KILLEEN (pop. 34,000 ') Postal receipts• .. .. ........ . . . ..... $ 75,233 2 15 Postal receipts• ..... . .. . ..... . ..... $ 58,527 -8 12 Building permits, less federal cont racts $ 549,000 -50 -37 Building permits, less f eder al contracts $ 794,531 71 158 Bank debits (t housands) . . ... . . . ... S 85,923 20 Bank debits (thousands) .. . . ... ..... $ 22,273 -23 21 End-of-month deposits (thousands)t .. $ 49,344 18 E nd-of-month deposits (thousands)t .. $ 13,347 5 8 N onfarm em ployment (area ) c . . . . . . 34,600 Annual rate of deposit turnover. 20.5 -21 14 Ma n ufactu ring em ployment (area) c 9,810 -2 12 KINGSLAND (pop. 150) Percent u nem ployed (a rea ) c . . . .. .. . 2.6 ** 16 Posta l receipts• . .. . .... . . . ... . . .. .. $ 1,986 -10 21 Bank debits (thousands) ...... .. ... $ End-of-month deposits (thousands)t . . $ 2,173 1.510 8 11 LUFKIN (pop. 20,756 ') Postal receipts• ....... . ... . ........ $ 38,580 -8 33 Annual rate of deposit turnover.. .. . 17.1 2 Building permits, less federa l con t racts $ 136,518 52 27 KINGSVILLE (pop. 25,297) Nonfarm placements . . . . .. . ........ . 81 27 Postal receipts • . . . . .. $ 35,389 43 24 Building permits, less federa l contract $ 324,516 -24 -45 McCAMEY (pop. 3,350 ' ) Bank debits (t housands) End-of-m ont h deposits (t housands) t .. $ 22,606 18.859 28 -4 51 Postal receipts• .. .... . ..... . . . . . ... $ Ba nk debits (thousands) . . ..... . . . .. $ 3,360 1,978 -14 -13 •• Annual rate of deposit turnover . .. 14.1 26 41 End-of-month deposits (thousands)t . . $ 2,144 26 9 For an explanat ion of sym bols see p. 326. Annual rate of deposit turnover ... . . 12.3 -19 -5 Local Business Conditions Percent change Local Business Conditions Percent change City and item Sept 1968 Septl968 from Aug 1968 Sept l 96 from Sept 1967 City and item Sept 196 Sept1968 from Aug 1968 Septl96 from Sept 1967 MARBLE FALLS (pop. 2,161) Bank debits (thousands ) .... . . . .. . .. s End-of-month deposits (thousands)t .. Annual rate of deposit turnover . .. 3,430 2,986 13.6 -15 3 -14 22 16 PALESTINE (pop. 13,974) P ostal receipts• ....... . ......... .. . S Building permits, less federal contracts S Bank debits (t housa nds) . . . . . . . . . . . S 19,27 109,700 14,961 2 4 19 4 86 1 MARSHALL (pop. 25, 715 ') Postal receipts• . . . . . . . . . . . S 35,537 1 30 End-of-month deposits (t housands) ; .. S Annual rate of deposit turnover . .. 18,247 9.9 21 10 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 406,662 64 67 Bank debits (thousands ) .... S 25,376 2 9 PAMPA (pop. 24,664) End-of-month deposits (thousands)t .. S Annual rate of deposit turnover. Nonfarm placements 30,259 10.2 399 3 -4 19 12 2 21 Postal receipts* .... .... . ... . ... . . . . $ Building permits, less federal contracts $ Bank debits (thousands ) . S 32,796 51, 50 31,565 -70 3 4 •* MEXIA (pop. 7,621 ') Postal receipts• ....... . ........ . S Building permits, less federal contracts S 9,563 216,000 397 20 End-of-month deposits (thousands); .. S Annual rate of deposit turnover ... .. Nonfarm placements ........ . 23,7 6 16.2 135 4 2 2 12 -30 Bank debits (t housands ) . . ... . . . .... S End-of-month deposits (thousands)t . . $ 6,761 6,728 -10 2 15 9 PARIS (pop. 20,977) Annual rate of deposit turnover . ... . 12.2 -12 5 Postal receipts• ......... . . .. . . .. S 34,923 3 16 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 170, 72 -42 47 MINERAL WELLS (pop. 11,053) Nonfarm placements 223 23 11 Postal receipts• ... . ... . .... . .. $ 33,522 8 43 Building permits, less federal contracts S 1,848,100 965 PECOS (pop. 12,728) Bank debits (thousands) ...... . .. ... $ 26,840 End-of-month deposits (thousands)t . . $ 16,76 Annual rate of deposit turnover. . . 19.5 Nonfarm placements . . . . . . 