I am finally home from my travels. It feels as though I have been gone for over a century, yet when I look at the date I see that I have only been gone for a few days. I don’t see how it is even possible. Yet since I am a history major, rather than engineering, or science, I am not going to question how it is possible that I am actually traveling though time. All I really know that I have learned a lot about the oil industry and the idea of monopolies. But it does not really matter to the average person what I have learned, other than it just being some interesting facts. Yet I know that some how everyone can relate to this topic because of it does have an impact on today’s society.
Rather that just thinking about just oil, it might be better to just refer to the good as a commodity. Thus we can apply the ideas of monopolies to many subjects other than standard oil. First, however we must learn what a commodity actually is. According to Merriam-Webster’s dictionary, the word commodity means “an economic good; something useful or valued; a good or service whose wide availability typically leads to smaller profit margins and diminishes the importance of factors (as brand name) other than price.” (Merriam-Webster “Commodity) So in terms of Standard, the commodity would be oil. Yet many things could be considered a commodity in today’s consumer society, for example look at the amount of cars in the parking lot, or even the advertisements on television. In terms of goods and services, there are two types of people that are effect. The first is known as a producer or a seller, the people who are actually making the product or selling a service for a profit. The second is called a buyer, or a consumer, who is the person who is paying for the service or good. “When a commodity is largely sold in spot markets, with prices that are very volatile and uncertain, buyers and sellers tend to try to find a mechanism to minimize their risk.” (Yergin “The Prize”, 724) In other words both they buyer and the seller are trying to make the market work for themselves. The seller is trying to make the most profit possible, and the buyer is trying to get the best quality product for the lowest possible price. “Both buyer and seller are hedgers, their objective is to minimize their risk and reduce their exposure to volatility.” (Yergin “The Prize”, 724) In reality the market is rather instable and unpredictable, which is why many buyers and sellers make deals with others in order to maximize their prophet or minimize the price that they are paying, if they do they are able to make it possible to drive out all other competition. Yet this is where it the buyers and the sellers violate the Sherman Anti-Trust Act, it is in section 2 that the act prohibits the use to conspire or create secret combinations. In addition in order to be considered a monopoly a business must control over 90% of a commodity in order to be considered a monopoly. (Morawetz “The Sherman Anti-Trust Act, 325-326)
It seems as though this was a big problem during the gilded age, with the major industries being owned by one or two big bosses. Yet there are also companies that continue to do this today.
When thinking about modern day monopolies, the thing that most Americans think of is Microsoft. In terms of a PC the only really competitive software is Windows, which is made by Microsoft. In 1995 a new software came out, called Windows 95. This software was the latest hit when it came to computers making it easier for the average person to use. Yet there was one big problem, when using Windows 95, one could only get on the Internet using one network, which is MSN, using the Windows Explorer to actually get on to the internet. (Gleick “Microsoft Monopoly”) Yet by doing this, it would force all of the other companies that were network browsers to become worthless, considering it would drive out all other competition when it came to the Internet. It would also mean the Microsoft would have total control over the software business and also full control over the Internet. More recently there have been some other companies that have been questioned for being monopolies, for example Hasbro, the game maker. Currently Hasbro games have 9 out of 10 spots on the best selling games list. Which has been driving out all other competition. (Feder “Hasbro Monopoly) Another example is Wal-mart. In terms of Hasbro, Wal-Mart made a deal with them to not advertise any other games if Hasbro would give them the cheapest game prices. Thus, “Wal-Mart reflects large retailers' ability to determine the pace for expanding retail exposure.”(Feder “Hasbro Monopoly”) This way Wal-Mart is able to provide the lowest price for their customers, driving out the competition.
Much like the idea of the monopoly of Standard Oil, many people want the government want to step in and get rid of monopolies. But there are two sides of the story. When it comes to Standard, they wanted to maximize the amount of profit by making the process of making oil production cheaper by increasing the amount of the actual commodity. This is the same idea for Microsoft, Hasbro, and Wal-Mart. One must ask themselves if they are willing to pay a higher price, or if they want to be part of the people who are driving out the competition.
