To:

Governor Paul LePage Commissioner George Gervais Department of Economic and Community Development Senator John Patrick, Chair Representative Erin Herbig, Chair Joint Standing Committee on Labor, Commerce, Research and Economic Development

From:

Janine Bisaillon-Cary, President, Maine International Trade Center and State Director of International Trade Wade Merritt, Vice President, Maine International Trade Center and the MITC Export Development Subcommittee Report on Barriers to Export Success for Maines Small Businesses February 1, 2013

Prepared by:

Re: Date:

Maine International Trade Center 511 Congress Street, Portland, Maine 04101 20 Godfrey Drive, Orono, Maine 04473 Tel. 207-541-7400 Fax. 207-541-7420 www.mitc.com

Barriers to Export Success for Maines Small Businesses Report to the Labor, Commerce, Research, and Economic Development (LCRED) Committee
In June 2012, Maine International Trade Center (MITC) was directed by the Labor, Commerce, Research, and Economic Development Committee of the 125th Maine Legislature to conduct a survey and study on barriers to increased exports of Maine products and services. In response, the MITC board of directors convened an advisory subcommittee 1 composed of private sector businesses and economic development partners to develop the survey instrument. Additionally, MITC reviewed national-level reports conducted for the US Department of Commerce (2009), the US International Trade Commission (USITC) (2010), and the Brookings Institutions Export Nation (2010), as well as relevant sections of US Congressman Michael Michauds recent survey of manufacturers in the 2nd Congressional District. Comparisons were also made to the barriers identified in the 1995 Governors Advisory Council on International Trade report which formed the basis for the creation of MITC. The MITC survey was conducted between November 1 and December 3, 2012, with 115 companies responding, having completed all or a portion. Broad selections of companies were solicited from MITCs own internal database as well as clients of the Maine Manufacturing Extension Partnership (MEP) and the Maine Small Business Development Centers (MSBDC).

Survey methodology and data

Companies were asked to identify the county in which they operate. Counties were then organized into three groups: Rural-Rim (Aroostook, Franklin, Oxford, Piscataquis, Somerset, and Washington); RuralCoastal (Hancock, Knox, Lincoln, and 80 Waldo); and Urban (Androscoggin, 70 Cumberland, Kennebec, Penobscot, % of Manufacturers 60 Sagadahoc, and York). In order to % of Exporters % of Responses 50 ensure an accurate representation, the number of responses from each group of 40 counties was compared to a separate 30 database of Maine manufacturers and 20 exporters. 2 It was concluded that the 10 number of responses adequately 0 matched the economic and export Urban Rural-Rim Rural-Coastal profile of each region. In all, 64.3% of responses came from the Urban counties, and 30.4% from Rural. The remaining 5% did not disclose their location. This compares favorably to a 69%-31% split in manufacturers and 66%-34% split in exporters.

1 2

A full list of Subcommittee members is included at the end of this report. Maine Manufacturing Directory 2012, Tower Publishing, Saco

Companies were also asked two questions regarding their company size in order to establish whether issues identified were related to being a large or small company and to ensure that all sizes were appropriately represented in the survey data. Again, the data matched up well with other independent sources in this case it was compared to the MITC membership as a proxy for the exporting community as a whole, with a slight overrepresentation of small businesses. To establish levels of expertise, companies were asked for estimates of the number of years they considered themselves exporters, as well as of the proportion of international sales within their total sales numbers. The majority of Survey responses by MITC membership were either non-exporters (44%) or number of employees by number of very experienced (46%), with very employees few respondents in the 1-5 year category.
<25 <25

Of the active exporters, 47% 26-99 26-99 reported that over 10% of their 100100249 sales in the past year were to 249 250250+ international markets; 14% 499 500+ indicated it was more than half of their overall sales. Respondents were also asked to estimate their export intensity five years ago: only 39% reported a rate of over 10%, with just 13% reporting more than half. This data is supported by general economic data showing that exports of Maine products have expanded faster than the overall state economy over this time period, indicating that products that in 2007 were Years of exporting destined for domestic markets are now being sold experience internationally. Companies were also asked to identify which industry best described their line of business: responses came from a broad range of manufacturers and service providers with highest representation from Consumer Goods, Food (including Seafood), Life Sciences, and Forest Products.
Never or <1 year 1-5 years 5 years or more

MITC believes the surveys conclusions are well supported based on the data received, with reasonably accurate response rates from all dimensions surveyed. Complete survey results are included as an appendix to this report.