134 4 3 2 11 14 9 5 14 Postal receipts• ... . . . . . . . .......... S Bank debits (thousands) S End-of-month deposits (thousa nds)t . . S Annual rate of deposit turnover . .. .. 11,553 16,560 10,497 I .5 -12 14 5 15 6 41 9 29 MONAHANS (pop. 9,252 ' ) Nonfarm placements 7 - 3 Postal receipts • ... . .. . ...... . ... .. . $ 10,313 - 6 13 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 580 -97 -99 PLAINVIEW (pop. 23,703 ') Bank debits (thousands) . . . . . . End-of-month deposits (t housands)t. Annual rate of deposit turnover . .... $ $ 10,264 7,218 16.8 -14 -3 -13 2 2 ** P ostal receipts• S Building permits, less federal contracts S Ba nk debits (thousands) ... . . ... . .. S 33,159 65,000 53,942 14 12 23 25 75 17 MOUNT PLEASANT (pop. 8,027) Postal receipts• . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ Building permits, less federal contracts $ 12,902 10,300 -4 -82 10 -70 End-of-month deposits (thousands)t .. S Annual rate of deposit turnover . ... . Nonfarm placements ...... . ....... . 2 ,133 24.6 243 15 17 31 3 17 16 Bank debits (thousands ) . . . . . . . . . . . $ End-of-month deposits (t housands)t . . $ Annua1 rate of deposit turnover. MUENSTER (pop. 1,190) 15,863 10,548 18. 7 9 8 12 17 5 13 PLEASANTON (pop. 5,053 ' ) Building permits, less federal contracts S Bank debits (thousands) . . . . . S End-of-month deposits (thousands)t . . S 26,500 4, 79 4,440 22 15 Postal receipts• .. . . . .... . .. . ..... . . $ 1,582 -52 - 4 Annual rate of deposit turnover ... 13.0 4 Building perm its, less federal contracts S 25,000 -82 Bank debits (t housands) S 3,980 23 Q ANAH (pop. 4,564) End-of-month deposits (t housands) t. Annual rate of deposit turnover. S 2,738 17.0 14 6 P ostal receipts• . . . . . . . . . . . . ... S Building permits, less federal contracts S 5,904 37 ,500 40 29 61 MULESHOE (pop. 3,871) Bank debits (thousands ) End-of-month deposits (thousands)t .. $ 13,658 10,672 31 54 10 6 Bank debits (thousands) ......... . . S End-of-month deposits (thousands) t .. S Annual rate of deposit turnover . . .. 5,593 6,065 11.3 6 4 7 33 28 Annual rate of deposit tu rnover . .. 18.6 8 27 RAYMONDVILLE (pop. 9,385) NACOGDOCHES (pop. 15,450 ') Postal receipts• . . .. .. . ..... . . . . .... $ ,566 - 4 17 Postal receipts• . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 27,968 -24 I Building permits, less federal contracts S 10,200 104 5 Building permits, less federal contracts S 113,314 12 -80 Bank debits (thousands) ........ ... . S 14,061 4 89 Bank debits (thousands) $ End-of-month deposits (thousands)t .. $ Annual rate of deposit turnover . .. Nonfarm placements . 30,979 30,632 12.7 70 16 9 13 6 16 -7 -47 End-of-m ont h deposits (thousands)t .. S Annual rate of deposit turnover . .. N onfarm placements ... 12,50 13.0 43 7 10 30 12 73.. NEW BRAUNFELS ( pop. 15,631) Postal receipts• . . . $ Building permits, less federal contracts S Bank debits (thousands) . . . S End-of-month deposits (thousands)t .. S 27,190 190,929 1 ,596 17 ,892 15 15 27 25 8 17 REFUGIO (pop. 4,944) Postal receipts• ..... S Building permits, less federal contracts S Bank debits (thousands) . . ..... . . . . . S End-of-month deposits (thousands); .. $ Annual rz te of deposit turnover . 4,714 0 4,51 i ,660 6.3 - 9 10 •* 11 30 45 4 54 OLNEY ( pop. 4,200 ') Building perm its, less federal contracts 3 Bank debits (thousands) S End-of-mont h depcsits (thousands)t .. S Annual rate of deposit turnover . . 5,493 5,426 12.0 12 3 12 17 1 20 ROCKDALE (pop. 4,481) Postal receipts• ..... . . ... .. . . ...... $ Bank debits thousands) .. . . . . ... . .. S End-of-month deposits (thousands)t .. $ 6,20 5,570 5,4 7 6 13 2 17 •• 6 For an explanation of symbols see p. 326. Annual rate of deposit turnover .. . . . 