The Sept. 25, Page 1 article, ``Commodity prices keep sliding,'' reported that HDPE prices are in the 34- to 35-cent-per-pound range. I agree with the general statement that commodity prices are falling, but you only reference general-purpose injection grade for users over 20 million pounds. I believe that more research needs to be made before making such broad statements about prices. For example, what is the melt flow of this resin? Is it ``pail'' or high-flow resin? Is this for prime resin or secondary quality? Does this price represent spot purchases or contract purchases? Could this be an export price?
Molders are not in the business of trying to deceive their customers. With the rapid escalation of all thermoplastic prices over the last 12 months, endusers watch the prices of plastic resins closer than the Dow Jones Industrial Average.
From such a widely read and respected industry trade journal, we need accurate and responsible reporting.
Douglas E. Bell
Berry Plastics Corp.
Evansville, Ind.
Editor's Note: The resin pricing chart presents prices available in the market for prime plastic resins, unfilled, natural color, f.o.b. the supplier, for specific grades of resins available in North America based on numerous weekly interviews. We do not track resins by specific melt-flow index because of the many distinct resins available from producers. Rather, we attempt to convey differences in prices for specific melt-flow indexes by providing a range of prices for broader resin categories.
Critics reveal bial against industry
Your Oct. 30, Page 1 article, ``Molding young minds,'' was an excellent overview of the problems firms face in presenting their side of the story to schoolchildren, who are all too often hearing biased, bad science from teachers who are trying to indoctrinate rather than educate.
The comments by the ``other side'' are very revealing. In particular, the arrogance and hypocrisy of Alex Molnar at the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee is there for everyone to see. Nitpicking over whether cloth bags should be included is a smokescreen; he is obviously unwilling to concede that the PBA has any legitimate story to offer.
His comment that taxpayers will subsidize companies' education efforts as marketing writeoffs is particularly galling. He takes the typical liberal position that all money belongs to the government and letting anyone keep any of it is a ``tax subsidy;'' he turns a blind eye to the fact his salary at the state-supported institution where he works is 100 percent taxpayer-subsidized. He appears to have typecast business as evil and, of course, himself as goodness incarnate.
Caroline Harwood must think owners and employees of companies come from another galaxy and don't have to live here if one accepts her premise that company personnel don't care about the environment. At least she admits she isn't objective.
Roger F. Jones
Franklin Polymers Inc.
Broomall, Pa.
