Release Date: 06/ 01/ 2005
CONTACT: J.L. Wilson, (503) 364-4450 or Tony Malandra, (415) 664-9685
Although sales and prospects slipped slightly, state makes it into top 10 nationally
OREGON -- The state's most important economic sector slipped 9 percentage points from the previous quarter on one important measure, according to the latest Oregon Small-Business ConditionsSM report released today, but Oregon still remains the best in the Northwest, especially on two other key indicators, sales and prospects.
Compiled quarterly by the Research Foundation of America's largest small-business advocacy group, NFIB, the Oregon Small-Business ConditionsSM report asked Main Street business owners to assess support in the state's business environment – which included government, banks, the media and community groups. Oregon tallied a 20-percent, net-supportive rating, down 9 points from the previous quarter, but still miles ahead of neighboring Washington, negative 9 percent, and Northern California, negative 4 percent. The best in the nation was North Carolina's at positive 42 percent. In all the Research Foundation examines small-business environments in 26 of the largest-economy states in the nation.
"One thing is clear, and that is the state's economy is still not revving like it should," said J.L. Wilson, state director for the 12,000-member Oregon arm of NFIB. "We slipped slightly in almost every single category, but even though the net percent of respondents who said sales were good fell 3 points to 45 percent, that still puts us at seventh in the nation. And while the net percent of respondents who said the outlook for their business looked good in the next three months fell 2 points to 64 percent, it still ranks us nationally as seventh best."
"In fact some slippage is welcome news," continued Wilson, "such as the decline in credit needs and the 8-point drop in worries from big business competition. Almost half, 47 percent, considered higher fuel prices a very or somewhat serious problem. But in coping with the increases, 20 percent opted to reduce energy use, 16 percent decided to absorb the cost with lower earnings, 9 percent are trying conservation measures and around 7 percent did nothing, meaning they also absorbed the increases. It's the way small businesses deal with all cost increases, by taking less profit, instead of laying people off."
For information about the Small-Business ConditionsSM project and other small-business research studies conducted by the NFIB Research Foundation, visit www.NFIB.com/research.
| Oregon Small-Business ConditionsSM | ||||||
| This chart shows the results from Oregon and its comparative standing among selected nearby states. | ||||||
| Ore. | No. Calif. |
Wash. | ||||
| Business Climate | Survey Date | |||||
| Overall state business environment | ||||||
| Net % supportive of small business | 5/2005 | 20 | 0 | -4 | ||
| Prior qtr. | 29 | 17 | -9 | |||
| Business conditions in market area | ||||||
| Net % "good" | 5/2005 | 30 | 26 | 33 | ||
| Prior qtr. | 39 | 41 | 36 | |||
| Net % "improving" | 5/2005 | 20 | 15 | 11 | ||
| Prior qtr. | 23 | 24 | 26 | |||
| Outlook for business | ||||||
| Net % "good" in next three months | 5/2005 | 64 | 57 | 63 | ||
| Prior qtr. | 66 | 66 | 67 | |||
| Reason for optimism | ||||||
| % Sales prospects | 5/2005 | 36 | 42 | 42 | ||
| Prior qtr. | 37 | 43 | 51 | |||
| % Lower costs | 5/2005 | 1 | 2 | 1 | ||
| Prior qtr. | 4 | 2 | 1 | |||
| % Price increases | 5/2005 | 4 | 6 | 4 | ||
| Prior qtr. | 6 | 5 | 4 | |||
| % Greater productivity | 5/2005 | 16 | 15 | 13 | ||
| Prior qtr. | 14 | 13 | 16 | |||
| % Government policy | 5/2005 | 4 | 4 | 3 | ||
| Prior qtr. | 2 | 4 | 2 | |||
| % Seasonal/Weather | 5/2005 | 17 | 13 | 10 | ||
| Prior qtr. | - | - | - | |||
| Reason for pessimism | ||||||
| % Sales prospects | 5/2005 | IC* | IC | IC | ||
| Prior qtr. | IC | IC | IC | |||
| % Cost increases | 5/2005 | IC | IC | IC | ||
| Prior qtr. | IC | IC | IC | |||
| % Pressure on selling prices | 5/2005 | IC | IC | IC | ||
| Prior qtr. | IC | IC | IC | |||
| % Lower productivity | 5/2005 | IC | IC | IC | ||
| Prior qtr. | IC | IC | IC | |||
| % Government policy | 5/2005 | IC | IC | IC | ||
| Prior qtr. | IC | IC | IC | |||
| Ore. | No. Calif. |
Wash. | ||||
| Sales and earnings (last quarter) | ||||||
| Sales | ||||||
| Net % sales "good" | 5/2005 | 45 | 31 | 44 | ||
| Prior qtr. | 48 | 36 | 43 | |||
| Profits | ||||||
| Net % profits "good" | 5/2005 | 21 | 18 | 24 | ||