12.3 -16 - 8 Local Business Conditions Percent change Local Business Conditions Percent change City a nd item Sept 1968 Sept 1968 from Aug 1968 Sept l 968 from Sept 1967 City a nd item Sept 1968 Sept 1968 from Aug 1968 Sept 1968 from Sept 1967 SAN MARCOS (pop. 12,713) TAHOKA (pop. 3,012) Postal receipts* ... S Bu ilding permits, less federa l contracts S Ba nk debits (thousands) S End-of-mon th deposits (t housands)+ . . $ Annual rate of deposit turnover . 32,521 52,225 18,250 15,722 14.6 87 -60 10 3 23 68 20 16 9 Building permits, less federal contracts $ Bank debits (thousands) ........ $ End-of-month deposits (thousands)t . . Annual ra te of deposit t urnover . . 29,500 6,1 37 6, 62 11.3 -51 14 11 188 SAN SABA (pop. 2,728) Posta l receipts• ..... ...... s Building permits , less federal cont racts Bank debits (thousands ) S End-of-month deposits (t housa nds)+ . $ Annual rate of deposit t urnover . 4,617 750 7,079 5,938 14.1 44 ** •• 45 -99 20 11 8 TAYLOR (pop. 9,434) Postal receipts* .. . ........ . . . . $ Building permits, less federal contracts S Bank debits (t housands ) . . .... . .... S End-of-month deposits (thousands)t .. $ Annual rate of deposit turnover ... . . Nonfarm placements 13,924 344,8 0 13,522 22,927 7.1 36 -- 11 409 6 •• 10 44 17 524 10 7 44 SILSBEE (pop. 6,277) Bu ilding permits, less federal contracts S 21 ,025 -85 -76 TEMPLE (pop. 34,730 ') Bank debits (t housands) . . . . S 9,312 •* 71 Reta il sales - 151 - 18 End-of-month deposits (thousands)1: .. $ 9,294 5 32 Furniture and household - 17t 13 26 Annual rate of deposit turnover ... 12.3 29 appliance stores . . .. .. ... . . . ... . Postal receipts* . . . . . . ......... S 56,967 17 SMITHVILLE (pop. 2,933) Building permits, less federal contracts $ 33 ,302 -75 Postal receipts* . 3,2 4 14 19 Bank debits (thousands ) ... S 51,579 24 Building permits, less federal contracts 6,575 338 14 Nonfa rm placements .. . 243 3 Bank debits (thousands) ........ . .. . 1,993 12 End-of-month deposits (thousands) t . . Annua l rate of deposit t urnover. 2,794 8.5 4 6 UVALDE (pop. 10,293) Postal receipts• ..... .. .. . .. . 12,445 SNYDER (pop. 13,850) Building permits, less federal contracts S 12 ,120 102 Postal receipts• S 18,695 12 35 Bank debits (thousands) . . . . $ 1 7,544 29 Building permits, less federal contracts S 129,200 70 47 End-of-month deposits (t housands)1: .. S 10,956 8 Bank debits (thousands) .... S End-of-mon th deposits (thousands)+ .. S 15,04 2 19,175 8.. 20 4 Annual ra te of deposit turnover . 18.9 8 18 Annua l rate of deposit t urnover . 9.4 15 VERNON (pop. 12,141) Postal receipts• . . . . . . . . . . . . . S 14,265 7 SONORA (pop. 2,619) Building permits, less federal cont racts S 71 ,450 259 - 13 Bu ildi ng perm its, less federal con tracts $ 2,150 -20 Bank debits (t housands) . . . . . . . . . . $ 17, 148 1 5 Bank debits (thousanas) End-of-month deposits (t housands)+ . $ 3,151 4,525 14 14 End-of-month deposits (thousands) t . . S Annual rate of deposit t urnover . .. .. 24,545 8.6 •• 8 1 Annua l rate of deposit turnover . . . 8.4 N onfarm placements 120 30 64 STEPHENVILLE (pop. 7359) VICTORIA (pop. 33,04 7) Postal receipts* 15,713 37 23 Reta il sales -15 t 11 Building permits, less federa l cont racts 12 ,350 19 30 Automot ive stor es - 27• 17 Bank debits (thousa nds) .. 11,902 8 Postal receipts* . ... . . . $ 59,9 6 51 End-of-mont h deposits (thousands)t . 11,665 11 Building permits, less federal contracts S 31 7,225 18 -6 Annual rate of deposit turnover . 12.7 Bank debits (t housands ) ... . .... S 8 ,105 3 16 End-of-m onth deposits (t housands) +.. S 97,70 3 STRATFORD (pop. 1,380) Annual rate of deposit turnover . .... 10.5 Postal receipts* 2,980 17 28 Nonfarm placements 537 7 Building permits, less feder a l cont racts $ Bank debits (thousands) . ... S 0 9,917 •• 51 LOWER RIO GRANDE VALLEY End-of-month deposits (t housands)+ .. $ Annual rat e of deposit tu rnover . 