Printer Friendly

Printed from http://www.researchandmarkets.com/reports/498474

The 2007-2012 World Outlook for High Fructose Corn Syrup Sweeteners Containing at Least 50-Percent Fructose and Crystalline Fructose Adjusted to a Liquid Equivalent of 77-Percent Solids Basis

Description:
WHAT IS LATENT DEMAND AND THE P.I.E.?

The concept of latent demand is rather subtle. The term latent typically refers to something that is dormant, not observable, or not yet realized. Demand is the notion of an economic quantity that a target population or market requires under different assumptions of price, quality, and distribution, among other factors. Latent demand, therefore, is commonly defined by economists as the industry earnings of a market when that market becomes accessible and attractive to serve by competing firms. It is a measure, therefore, of potential industry earnings (P.I.E.) or total revenues (not profit) if a market is served in an efficient manner. It is typically expressed as the total revenues potentially extracted by firms. The “market” is defined at a given level in the value chain. There can be latent demand at the retail level, at the wholesale level, the manufacturing level, and the raw materials level (the P.I.E. of higher levels of the value chain being always smaller than the P.I.E. of levels at lower levels of the same value chain, assuming all levels maintain minimum profitability).

The latent demand for high fructose corn syrup sweeteners containing at least 50-percent fructose and crystalline fructose adjusted to a liquid equivalent of 77-percent solids basis is not actual or historic sales. Nor is latent demand future sales. In fact, latent demand can be lower either lower or higher than actual sales if a market is inefficient (i.e., not representative of relatively competitive levels). Inefficiencies arise from a number of factors, including the lack of international openness, cultural barriers to consumption, regulations, and cartel-like behavior on the part of firms. In general, however, latent demand is typically larger than actual sales in a country market.

For reasons discussed later, this report does not consider the notion of “unit quantities”, only total latent revenues (i.e., a calculation of price times quantity is never made, though one is implied). The units used in this report are U.S. dollars not adjusted for inflation (i.e., the figures incorporate inflationary trends) and not adjusted for future dynamics in exchange rates (i.e., the figures reflect average exchange rates over recent history). If inflation rates or exchange rates vary in a substantial way compared to recent experience, actually sales can also exceed latent demand (when expressed in U.S. dollars, not adjusted for inflation). On the other hand, latent demand can be typically higher than actual sales as there are often distribution inefficiencies that reduce actual sales below the level of latent demand.

As mentioned in the introduction, this study is strategic in nature, taking an aggregate and long-run view, irrespective of the players or products involved. If fact, all the current products or services on the market can cease to exist in their present form (i.e., at a brand-, R&D specification, or corporate-image level) and all the players can be replaced by other firms (i.e., via exits, entries, mergers, bankruptcies, etc.), and there will still be an international latent demand for high fructose corn syrup sweeteners containing at least 50-percent fructose and crystalline fructose adjusted to a liquid equivalent of 77-percent solids basis at the aggregate level. Product and service offering details, and the actual identity of the players involved, while important for certain issues, are relatively unimportant for estimates of latent demand.

THE METHODOLOGY

In order to estimate the latent demand for high fructose corn syrup sweeteners containing at least 50-percent fructose and crystalline fructose adjusted to a liquid equivalent of 77-percent solids basis on a worldwide basis, we used a multi-stage approach. Before applying the approach, one needs a basic theory from which such estimates are created. In this case, we heavily rely on the use of certain basic economic assumptions. In particular, there is an assumption governing the shape and type of aggregate latent demand functions. Latent demand functions relate the income of a country, city, state, household, or individual to realized consumption. Latent demand (often realized as consumption when an industry is efficient), at any level of the value chain, takes place if an equilibrium in realized. For firms to serve a market, they must perceive a latent demand and be able to serve that demand at a minimal return. The single most important variable determining consumption, assuming latent demand exists, is income (or other financial resources at higher levels of the value chain). Other factors that can pivot or shape demand curves include external or exogenous shocks (i.e., business cycles), and or changes in utility for the product in question.

Ignoring, for the moment, exogenous shocks and variations in utility across countries, the aggregate relation between income and consumption has been a central theme in economics. The figure below concisely summarizes one aspect of problem. In the 1930s, John Meynard Keynes conjectured that as incomes rise, the average propensity to consume would fall. The average propensity to consume is the level of consumption divided by the level of income, or the slope of the line from the origin to the consumption function. He estimated this relationship empirically and found it to be true in the short-run (mostly based on cross-sectional data). The higher the income, the lower the average propensity to consume. This type of consumption function is labeled "A" in the figure below (note the rather flat slope of the curve). In the 1940s, another macroeconomist, Simon Kuznets, estimated long-run consumption functions which indicated that the marginal propensity to consume was rather constant (using time series data across countries). This type of consumption function is show as "B" in the figure below (note the higher slope and zero-zero intercept). The average propensity to consume is constant.

