Tuesday, April 28, 2009
Wednesday, April 1, 2009
Sherman Ant-Trust Act
In the family office around fifty years later is now where I found myself. Looking around at pictures old maps, and articles from textbooks and newspapers. I can see someone in my family has been keeping a record of has been going on. In the time that I have taken to get here, the entire standard oil company has broken up. In such a short time it is all gone. “Americans have always been conflicted about black gold.” (Economist “Blood Oil”, 36) this black gold, immediately reminds me of watching the introduction of an episode of the Beverly Hillbillies, when Jed first discovers the oil. The description being so close to the truth, being worth as much as gold, and causing the same contention that gold does. Yet I still wonder “why have some Americans always harbored such hostility to the oil industry? Their loathing long predicates worries about man’s carbon footprint. It flies in the face of America’s love affair with cars and the extravagant use of fuel. Many oilmen, too, have been quintessential entrepreneurs, self-reliant types who have wrestled wealth out of an unforgiving frontier. The great oil tycoons have recycled their wealth through philanthropy on a huge sale. Yet they are often hated.”(Economist “Blood Oil”, 36) There has to be a reason why so many people tend to hate these oil companies. Either people love or hate the oil industry. So many people hated the Standard Oil Company, yet they made it possible for oil prices to drop significantly. Perhaps the “reason is the sheer wealth and power of the oil families.”(Economist “Blood Oil”, 36) Considering those families had power over millions of people and their jobs, I think the true reason why they were hated was because of the negative connotation of being the head “boss”. In addition, there is the idea that because Standard Oil had control over the industry, there was no room for a rag to riches story. The American Dream would be in part a fantasy because there was no possible way to raise classes if they controlled the entire industry.
I look in the trashcan and find some crumpled up paper. I unfold the paper, wondering what it could be, after opening a few pieces I realize that the paper is actually a picture that had been torn up, wrinkled and then thrown away. The picture is of a woman. I have never seen her before, nor is her appearance that of anything notable. I look at the surrounding background of the picture to see a newspaper with a headline on Standard. On the back I see name written, it says Tarbell. I decide to look the name up on the Internet, and this is what I found. “When Ida Tarbell published her groundbreakings expose “The History of the Standard Oil Company.” It was David meets Goliath in 1904.” (American History “The Reporter”, 17) Her research was about the inner workings of Standard Oil. She made claims in her original article that Standard Oil built “its empire on fraud, deceit, special privilege, gross illegality, bribery, coercion, corruption, intimidation, espionage or outright terror.” (Economist “Blood Oil”, 36) In her research, Tarbell spent “years…on how John D. Rockefeller’s mammoth trust gained control of more that 80 percent of the U.S. Oil market by the turn of the century.” (American History “The Reporter”, 17)
Looking around the office I see a newspaper article that talks about the word “Monopoly”. I immediately remember the board game with the little man on the front wearing the top hat and the little eyeglasses. “The word “Monopoly” in its popular sense implies such a control of an industry or a branch practically precludes competition as will enable those combining to control and dictate prices. A combination that diminishes competition in a branch of trade does not create a monopoly if effective competition remains possible. A combination involving 90 per cent of a branch of trade might properly be held to create a monopoly.” (Morawetz “The Sherman Anti-Trust Act, 325-326) On these grounds, Standard Oil would have been a monopoly. So many people, especially the media, were able to give their opinions, yet Standard was unable to defend themselves. “The directors claimed that their “absolute innocence of wrongdoings” and spoke of the “vindictive politics” of their attackers”(Wilson “Big Business”, 50). However the government and congress had another idea about what to do about monopolies. “The Sherman Act, so-called from the name of the distinguished senator from Ohio, John Sherman…passed on July 2, 1890.” (Benton “The Sherman Anti-Trust Act) Through this act the government was able to regulate the economy and break up the monopolies. This would be going against the idea of free trade, however it would be necessary to provide competition. By law “every person who shall monopolize or attempt to monopolize, or combine or conspire…shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor.”(Sherman Anti-Trust Act) and “Any property owned under any contract or by any combination or pursuant to any conspiracy… shall be forfeited to the United States, and may be seized and condemned…”(Sherman Anti-Trust Act) I reality this act was made because of the Standard Oil Company.” At the time they had control of much of the oil business, and many other businesses that were also a part of the oil industry.
It is finally easy to understand everything. The reason why Standard Oil Company was broken up, and the reason why so many people dislike the company is because of the Monopoly. It was actually a good thing that Standard was broken up. It has overall helped the industry. I think that I need to go forward more, back to my own time to be able to see the effects that have occurred because of the break up of Standard Oil and also the effect of the Sherman Anti-Trust has had on modern day society.