Findings on barriers to export

Businesses were asked to rate the impact of 18 common barriers, either as a constraint on expanded sales or from market entry. Barriers to export were drawn from the 2010 US International Trade

Commission Survey on Small and Medium Enterprise (SME) Exporters 3, with minor modifications made by the subcommittee. Respondents were asked to rate the impact of each barrier on a scale of 0-3. The survey identified three primary areas of concern for Maine companies: transportation costs, foreign market barriers, and difficulty in locating overseas partners.

Transportation costs
The cost of transporting goods out of Maine was most frequently cited by survey respondents, with 79% responding that it was a moderate or severe impediment. This issue had the highest impact regardless of geography and in fact was more strongly identified by businesses in the urban counties which coincide with the I-95/295 corridor. It was also the leading barrier regardless of experience level, with established exporters actually identifying it more strongly than novices. The most influential factor seemed to be company size. The cost of transportation was rated second or third most important by those companies with more than 100 employees, but very strongly first for those with less than 100. Firms identifying transportation cost as a leading issue especially those with fewer than 100 employees tended to be in perishable industries (such as food and beverage, seafood, or life sciences) or in other industries where the standard is small package shipments like UPS or FedEx. However, several small manufacturers that ship via palletized ocean freight also indicated that inland costs from Maine to nearby ocean ports can be nearly as expensive as the vessel carriage. 4 The Maine data matches well with the larger USITC report. That report, which surveyed 3,200 small and medium sized companies nationwide, identified transportation and shipping costs as the most frequently encountered impediment to export growth. 90% of respondents identified it as a problem; 40% of companies rated it moderate-severe. USITCs findings were that per-unit transportation costs are less on larger shipments, which puts smaller companies at a competitive disadvantage with larger firms. Other identified impediments included rising ocean freight rates, small order sizes for filling shipping containers, and container shortages. 5 Those same issues are faced by Maine companies, with the added difficulty imposed by the states relative distance from international shipping gateways in the United States or Canada. Policy recommendations Further review, in cooperation with the Maine Department of Transportation (Maine DOT), Maine Port Authority, and others, of the issues driving transportation costs and potential solutions.

Clearly some components of this issue will be difficult to impact Maines geographic distance to international gateways cannot be affected by even the most well-meaning group. In fact, in the 1995 report which formed the basis for the creation of the MITC, this barrier was not identified separately but
3 4

USITC, Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises: Characteristics and Performance, Washington DC, 2010 Personal interviews. 5 USITC, Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises: Characteristics and Performance, Chapter 6.

was included within a section called lack of infrastructure. This was the least developed barrier included in the report at just 90 words, noting the need for additional port and intermodal facilities is critical if {Maine} really wants to enhanceexports. 6 However, though investments in infrastructure may not save miles, they can save transit time as demonstrated by the new Calais-St. Stephen bypass and bridge crossing which by some estimates moved Saint John {New Brunswick} 30 minutes closer to Bangor. International connections are sparse, and just over 80% of Maines exports leave the United States from a location outside of the states borders. Arguably the most important piece of international trade infrastructure is the Maine Turnpike, which carries a significant portion, if not all, of those exports. The lack of in-state air or ocean freight options consequently requires significantly more expensive inland freight charges be added, squeezing profit margins and making Maine products unattractive or uncompetitive. Freight consolidation could be one potential solution and should be studied more thoroughly. In addition, other states have enacted legislation to incentivize the use of the states ports for international trade: Mississippi offers a tax credit to companies to offset handling fees for export and import shipments. 7 Though in the current budget environment this is problematic, it has generated revenue for that state that could be reinvested in export and investment attraction initiatives, as well as improved transportation infrastructure.