Is it declining or is it constant? A number of other economists, notably Franco Modigliani and Milton Friedman, in the 1950s (and Irving Fisher earlier), explained why the two functions were different using various assumptions on intertemporal budget constraints, savings, and wealth. The shorter the time horizon, the more consumption can depend on wealth (earned in previous years) and business cycles. In the long-run, however, the propensity to consume is more constant. Similarly, in the long run, households, industries or countries with no income eventually have no consumption (wealth is depleted). While the debate surrounding beliefs about how income and consumption are related and interesting, in this study a very particular school of thought is adopted. In particular, we are considering the latent demand for high fructose corn syrup sweeteners containing at least 50-percent fructose and crystalline fructose adjusted to a liquid equivalent of 77-percent solids basis across some 230 countries. The smallest have fewer than 10,000 inhabitants. we assume that all of these counties fall along a "long-run" aggregate consumption function. This long-run function applies despite some of these countries having wealth, current income dominates the latent demand for high fructose corn syrup sweeteners containing at least 50-percent fructose and crystalline fructose adjusted to a liquid equivalent of 77-percent solids basis. So, latent demand in the long-run has a zero intercept. However, we allow firms to have different propensities to consume (including being on consumption functions with differing slopes, which can account for differences in industrial organization, and end-user preferences).

Given this overriding philosophy, we will now describe the methodology used to create the latent demand estimates for high fructose corn syrup sweeteners containing at least 50-percent fructose and crystalline fructose adjusted to a liquid equivalent of 77-percent solids basis. Since this methodology has been applied to a large number of categories, the rather academic discussion below is general and can be applied to a wide variety of categories, not just high fructose corn syrup sweeteners containing at least 50-percent fructose and crystalline fructose adjusted to a liquid equivalent of 77-percent solids basis.

Step 1. Product Definition and Data Collection

Any study of latent demand across countries requires that some standard be established to define “efficiently served”. Having implemented various alternatives and matched these with market outcomes, we have found that the optimal approach is to assume that certain key countries are more likely to be at or near efficiency than others. These countries are given greater weight than others in the estimation of latent demand compared to other countries for which no known data are available. Of the many alternatives, we have found the assumption that the world’s highest aggregate income and highest income-per-capita markets reflect the best standards for “efficiency”. High aggregate income alone is not sufficient (i.e., China has high aggregate income, but low income per capita and can not assumed to be efficient). Aggregate income can be operationalized in a number of ways, including gross domestic product (for industrial categories), or total disposable income (for household categories; population times average income per capita, or number of households times average household income per capita). Brunei, Nauru, Kuwait, and Lichtenstein are examples of countries with high income per capita, but not assumed to be efficient, given low aggregate level of income (or gross domestic product); these countries have, however, high incomes per capita but may not benefit from the efficiencies derived from economies of scale associated with large economies. Only countries with high income per capita and large aggregate income are assumed efficient. This greatly restricts the pool of countries to those in the OECD (Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development), like the United States, or the United Kingdom (which were earlier than other large OECD economies to liberalize their markets).

The selection of countries is further reduced by the fact that not all countries in the OECD report industry revenues at the category level. Countries that typically have ample data at the aggregate level that meet the efficiency criteria include the United States, the United Kingdom and in some cases France and Germany.

Latent demand is therefore estimated using data collected for relatively efficient markets from independent data sources (e.g. Euromonitor, Mintel, Thomson Financial Services, the U.S. Industrial Outlook, the World Resources Institute, the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, various agencies from the United Nations, industry trade associations, the International Monetary Fund, and the World Bank). Depending on original data sources used, the definition of “high fructose corn syrup sweeteners containing at least 50-percent fructose and crystalline fructose adjusted to a liquid equivalent of 77-percent solids basis” is established. In the case of this report, the data were reported at the aggregate level, with no further breakdown or definition. In other words, any potential product or service that might be incorporated within high fructose corn syrup sweeteners containing at least 50-percent fructose and crystalline fructose adjusted to a liquid equivalent of 77-percent solids basis falls under this category. Public sources rarely report data at the disaggregated level in order to protect private information from individual firms that might dominate a specific product-market. These sources will therefore aggregate across components of a category and report only the aggregate to the public. While private data are certainly available, this report only relies on public data at the aggregate level without reliance on the summation of various category components. In other words, this report does not aggregate a number of components to arrive at the “whole”. Rather, it starts with the “whole”, and estimates the whole for all countries and the world at large (without needing to know the specific parts that went into the whole in the first place).