I look in the trashcan and find some crumpled up paper. I unfold the paper, wondering what it could be, after opening a few pieces I realize that the paper is actually a picture that had been torn up, wrinkled and then thrown away. The picture is of a woman. I have never seen her before, nor is her appearance that of anything notable. I look at the surrounding background of the picture to see a newspaper with a headline on Standard. On the back I see name written, it says Tarbell. I decide to look the name up on the Internet, and this is what I found. “When Ida Tarbell published her groundbreakings expose “The History of the Standard Oil Company.” It was David meets Goliath in 1904.” (American History “The Reporter”, 17) Her research was about the inner workings of Standard Oil. She made claims in her original article that Standard Oil built “its empire on fraud, deceit, special privilege, gross illegality, bribery, coercion, corruption, intimidation, espionage or outright terror.” (Economist “Blood Oil”, 36) In her research, Tarbell spent “years…on how John D. Rockefeller’s mammoth trust gained control of more that 80 percent of the U.S. Oil market by the turn of the century.” (American History “The Reporter”, 17)
Looking around the office I see a newspaper article that talks about the word “Monopoly”. I immediately remember the board game with the little man on the front wearing the top hat and the little eyeglasses. “The word “Monopoly” in its popular sense implies such a control of an industry or a branch practically precludes competition as will enable those combining to control and dictate prices. A combination that diminishes competition in a branch of trade does not create a monopoly if effective competition remains possible. A combination involving 90 per cent of a branch of trade might properly be held to create a monopoly.” (Morawetz “The Sherman Anti-Trust Act, 325-326) On these grounds, Standard Oil would have been a monopoly. So many people, especially the media, were able to give their opinions, yet Standard was unable to defend themselves. “The directors claimed that their “absolute innocence of wrongdoings” and spoke of the “vindictive politics” of their attackers”(Wilson “Big Business”, 50). However the government and congress had another idea about what to do about monopolies. “The Sherman Act, so-called from the name of the distinguished senator from Ohio, John Sherman…passed on July 2, 1890.” (Benton “The Sherman Anti-Trust Act) Through this act the government was able to regulate the economy and break up the monopolies. This would be going against the idea of free trade, however it would be necessary to provide competition. By law “every person who shall monopolize or attempt to monopolize, or combine or conspire…shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor.”(Sherman Anti-Trust Act) and “Any property owned under any contract or by any combination or pursuant to any conspiracy… shall be forfeited to the United States, and may be seized and condemned…”(Sherman Anti-Trust Act) I reality this act was made because of the Standard Oil Company.” At the time they had control of much of the oil business, and many other businesses that were also a part of the oil industry.
It is finally easy to understand everything. The reason why Standard Oil Company was broken up, and the reason why so many people dislike the company is because of the Monopoly. It was actually a good thing that Standard was broken up. It has overall helped the industry. I think that I need to go forward more, back to my own time to be able to see the effects that have occurred because of the break up of Standard Oil and also the effect of the Sherman Anti-Trust has had on modern day society.
Tuesday, February 24, 2009
My Trip to 1883 to Visit Standard Oil
Lucky am I to be going back in time to see where my ancestors had once been, seeing were my family’s love of the “business” came from. Armed with my time machine, supplied by my history professor, and my trusty MacBook, I head back to the late 19th century, more importantly the year of 1883. As soon as I arrive in Pennsylvania to see the oil rigs being drilled, I see my great, great, uncle Platt, who just happens to be one of the owners of the Standard Oil Company. The rig looks much like the ones that I have visited since I was a small girl. While not having any computers or machines, the drilling rig looks much the same. It seems crazy to think that many of the techniques that we use in our day came from this seemingly un-technological age. My Uncle seems very stressed because one of their many rigs was struck by lightning the night before. While there is over $1,500,000 worth of damage due to the fire that occurred (Friend 327, 1883) I can see that this is not the only thing that is troubling him. He has been reading the North American Review where many people have been criticizing the Standard Oil Company because of they have been monopolizing the oil industry. He tells me that congress has even been thinking about passing a law that would outlaw monopoles and therefore make Standard Oil an outlawed company. The effects of this could be devastating to the company. My Uncle reads me a few sources that have supported his cause in saying that their company is not doing anything wrong. He reads from the North American Review “[what the] Standard Oil Company has accomplished: “It has been the instrument, if not the cause, of almost the whole development of the oil industry- production excepted- during the last decade; of vastly improving and bringing to uniformity all oil manufactures; of cheapening these latter to an unprecedented degree, and pushing the introduction of American petroleum to the remotest parts of the earth; of furnishing employment to a host of men equal in number to the standing army of the United States, and of giving an impulse of prosperity to every locality in which its enormous laboring force than any other corporation of comparable importance in the world.