| Prior qtr. | 28 | 23 | 23 | |||
| Employment | ||||||
| Current job openings (one or more) | ||||||
| % "Yes" | 5/2005 | 18 | 19 | 15 | ||
| Prior qtr. | 15 | 22 | 20 | |||
| Per employee payroll cost | ||||||
| Net % "risen" | 5/2005 | 20 | 13 | 23 | ||
| Prior qtr. | 16 | 12 | 28 | |||
| Employee cost pressures (greater) | ||||||
| % Wages | 5/2005 | 56 | 49 | 48 | ||
| Prior qtr. | 55 | 52 | 55 | |||
| % Benefits | 5/2005 | 20 | 26 | 29 | ||
| Prior qtr. | 24 | 32 | 25 | |||
| Ore. | No. Calif. |
Wash. | ||||
| Productivity | ||||||
| Upgraded technology/processes (last three months) | ||||||
| % "Yes" | 5/2005 | 43 | 43 | 44 | ||
| Prior qtr. | 43 | 41 | 48 | |||
| Made capital expenditure(s) (last three months) | ||||||
| % "Yes" | 5/2005 | 41 | 38 | 39 | ||
| Prior qtr. | 48 | 39 | 46 | |||
| Made expenditure to train employee(s) (last three months) | ||||||
| % "Yes" | 5/2005 | 40 | 39 | 40 | ||
| Prior qtr. | 42 | 39 | 43 | |||
| Capacity utilization - can increase sales 10% without new inputs | ||||||
| % "Yes" | 5/2005 | 57 | 50 | 45 | ||
| Prior qtr. | 54 | 57 | 62 | |||
| Credit availability (last three months) | ||||||
| % All credit needs satisfied | 5/2005 | 36 | 39 | 42 | ||
| Prior qtr. | 39 | 38 | 36 | |||
| % All credit needs not satisfied | 5/2005 | 6 | 6 | 5 | ||
| Prior qtr. | 3 | 7 | 10 | |||
| % No credit needs | 5/2005 | 51 | 47 | 47 | ||
| Prior qtr. | 51 | 50 | 52 | |||
| Ore. | No. Calif. |
Wash. | ||||
| Prices | ||||||
| Purchasing prices (last three months) | ||||||
| Net % increased | 5/2005 | 62 | 46 | 59 | ||
| Prior qtr. | 54 | 45 | 54 | |||
| Selling prices (last three months) | ||||||
| Net % increased | 5/2005 | 23 | 19 | 19 | ||
| Prior qtr. | 22 | 18 | 22 | |||
| Miscellaneous | ||||||
| Involvement in start of another business | ||||||
| % "Yes" | 5/2005 | 8 | 12 | 9 | ||
| Prior qtr. | 9 | 13 | 16 | |||
| Single most important business problem | ||||||
| % Weak sales | 5/2005 | 10 | 13 | 6 | ||
| Prior qtr. | 10 | 10 | 10 | |||
| % Taxes | 5/2005 | 9 | 11 | 21 | ||
| Prior qtr. | 8 | 11 | 19 | |||
| % Employee quality/costs | 5/2005 | 9 | 7 | 8 | ||
| Prior qtr. | 11 | 9 | 11 | |||
| % Insurance | 5/2005 | 17 | 15 | 14 | ||
| Prior qtr. | 15 | 19 | 14 | |||
| % Big-business competition | 5/2005 | 10 | 15 | 14 | ||
| Prior qtr. | 18 | 13 | 12 | |||
| % Inflation/Rising prices | 5/2005 | 17 | 9 | 10 | ||
| Prior qtr. | 9 | 7 | 10 | |||
| % Credit availability/Interest rates | 5/2005 | 2 | 2 | 2 | ||
| Prior qtr. | 3 | 5 | 4 | |||
| % Regulations/Red tape | 5/2005 | 9 | 10 | 10 | ||
| Prior qtr. | 13 | 11 | 11 | |||
* Insufficient cases
| Oregon Quarterly Spotlight | |
| Have higher energy prices over the last three to four months imposed a burden on your business, OR have they actually benefited it? | |
| Very serious | 12% |
| Somewhat serious | 35% |
| Not too serious | 29% |
| Not at all serious | 14% |
| Benefited | 2% |
| Don't know/Refused | 9% |
| Total | 100% |
| What is the single most important action you have recently taken in response to the rising cost of energy? | |
| Raised selling prices | 10% |
| Invested in energy-conserving equipment or vehicles | 9% |
| Reduced energy use | 20% |
| Absorbed higher costs with lower earnings | 16% |
| Reduced non-energy costs such as payroll | 4% |
| Increased promotion and/or advertising | 11% |
| Other | 3% |
| Nothing | 7% |
| Don't know/Refused | 21% |
| Total | 100% |
The Poll
NFIB’s Oregon Small-Business ConditionsSM is a telephone survey of a random sample of Oregon small employers regarding business conditions within the state. “Small employer” is defined here as employing between one and 250 people (not including the owner(s)) in a for-profit business. Each edition of the survey has a minimum of 350 respondents. The sampling error is ± 5 percentage points. Data are collected quarterly in the months of February, May, August and November, beginning in February 2005. The MRCGroup of Las Vegas conducts the survey for the NFIB Research Foundation.
The Sponsor
The NFIB Research Foundation is a 501 (c)(3) organization that provides policy-makers, media, educators, small-business owners and other interested parties empirically based information on small business and small-business owners. The Foundation is affiliated with the National Federation of Independent Business, the nation’s largest small- and independent-business advocacy organization, and is located in Washington, D.C.