Foreign market barriers

Barriers erected by foreign governments were identified as the second most difficult to overcome by survey respondents. 65% ranked foreign regulations, certifications, and nontariff barriers as moderate or severe, and 63% placed overseas customs procedures in these categories. Slightly more than half also identified high tariffs or foreign tax issues in their responses. These barriers are interrelated and can be overlapping - regulatory enforcement is often perceived as a customs procedure. Regulatory issues are more often faced by established exporters. In fact, 13 of the 14 companies that indicated a severe issue with foreign regulations had more than 5 years experience and a large percentage of sales to overseas markets. The fourteenth was a small technology-based start-up that had already identified certain foreign regulations as an impediment to their future growth. Firms that indicated moderate impact were a mix of current and former exporters. Nearly all the companies were in industries that would intuitively expect more intense regulation: life sciences and food products, as well as those broadly involved in health and safety. Notably, large exporters of pulp and paper were the major companies rating no impact or not encountered in this category. The businesses that identified overseas customs procedures as a leading issue were much more diverse. Those indicating severe issues were less experienced with lower export intensity half found less than 10% of their sales internationally. Firms identifying a moderate impact tended to be more experienced
Governors Advisory Council on International Trade, Final Report to Governor Angus S. King, December 1995. Mississippi Code of 1972, SEC. 27-7-22.7. Income tax credit for charges for using certain public port facilities, via Liz Cleveland of the Mississippi Development Authority.
7
6

and more intense in their export sales. This finding matches with USITCs insight that this particular barriers perception of difficulty declines as companies grow or gain international experience. Conversely, regulatory issues represent a constant or increasing difficulty as companies gain experience and enter new markets with different regimes. 8 Policy recommendations Training and programming regarding foreign technical barriers Creation of a database of in-state and regional consulting resources Explore methods of improving internal company capacity through creation of internship programs in cooperation with the University of Maine, Blackstone 9, and others.

The USITC report, based on data that is very much mirrored in the Maine survey, correctly identified that these impediments can disproportionately affect small and medium sized companies. These barriers can seem more significant because of human resource capacity issues internal to the firm. In Maine, 80% of exporters have less than 100 employees and simply lack the capital and/or staff to cope with complex international regulatory needs. This assumes that the staff member in charge of compliance even knows that the regulation exists or can appropriately diagnose whether a certain regulation applies. In many cases, generally a single person within the company handles both domestic and foreign regulatory compliance issues in addition to other responsibilities. 10 Currently, in-state assistance for those facing these issues is limited. MITC is able to support companies through research and other assistance to help identify barriers and consulting resources, both through connections with federal partners, as well as other states trade offices. However, it is outside of MITCs scope to provide highly technical advice, and it would be unwise and impractical from a liability standpoint to attempt it. However, a database of public and private groups within Maine and around New England would be an invaluable resource to Maines small businesses. Another opportunity for capacity-building would be internationally interested graduate and upper-level undergraduate students. MITC has had some preliminary discussions with the University of Maine regarding placement of students in internships for international marketing and the Maine Maritime Academys Loeb Sullivan School regarding international logistics interns. Any future cooperation could also include research into regulatory constraints. As most of these issues tend to be industry-specific, an initial pilot program targeting life sciences or food/seafood products could be used to test the actual need for both the internships and resource database.

8
9

USITC, Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises: Characteristics and Performance, Chapter 6, pp. 16-18. Blackstone Accelerates Growth is a statewide initiative involving the Maine Technology Institute, the Maine Center for Entrepreneurial Development and the University of Maine that aims to help the state transition to an innovation economy. 10 USITC, Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises: Characteristics and Performance, Chapter 6, pp. 21-23.

Market research and lead generation

55% of respondents indicated that they had difficulty in locating sales prospects, with slightly less (52%) indicating they also had difficulty establishing affiliate relationships. Businesses indicating these impediments comprised of all types of businesses, experience levels, and export intensities. Market access is a costly endeavor for which many small businesses again lack sufficient human resource or financial capacity. Within the USITC report, and again supported by MITCs own work, these companies are unable to properly vet, or even identify, sales prospects or research foreign markets on their own. 11 Indeed, this was one of the major rationales for MITCs creation to provide a shared information and market research clearinghouse for small businesses statewide. Financial constraints are also an important impediment to expansion of small business exports. Attending an overseas trade show can be significantly more expensive than attending a similar one domestically, with the costs of exhibiting easily running into the tens of thousands of dollars. Several federal programs exist to mitigate expenses associated with export development activity the Farm Billfunded FoodExportUSA and Softwood Export Council, as well as the US Small Business Administrations STEP 12 program but their scope is limited, and in the case of STEP, may not exist in future years. However, even modest reimbursement programs show great success. In Maines case, there has been a return of $35 in export sales for each dollar expended, and in some cases just $1,000 is enough to convince a company to take the risk of attending an international trade show or trade mission. Policy recommendations Continued outreach to small and medium sized businesses statewide Training and development for companies on better strategies for effective lead generation Increased participation in federal export reimbursement programs including FoodExportUSA, Softwood Export Council, and SBA-STEP