In view of this state of facts it might reasonably be supposed that the Standard Oil Company would have been entitled in some degree to public commendation for what it has accomplished, and the beneficial results produced- not that it has any claim on the score of philanthropy. It has not. It was organized and is operated to do in the best manner the largest possible amount of business. But the fact that philanthropy is not the mainspring of its corporate action cannot destroy the fact that the great public benefit has resulted from the Standard’s work; greater, unquestionably, than could ever have been brought about by the use of even equal capital and equivalent energy, divided between a score or a hundred disconnected and unfriendly organizations.” (Camden 1883, 188). My Uncle better explains to me in words that I can actually comprehend that the reason that they were able to monopolize the market was because they “were able to make oil better, cheaper, and have a more uniform production method.” (Camden 1883,186). My Uncle also makes the point stated by Camden as “There is a growing sentiment in this country unfavorable to the accumulation of enormous fortunes in single hands, and, as the reverse of this, there is a disposition on the part of those who are possessed of enormous fortunes, or who are in the way to acquire them, to strengthen themselves against the feeing hostile to them. This cannot be done in any other way so effectively as by multiplying the holders of the enormous fortunes, and enlisting the zeal of their followers. By their power in the press, in the national and in state legislatures, in courts, in official life, in political parties, in social ramifications, in literature, in the pulpit, we see developed a body of opinion which comes to be a part of the national life, and the sentiment which aims to dislodge it is reprobated as communism or revolution, to be suppressed summarily.” (Camden 1883, 186) My Uncle and all of his other partners know that they are having opposition when it comes to their company. Many are against such big businesses that are controlling. They are also well aware of the corruption that is going on in Washington and that they can have control over much of the government does because of the financial influence. One thing however if there is a law or an act passed against monopolies it will mean the breaking up of Standard Oil, which they do not want to happen.
Later on thinking to myself I wonder why so many people hate monopolies and how they were able to achieve such a monopoly over the entire industry. I decide to ask one of the writers as to get an opinion that is not biased by my Uncle. I decide to ask a man named Welsh. He tells me that “The Standard became practically a dictator to the railroads of their relations to petroleum,-not in terms, indeed, and in an arbitrary way, but in a genial and conciliation one.”(Welsh 1883, 192) Once again I am confused by all of the big words that everyone is saying. So I decide once again to dumb it down to my level. Basically They were able to make deals with other companies by promising to not charge them more than anyone else so long as they promised to give their business to them and only them, signed by contract. Therefore driving out all competition. In addition they owned other companies that were also members of the business like the American Transfer Company and the United Pipe Lines that furthered their monopoly over every company because everyone who wanted a job would work for Standard. (Welsh 1883, 196) This brings me a little more comfort. Perhaps I am mistaken about all of the bad things that have been said about the company. Maybe my knowledge about the Sherman Anti-Trust Act occurring later has been wrong.
I woke up this morning to find the article of Camden sitting on my nightstand. I decide to read it once more. My thoughts are jumbled as I read the last paragraph that “Many, however, may still be surprised to learn that the Standard Oil Company is not the monster that it has been represented; that it has never had a railroad company which a fair-minded man could pronounce to be against public policy, good morals or good business principles; that it has never broken an agreement nor committed an act of trenchery; that it is not a peculation nor a manipulator of speculative prices, as has been so often charged; that it is not a monopoly, and never can become one, despite its present great preponderance in the trade; in short that this great bugbear is nothing more nor less than an organization of laborious, painstaking men, who, with great abilities and great opportunities, have made a great success by legitimate means, in a legitimate business”
(Camden 1883, 190). I have decided to pack up my notebook and go further ahead in time to learn more about the corruption that occurred, by looking at it emerge in a later time. Until I get there I will continue to think about all that I have learned here.
