ANALYTICAL CHEMISTRY December 1958, Vol. 30, No. 12 APPLIED JOURNALS, ACS Director of Publications, C. B. Larrabee Editorial Director, Walter J. Murphy Executive Edifor, James M. Crowe Production Manager, Joseph H. Kuney ANALYTICAL CHEMISTRY Editor, Lawrence 1. Hallett Managing Editor, Robert 0. Gibbs EDITORIAL HEADQUARTERS WASHINGTON 6, D. C. 1155 Sixteenth St., N.W. Teletype WA 23 Phone Republic 7-3337 Associate Editors: 0. Gladys Gordon, Stella Anderson, Ruth Cornette, Katherine I. Biggs, George B. Krantz Assistonf Editors: Robert J. Riley, Robert J. Kelley, Ruth M. Haworth, Eugenia Keller, Sue M. Salliday, S. David Purrglove Editorial Assisfonts: Malvina B. Preiss, Ruth Reynard, Katherine H. Ginnane, James H. Carpenter Layout and Production: Melvin D. Buckner (Art); Betty V. Kieffer, Roy F. Nash, Clarence 1. Rakaw BRANCH EDITORIAL OFFICES CHICAGO 3, ILL. Room 926 36 South Wabash Ave. Teletype CG 725 Phone State 2-5148 Associafe Editors: Howard J. Sanders, Chester PIacek Assistant Editor: Laurence J. White HOUSTON 2, TEX. 718 Melrose Bldg. Phone Fairfax 3-7107 Teletype HO 72 Associate Editor: Bruce F. Greek Assistont Editor: Earl V. Anderson NEW YORK 16, N. Y. 2 Park Ave. Phone Oregon 9-1646 Teletype NY 1-4726 Associate Editors: William Q. Hull, Harry Stenerson, David M. Kiefer, D. Gray Weaver, Walter S. Fedar, Morton Salkind Assistant Editor: Louis A. Agnello SAN FRANCISCO 4, CALIF. 703 Mechanics’ Institute Bldg. 57 Post st. Phone Exbrook 2-2895 Teletype SF 549 Associate Editor: Richard 0. Newhall Assistant Editor: David E. Gushee EASTON, PA. 20th and Northampton Str. Phone Easton 91 1 1 Teletype ESTN Pa 48 Associate Editor; Charlotte C. Sayre Editorial Assistants: Joyce A. Richards, Elizabeth R. Rufe, June A. Barron EUROPEAN OFFICE Bush House, Aldwych, London Phone Temple Bar 3605 Cable JIECHEM Associate Editor: Albert S. Hester Contributing Editor: R. H. MGller Advisory Board: R. M. Archibald, W. H. Beamer, H. 0. Cassidy, W. D. Cooke, R. M. Fowler, Louis Gordon, J. 1. Hoffman, M. 1. Kelley, E. E. Leininger, W. M. MacNevin, V. W. Meloche, John Mitchell, Jr., E. J. Rosenbaurn, R. G. Russell, A I Steyermark Advertising Managemenf: REINHOLD PUBLISHING CORP. 430 Park Ave., New York 22, N. Y. (For Branch Offices see page 1 1 3 A)
EDITORIAL Importation of Scientific lnstrurnents Foreign Competition Hurting in Some Areas. One Alternaiive-Produce Abroad for Sale Here and in Internaiional Market
U. S.instrument makers compete with foreign producers? I n Ch:iany areas, such as mass-produced microscopes for student use and inspection lines in plants, the answer seems to be no. Foreign producers, with substantially lower wage costs, can undersell American producers in U. S. markets. I n other areas, where original design and engineering are involved, the picture is brighter. These opinions are based on informal discussions v i t h several instrument manufacturers who feel that this situation will continue due to the revitalization of foreign industry, both in Europe and the F a r East. American instrument makers are feeling this competition and are seeking means to meet it. One proposed solution, of course, is in the political arena: a foreign trade policy based on restrictive tariffs. Without getting into a debate on this highly complex and controversial topic, there are some aspects, particularly technical, which we believe n-arrant consideration. The U. S. instrument makers manufacture the best engineered and designed complex instrumentation for difficult jobs. These instruments incorporate results of research and development carried out in their own laboratories as well as in university and industrial laboratories. Through this means, Anierican instrument makers continue to lead the field in many areas. Development of instruments to perform analyses autoniatically is a good example. As ill. G. Nellon points out in the Report for Analytical Chemists (page 25 &4),developments in automation are the most spectacular current achievements in analytical chemistry. Hosts of instruments are already in production which make possible the autoniation of various analytical procedures. The endless battle of competition will require instrument makers to seek ever new and better designs and instruments to do jobs heretofore done manually. It is in these areas, therefore, that we feel they should concentrate. Another area that we believe warrants their close attention is the foreign market. While they may not be able to compete in the field of standard, mass-produced items, they can meet competition in specialized fields. I n our lead news story (page 39 -4), for example, it is noted t h a t some Europeans hesitate to purchase American instruments which they feel are superior, because they cannot get them serviced. This is being overcome by the estnblishment of foreign offices by U. S. manufacturers but apparently this trend has not developed sufficiently to meet needs. K e also receive letters from abroad indicating great interest in many new products made in the United States. One other approach, where relatively cheap, mass-produced instruments are involved, is t o open foreign factories and join the import trend. This may ultimately mean loss of jobs for American workmen but in many instances the spread between wage scales in the U. S. and abroad is leaving no alternative. I n addition, considerable research can also be obtained by using this same pattern. We feel, therefore, that the American instrument makers, although beset with serious problems of foreign competition, have the ability to meet this competition and keep their industry strong. T
VOL. 30, NO. 12, DECEMBER 1958
1891