MITC has worked diligently to provide outreach to the Maine business community, with 521 individual company interactions in 2012. As market research and lead generation are the backbone of the organization, the bulk of these contacts involve exactly these types of consulting activities. However, there is room for improvement: 78% of those clients were in the Urban counties, with the remaining Rural 22% divided evenly between the Coastal and Rim counties meaning that the organizations outreach skews toward the I-95/295 corridor. Through MITCs interactions with the business community, capacity issues regarding lead generation and taking full advantage of resources available are apparent. To that end, MITC advises more training and development on preparing companies to access international activities such as trade shows, trade missions, and business matchmaking.
11

12

USITC, Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises: Characteristics and Performance, Chapter 6, p. 3. The State Trade and Export Promotion (STEP) program was created in 2011 to assist small business exporters through cooperation with state trade offices. It is currently in its last year of funding, with efforts to modify or extend the program underway.

Companies interested in seeking overseas clients or representation may take advantage of business matchmaking services available through the US Department of Commerces Commercial Service, which has offices and staff located at most major embassies and consulates worldwide. MITC works closely with the Commercial Services domestic office in Portland as well as the foreign posts to promote these programs, which assist firms through in-country market research as well as the setting of prequalified business meetings. For many, this program is the first step into a new market and sharply reduces the risks involved. Finally, several reimbursement programs exist to offset certain expenses associated with export sales, including the fees associated with the US Department of Commerces business matchmaking services. Food and seafood companies can receive FoodExportUSA Market Access funds; softwood companies may be reimbursed through the Softwood Export Council; and in 2012-2013 all small businesses may access funds through the US Small Business Administrations STEP program.

Conclusion
International business is a critical component to growth because it brings new dollars into an economy. These dollars directly create jobs within the exporting company and also indirectly through suppliers and vendors that support that company. Exporting companies generally employ more workers, pay higher wages, and have higher productivity than their domestic-market-only competitors. 13 In 2010, the Business Roundtable estimated that 181,000 jobs in Maine were dependent in some way on the international economy. 14 That said, exporting has been and will continue to be challenging for small businesses. 97% of American companies involved in trade are small businesses, but 42% sell to just one market. These are the best targets for international sales expansion: companies with some expertise that can be encouraged to take one more step, enter one more market, or try a new trade show. One of the most effective means to promote exports from a given jurisdiction is the creation of an export promotion agency. The first, Finpro, was created in Finland in 1919, and by the mid-1960s they became popular worldwide as an economic development tool. 15 While Maine has had an export promotion agency, MITC since 1996 and its predecessors since 1980, there are newspaper articles regarding state government involvement in international trade promotion dating back to at least the 1930s. 16 In FY2002, when MITC started receiving funding through the Department of Economic and Community Services, its budget was $580,000. In FY2013, MITCs state funding was approximately $498,000 a 14%
13

Howard Rosen, The Export Imperative. Testimony delivered to US Senate Finance Subcommittee on International Trade, December 2009. 14 Laura Baughman & Joseph Francois, Trade And American Jobs: The Impact of Trade on US and State-Level Employment: An Update. Business Roundtable, July 2010 15 The World Bank Group, Export Promotion Agencies: What Works and What Does Not, September 2006. 16 Speakers from Bureau of Foreign and Domestic Commerce Advise Local Manufacturers to Investigate Possibilities of Exporting, Lewiston Daily Sun, January 29, 1931, p. 14.

decrease in absolute terms but a 47.8% reduction when adjusted for inflation. As a consequence, the organization has closed the satellite office in Lewiston-Auburn and reduced the presence in eastern Maine to sporadic monthly office hours. At the same time, the workload has consistently increased, with the number of companies seeking service from MITC nearly quadrupling over the past 10 years, from 387 in 2002 to 1,496 in 2012. Maine businesses face a capacity issue as their main barrier to export. Though the international market is vast and lucrative, it requires investment of human and financial resources that most companies simply do not have. As stated in the 1995 Governors report, small and medium sized businesses do not have the resources to dedicate personnel full-time to international market research and development, and therefore require that the information and services be easy to identify and obtain. 17 This statement remains true 16 years later.