In view of this state of facts it might reasonably be supposed that the Standard Oil Company would have been entitled in some degree to public commendation for what it has accomplished, and the beneficial results produced- not that it has any claim on the score of philanthropy. It has not. It was organized and is operated to do in the best manner the largest possible amount of business. But the fact that philanthropy is not the mainspring of its corporate action cannot destroy the fact that the great public benefit has resulted from the Standard’s work; greater, unquestionably, than could ever have been brought about by the use of even equal capital and equivalent energy, divided between a score or a hundred disconnected and unfriendly organizations.” (Camden 1883, 188). My Uncle better explains to me in words that I can actually comprehend that the reason that they were able to monopolize the market was because they “were able to make oil better, cheaper, and have a more uniform production method.” (Camden 1883,186). My Uncle also makes the point stated by Camden as “There is a growing sentiment in this country unfavorable to the accumulation of enormous fortunes in single hands, and, as the reverse of this, there is a disposition on the part of those who are possessed of enormous fortunes, or who are in the way to acquire them, to strengthen themselves against the feeing hostile to them. This cannot be done in any other way so effectively as by multiplying the holders of the enormous fortunes, and enlisting the zeal of their followers. By their power in the press, in the national and in state legislatures, in courts, in official life, in political parties, in social ramifications, in literature, in the pulpit, we see developed a body of opinion which comes to be a part of the national life, and the sentiment which aims to dislodge it is reprobated as communism or revolution, to be suppressed summarily.” (Camden 1883, 186) My Uncle and all of his other partners know that they are having opposition when it comes to their company. Many are against such big businesses that are controlling. They are also well aware of the corruption that is going on in Washington and that they can have control over much of the government does because of the financial influence. One thing however if there is a law or an act passed against monopolies it will mean the breaking up of Standard Oil, which they do not want to happen.
Later on thinking to myself I wonder why so many people hate monopolies and how they were able to achieve such a monopoly over the entire industry. I decide to ask one of the writers as to get an opinion that is not biased by my Uncle. I decide to ask a man named Welsh. He tells me that “The Standard became practically a dictator to the railroads of their relations to petroleum,-not in terms, indeed, and in an arbitrary way, but in a genial and conciliation one.”(Welsh 1883, 192) Once again I am confused by all of the big words that everyone is saying. So I decide once again to dumb it down to my level. Basically They were able to make deals with other companies by promising to not charge them more than anyone else so long as they promised to give their business to them and only them, signed by contract. Therefore driving out all competition. In addition they owned other companies that were also members of the business like the American Transfer Company and the United Pipe Lines that furthered their monopoly over every company because everyone who wanted a job would work for Standard. (Welsh 1883, 196) This brings me a little more comfort. Perhaps I am mistaken about all of the bad things that have been said about the company. Maybe my knowledge about the Sherman Anti-Trust Act occurring later has been wrong.
I woke up this morning to find the article of Camden sitting on my nightstand. I decide to read it once more. My thoughts are jumbled as I read the last paragraph that “Many, however, may still be surprised to learn that the Standard Oil Company is not the monster that it has been represented; that it has never had a railroad company which a fair-minded man could pronounce to be against public policy, good morals or good business principles; that it has never broken an agreement nor committed an act of trenchery; that it is not a peculation nor a manipulator of speculative prices, as has been so often charged; that it is not a monopoly, and never can become one, despite its present great preponderance in the trade; in short that this great bugbear is nothing more nor less than an organization of laborious, painstaking men, who, with great abilities and great opportunities, have made a great success by legitimate means, in a legitimate business”
(Camden 1883, 190). I have decided to pack up my notebook and go further ahead in time to learn more about the corruption that occurred, by looking at it emerge in a later time. Until I get there I will continue to think about all that I have learned here.
Bibliograpy
1. American History “The Reporter Who Toppled a Titan”.; Jun2008, Vol. 43 Issue 2, p16-18, 2p
2. Benton, J.H. “The Sherman or Anti-Trust Act”. The Yale Law Journal, Vol. 18, No. 5 (Mar., 1909), pp. 311-327, Published by: The Yale Law Journal Company, Inc.
