University of Wisconsin Digital Collections
Link to University of Wisconsin Digital Collections
Link to University of Wisconsin Digital Collections
The State of Wisconsin Collection

Page View

Wisconsin Cheese Makers' Association / Proceedings of the Wisconsin Cheese Makers' Association forty-second annual convention November 15, 16, 1933 assembled in the Eagles Auditorium Sheboygan, Wisconsin
(1934)

Price, Walter V.
Cost of making cheese at four different cheese factories,   pp. 46-51 PDF (1.3 MB)


Page 48


48   WISCONSIN CHEESE MAKERS' ASSOCIATION
The four factories which I intend to discuss were selected partly be-
cause the owners and operators were willing to help us get the infor-
mation we needed. We are grateful to these men even though we
cannot thank them personally by name at this time. These plants
vary widely in size as well as in practically every other respect. It
may seem to you at first glance that certain results of this study are
related to the size of these factories, but I wish to state emphatically
that I am firmly convinced if four other plants in the state had been
selected with the same diversity of size that we might have reversed
every conclusion which may seem apparent from the tables and graphs
which are in your hands. No plants, however, could have been se-
lected to illustrate better than these four the advantages which may
be attained by careful study of the operation and management of a
factory.
Table 1 presents some general information which will be helpful
in considering the tables which follow. The figures in this and all
other tables cover the observations of one year beginning May 1,
1931. The amount of milk received, which is the first item in the
table, serves to distinguish the factories. They range in size from a
one-man plant to one which employs several men. Figure 1 also dis-
tinguishes the plants according to the amount of money invested in
land, buildings, and equipment. Factories B and C are relatively
new plants, while the others have survived several depressions in the
past few decades. The passing years have taken their toll from fac-
tories A and D until today their actual values are far less than their
replacement values.
The second item in table 1 shows the variation in milk composition
at the four plants and serves to explain to some extent the differences
in the yield of cheese from 100 pounds of milk which are shown in the
next line of this table. But this second figure is calculated to show
what the yield should be at these factories when the composition of
the milk and the moisture in the cheese are taken into consideration.
Comparing the efficiencies of factories by the yield per 100 pounds of
milk when the moisture of the cheese may be 35 per cent in one plant
and 40 per cent in the other is misleading, but not more so than com-
paring the yields per pound of fat when the milk averages 3 per cent
at one plant and 4 per cent at the other. I suggest that, when the
cheese is made to suit the buyer, the efficiency of the factory would be
indicated better by comparing the actual with the calculated yield.
The calculated yield sets an individual standard determined by the
fat in the milk and the moisture in the cheese. Anyone, knowing the
per cent fat in the milk and per cent moisture in the finished cheese,
can calculate this standard.
Table 2 shows the amount of money received from sales, the costs of
manufacturing and finally the net income at the four plants. The
sales receipts came from the sale of cheese, whey cream, milk, and
butter. Cost of making consists of the items of labor, supplies and
burden. In supplies are included bandages, rennet, color, salt and
boxes. Burden, which is sometimes called "overhead" includes
the
ex-


Go up to Top of Page