5,884 20.6 - 4 4 10 60 Retail (Cameron, Willacy, and Hidalgo; pop. 335,450 •) sales -151 -5 39 S LPHUR SPRINGS (pop. 9,160) Pos ta I receipts• ... ... .. . . . $ Bu ilding per m its, less federa l contracts $ Bank debits (thousands) $ End-of-month deposits (t housands)1: .. S Annual rate of deposit tu r nover . 22,541 55,050 21,312 17,602 14.6 -2 -81 2 7 57 7 Appa rel stores Autom ot ive stores Drugstores ....... . ..... . . . E a ti ng a nd dri nk ing places Food stores F u rniture a nd household­appl ia nce stores -26t -2'11 lt 9t -17t - 21 1 7 8 -- 22 72 4 12 3 36 SWEETWATER (pop. 13,914) Postal receipts• . . .. . $ Building perm its, less federal contracts $ Ba nk dEbits (t housa nds) . $ End-of-month deposits (t housands )t. $ Annual rate of deposit turnover. Nonfa rm placements 16,043 4, 700 13,014 10,191 15.2 139 -15 -98 16 2 11 31 -83 Gasoline a nd service stations General-mercha ndise stores Lum ber, bu ilding-m aterial, and ha rdware dealers .. . . .. . P ostal receipts . . .... . . .. . . . . . Building permits, less federal cont racts Bank debits (thousands) End-of-month deposits (thousands)t . --- 5-i' 23t 12. 16 11 37 3 20 50 454 51 13 For an expla nat ion of sym bols see p. 326. Annual rate of deposit t urnover 19.9 41 TEXAS BUSI ESS REVIEW BAROMETERS OF TEXAS BUSINESS (All figures are for Texas unless otherwise indicated.) _All index es ar~ based-on the average months for 1957-1959 except where other specification is made; all except annual mdexes are ·adJuste? ~or ~easonal variation unless otherwise noted. Employment estimates are compiled by the Texas Employment Co~m1ss1on m cooperation with the Bureau of Labor Statistics of the U.S. Department of Labor. The sym­ bols used below impose qualifications as indicated here: *-preliminary data subject to revision; r-revised data; #­ dollar totals for the calendar year to date; §-dollar totals for the fiscal year to date; t--employment data for wage and salary workers only. Year-tcHiateaverage September August September 1968 196 1967 196 1967 GENERAL BUSINESS ACTIVITY Texas business activity (index) -----·-·-----·-·-·-·-·-·-··-·--------------------·-· 216.1 • 217.2 • 193.8 r 214 .1 188.8 Wholesale prices in U.S. -3 > to t-3 c::: UJ t-3 ~ .... ~ d t_:rj z .z z .... > ~ >-3 < c::: t< 0 d > UJ "1j UJ t< >-3 00 to t-3 t< t_:rj> u:i UJ u:i ~ t_:rj u:i t_:rj > ~ 0 ::r: MEXICO'S NATURAL GAS: THE BEGINNING OF AN INDUSTRY by Fredda Jean Bullard This analysis of one important aspect of the Mexican economy dramatizes, against a setting of intense nationalism, the harness­ing of Mexico's vast resources in natural gas to produce a po­tentially giant industry. Despite conflicting forces of technical obsolescence, untrained personnel, paucity of financial backing, and a struggling national economic development, the Mexican government agency Petr6leos Mexicanos worked determinedly toward an ultimate goal of providing Mexico with self-sufficiency in its energy requirements. The transfiguration of a natural resource from a wasted by­product to a key raw material for a growing modern industry within the span of only a few years has been a record feat among developing nations. In this book the reader will find a lively and stimulating, though thorough and technical, discussion of the role played by natural gas in the economic development of Mexico. Profusely illustrated with 37 maps and charts and richly aug­mented with 85 detailed tables and appendix material, this study provides a variety of readers with a valuable source of informa­tion. 336 + xxiii pp. $6.50 Bureau of Business Research The University of Texas at Austin (Texas residents add 4-percent sales tax)