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/785757
3. Camden, J.N., Standard Oil Company, North American Review 136 (1883) 181-190.
2. SUMMARY OF EVENTS. The Friend; a Religious and Literary Journal (1827-1906), May 19 1883, 327. http://www.proquest.com/ (accessed February 24, 2009).
4. Economist “Blood and oil”.; 1/19/2008, Vol. 386 Issue 8563, p36-36, 1p, 1 color
5. Gleick, James. “Microsoft Monopoly”, New York Times (1857-Current file). New York, N.Y.: Nov 5, 1995. pg. SM50, 9 pgs
6. Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary, "Commodity". 2008. Merriam-Webster Online.
28 April 2009
7. Morawetz,Victor. "The Sherman Anti-Trust Act”. American Economic Association Quarterly, 3rd Series, Vol. 11, No. 1, Papers and Discussions of the Twenty-Second Annual Meeting: Being the Twenty-Fifth Anniversary of the Founding of the Association. New York City. December 27-31, 1909 (Apr., 1910), pp. 321-327. Published by: American Economic Association, Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3000036
8. Sherman Anti-Trust Act of 1890; 2009, Vol. 1 Issue 1, p1, 2p
9. SUMMARY OF EVENTS. The Friend; a Religious and Literary Journal (1827-1906), May 19 1883, 327. http://www.proquest.com/ (accessed February 24, 2009).
10. Welch, J.C. The Standard Oil Company, North American Review 136 (1883) 191-200
11. Victor Morawetz,“The Sherman Anti-Trust Act”. American Economic Association Quarterly, 3rd Series, Vol. 11, No. 1, Papers and Discussions of the Twenty-Second Annual Meeting: Being the Twenty-Fifth Anniversary of the Founding of the Association. New York City. December 27-31, 1909 (Apr., 1910), pp. 321-327. Published by: American Economic Association, Stable
12. Wilson, Charles, R. W. and M. E. Hidy, Pioneering in Big Business: History of Standard Oil Company (New Jersey) 1882-1911 (Book Review), Explorations in Entrepreneurial History, 9:1 (1956:Oct.) p.50
2. Benton, J.H. “The Sherman or Anti-Trust Act”. The Yale Law Journal, Vol. 18, No. 5 (Mar., 1909), pp. 311-327, Published by: The Yale Law Journal Company, Inc.
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/785757
3. Camden, J.N., Standard Oil Company, North American Review 136 (1883) 181-190.
2. SUMMARY OF EVENTS. The Friend; a Religious and Literary Journal (1827-1906), May 19 1883, 327. http://www.proquest.com/ (accessed February 24, 2009).
4. Economist “Blood and oil”.; 1/19/2008, Vol. 386 Issue 8563, p36-36, 1p, 1 color
5. Gleick, James. “Microsoft Monopoly”, New York Times (1857-Current file). New York, N.Y.: Nov 5, 1995. pg. SM50, 9 pgs
6. Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary, "Commodity". 2008. Merriam-Webster Online.
28 April 2009
7. Morawetz,Victor. "The Sherman Anti-Trust Act”. American Economic Association Quarterly, 3rd Series, Vol. 11, No. 1, Papers and Discussions of the Twenty-Second Annual Meeting: Being the Twenty-Fifth Anniversary of the Founding of the Association. New York City. December 27-31, 1909 (Apr., 1910), pp. 321-327. Published by: American Economic Association, Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3000036
8. Sherman Anti-Trust Act of 1890; 2009, Vol. 1 Issue 1, p1, 2p
9. SUMMARY OF EVENTS. The Friend; a Religious and Literary Journal (1827-1906), May 19 1883, 327. http://www.proquest.com/ (accessed February 24, 2009).
10. Welch, J.C. The Standard Oil Company, North American Review 136 (1883) 191-200
11. Victor Morawetz,“The Sherman Anti-Trust Act”. American Economic Association Quarterly, 3rd Series, Vol. 11, No. 1, Papers and Discussions of the Twenty-Second Annual Meeting: Being the Twenty-Fifth Anniversary of the Founding of the Association. New York City. December 27-31, 1909 (Apr., 1910), pp. 321-327. Published by: American Economic Association, Stable
12. Wilson, Charles, R. W. and M. E. Hidy, Pioneering in Big Business: History of Standard Oil Company (New Jersey) 1882-1911 (Book Review), Explorations in Entrepreneurial History, 9:1 (1956:Oct.) p.50
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