17

Governors Advisory Council on International Trade, Final Report to Governor Angus S. King, December 1995

Special thanks to the members of the MITC Export Subcommittee for their assistance and input on this project: Janine Bisaillon-Cary, Maine International Trade Center Dennis Leiner, Lighthouse Imaging Corporation Kelly LHeureux, OCEANAIR, Inc. Muriel Mosher, Maine Manufacturing Extension Partnership (MEP) Jeff Porter, US Department of Commerce Kent Peterson, Fluid Imaging Technologies Doug Ray, Maine Department of Economic & Community Development John Wolanski, GAC Chemical Corporation Thanks also to the following for their reviews and guidance: Damien Bard, Idaho Department of Commerce Liz Cleveland, Mississippi Development Authority Susan Dragotta, Waukesha (Wisc.) County Technical College Michael Stone, Stone & Associates Nora Todd, Office of Congressman Michael Michaud

10

APPENDIX

11

Maine Barriers to Export Survey

1. My company is a...
ResponsePercent Manufacturer/Processor Services firm (law, engineering, education, etc.) Service provider (banking, logistics, etc.) 63.4% ResponseCount 64

17.8%

18

18.8%

19

AnsweredQuestion SkippedQuestion

101 14

1 of 11

2. The industry sector which best fits my company is:

ResponsePercent Advanced Textiles/Composite Materials Aerospace/Defense Automotive Boatbuilding/Marine Technologies Consumer Goods Education Energy Environmental Financial Services Food & Beverage Industrial/Commercial Machinery Information Technology Language and Translation Services Legal Services Life Sciences Logistics/Transportation Marketing/PR Paper & Pulp Precision Metal Manufacturing Seafood Telecommunications Wood Products/Building Materials ResponseCount

7.9%

5.6% 0.0% 1.1% 18.0% 5.6% 5.6% 4.5% 2.2% 11.2% 4.5% 4.5% 0.0% 1.1% 11.2% 9.0% 2.2% 5.6% 7.9% 6.7% 1.1% 10.1%

5 0 1 16 5 5 4 2 10 4 4 0 1 10 8 2 5 7 6 1 9

2 of 11

Other (please specify)

35

AnsweredQuestion SkippedQuestion

89 26

3. My company has
ResponsePercent less than 25 employees 26-99 employees 100-249 employees 250-499 employees 500+ employees 62.0% 16.7% 9.3% 6.5% 5.6% AnsweredQuestion SkippedQuestion ResponseCount 67 18 10 7 6 108 7

4. My company's annual revenue is...

ResponsePercent less than $1M $1M-$5M $5M-$10M $10M-$25M $25M+ Decline to answer 44.8% 15.2% 4.8% 8.6% 19.0% 7.6% AnsweredQuestion SkippedQuestion ResponseCount 47 16 5 9 20 8 105 10

3 of 11

5. My company's primary location in Maine is located in the following county:

ResponsePercent Androscoggin Aroostook Cumberland Franklin Hancock Lincoln Kennebec Knox Oxford Penobscot Piscataquis Sagadahoc Somerset Waldo Washington York 4.6% 1.8% 37.6% 1.8% 5.5% 2.8% 7.3% 4.6% 0.9% 4.6% 0.9% 1.8% 1.8% 2.8% 9.2% 11.9% AnsweredQuestion SkippedQuestion ResponseCount 5 2 41 2 6 3 8 5 1 5 1 2 2 3 10 13 109 6

4 of 11

6. Are you currently exporting, interested in exporting, or not interested in exporting?

ResponsePercent Current exporter Have exported in the past Don't currently export, but interested Don't currently export, and not interested 44.0% 15.6% ResponseCount 48 17

24.8%

27

15.6%

17

AnsweredQuestion SkippedQuestion

109 6

7. If you are an exporter, how long have you actively been selling internationally?
ResponsePercent Less than one year 1-5 years 5 or more years 6.3% 14.1% 79.7% AnsweredQuestion SkippedQuestion ResponseCount 4 9 51 64 51

5 of 11

8. If you are an exporter, what percentage of your total sales were exported in the last year?
ResponsePercent Less than 10% 10-25% 25-50% More than 50% 53.1% 25.0% 7.8% 14.1% AnsweredQuestion SkippedQuestion ResponseCount 34 16 5 9 64 51

9. If you are an exporter, what percentage of your total sales were exported five years ago?
ResponsePercent Less than 10% 10-25% 25-50% More than 50% 60.9% 21.9% 4.7% 12.5% AnsweredQuestion SkippedQuestion ResponseCount 39 14 3 8 64 51

6 of 11

10. When my company has needed export assistance, we have reached out to...
ResponsePercent Maine International Trade Center Maine MEP Small Business Development Centers (SBDC) US Department of Commerce/US Export Assistance Center US Small Business Administration Service Provider (Bank, lawyer, etc.) 73.2% 3.6% ResponseCount 41 2

10.7%

37.5%

21

1.8%

26.8%

15

Other (please specify)

21

AnsweredQuestion SkippedQuestion

56 59

7 of 11

11. Several studies have raised common barriers faced by American companies when selling their product or service internationally. Please review the list below and the importance of barrier on your export sales - or your decision not to pursue exporting at all.
No impact 29.3% (24) 39.5% (32) 48.1% (39) 24.7% (20) 46.8% (36) 32.1% (26) 46.3% (37) 32.5% (26) 20.5% (17) 23.2% (19) 57.0% (45) 42.5% (34) 42.5% (34) 28.0% (23) Moderate impact 32.9% (27) 27.2% (22) 29.6% (24) 37.0% (30) 28.6% (22) 51.9% (42) 22.5% (18) 32.5% (26) 48.2% (40) 50.0% (41) Severe impact 20.7% (17) 12.3% (10) Not encountered

RatingAverage

RatingCount

Difficulty locating sales prospects

17.1% (14)

1.90

82

Unable to find foreign partner

21.0% (17)

1.66

81

Difficulty in meeting export customer lead times

2.5% (2)

19.8% (16)

1.43

81

Difficulty establishing affiliates

13.6% (11)

24.7% (20)

1.85

81

Exports not sufficiently profitable

6.5% (5)

18.2% (14)

1.51

77

Language or cultural barriers

2.5% (2)

13.6% (11)

1.66

81

Insufficient IP protection

6.3% (5)

25.0% (20)

1.47

80

High tariffs or foreign tax issues

20.0% (16) 16.9% (14) 13.4% (11)

15.0% (12)

1.85

80

Foreign regulations, certifications, and nontariff barriers

14.5% (12)

1.96

83

Overseas customs procedures

13.4% (11)

1.89

82

Visa issues

8.9% (7)

5.1% (4)

29.1% (23)

1.27

79

Obtaining financing

12.5% (10) 30.0% (24) 41.5% (34)

18.8% (15)

26.3% (21)

1.68

80

Receiving or processing international payments Lack of trained staff to manage export activities

6.3% (5)

21.3% (17)

1.54

80

14.6% (12)

15.9% (13)

1.84

82

8 of 11

Lack of government support programs Local competition in overseas markets

32.5% (26) 28.4% (23) 13.4% (11)

30.0% (24) 38.3% (31) 46.3% (38)

13.8% (11) 16.0% (13) 32.9% (27)

23.8% (19)

1.75

80

17.3% (14)

1.85

81

Transportation costs

7.3% (6)

2.21

82

US export controls (Bureau of Industry & Security (BIS), International Trade in Arms Regulations (ITAR), etc.) AnsweredQuestion SkippedQuestion 85 30 44.9% (35) 16.7% (13) 6.4% (5) 32.1% (25) 1.43 78

12. Do you want or need outside expertise to overcome any of the barriers you indicated were severe? Which barriers? What type of help do you need?
ResponseCount 41 AnsweredQuestion SkippedQuestion 41 74

13. Would you be willing to meet with a representative of the Maine International Trade Center to provide input on how to address the barriers identified above?
ResponsePercent Yes No 51.2% 48.8% AnsweredQuestion SkippedQuestion ResponseCount 43 41 84 31

9 of 11

14. Would you like more information on export assistance services available from the Maine International Trade Center?
ResponsePercent Yes No 40.7% 59.3% AnsweredQuestion SkippedQuestion ResponseCount 35 51 86 29

15. Do you wish to be entered in the drawing to win a new iPad?

ResponsePercent Yes No 77.1% 22.9% AnsweredQuestion SkippedQuestion ResponseCount 64 19 83 32

10 of 11

16. If you answered "Yes" to Question 13 or 14 or 15, please provide the following information so that we may contact you:
ResponsePercent Name: ResponseCount

100.0%

65

Company:

98.5%

64

City/Town:

100.0%

65

Email Address:

100.0%

65

Phone Number:

95.4%

62

AnsweredQuestion SkippedQuestion

65 50

11 of 11