Given this caveat, this study covers “high fructose corn syrup sweeteners containing at least 50-percent fructose and crystalline fructose adjusted to a liquid equivalent of 77-percent solids basis” as defined by the North American Industrial Classification system or NAICS (pronounced “nakes”). For a complete definition of high fructose corn syrup sweeteners containing at least 50-percent fructose and crystalline fructose adjusted to a liquid equivalent of 77-percent solids basis, please see below. The NAICS code for high fructose corn syrup sweeteners containing at least 50-percent fructose and crystalline fructose adjusted to a liquid equivalent of 77-percent solids basis is 31122113. It is for this definition of high fructose corn syrup sweeteners containing at least 50-percent fructose and crystalline fructose adjusted to a liquid equivalent of 77-percent solids basis that the aggregate latent demand estimates are derived. “High fructose corn syrup sweeteners containing at least 50-percent fructose and crystalline fructose adjusted to a liquid equivalent of 77-percent solids basis” is specifically defined as follows:

31122113
High fructose corn syrup (HFCS) sweeteners, 50 percent or more fructose, including crystalline fructose (adjusted to a liquid equivalent, 77 percent solids basis)

3112211371
High fructose corn syrup (HFCS) sweeteners, 50 percent or more fructose, including crystalline fructose (adjusted to a liquid equivalent, 77 percent solids basis)



Step 2. Filtering and Smoothing

Based on the aggregate view of high fructose corn syrup sweeteners containing at least 50-percent fructose and crystalline fructose adjusted to a liquid equivalent of 77-percent solids basis as defined above, data were then collected for as many similar countries as possible for that same definition, at the same level of the value chain. This generates a convenience sample of countries from which comparable figures are available. If the series in question do not reflect the same accounting period, then adjustments are made. In order to eliminate short-term effects of business cycles, the series are smoothed using an 2 year moving average weighting scheme (longer weighting schemes do not substantially change the results). If data are available for a country, but these reflect short-run aberrations due to exogenous shocks (such as would be the case of beef sales in a country stricken with foot and mouth disease), these observations were dropped or "filtered" from the analysis.

Step 3. Filling in Missing Values

In some cases, data are available for countries on a sporadic basis. In other cases, data from a country may be available for only one year. From a Bayesian perspective, these observations should be given greatest weight in estimating missing years. Assuming that other factors are held constant, the missing years are extrapolated using changes and growth in aggregate national income. Based on the overriding philosophy of a long-run consumption function (defined earlier), countries which have missing data for any given year, are estimated based on historical dynamics of aggregate income for that country.

Step 4. Varying Parameter, Non-linear Estimation

Given the data available from the first three steps, the latent demand in additional countries is estimated using a “varying-parameter cross-sectionally pooled time series model”. Simply stated, the effect of income on latent demand is assumed to be constant across countries unless there is empirical evidence to suggest that this effect varies (i.e., . the slope of the income effect is not necessarily same for all countries). This assumption applies across countries along the aggregate consumption function, but also over time (i.e., not all countries are perceived to have the same income growth prospects over time and this effect can vary from country to country as well). Another way of looking at this is to say that latent demand for high fructose corn syrup sweeteners containing at least 50-percent fructose and crystalline fructose adjusted to a liquid equivalent of 77-percent solids basis is more likely to be similar across countries that have similar characteristics in terms of economic development (i.e., African countries will have similar latent demand structures controlling for the income variation across the pool of African countries).

This approach is useful across countries for which some notion of non-linearity exists in the aggregate cross-country consumption function. For some categories, however, the reader must realize that the numbers will reflect a country’s contribution to global latent demand and may never be realized in the form of local sales. For certain country-category combinations this will result in what at first glance will be odd results. For example, the latent demand for the category “space vehicles” will exist for “Togo” even though they have no space program. The assumption is that if the economies in these countries did not exist, the world aggregate for these categories would be lower. The share attributed to these countries is based on a proportion of their income (however small) being used to consume the category in question (i.e., perhaps via resellers).

Step 5. Fixed-Parameter Linear Estimation

Nonlinearities are assumed in cases where filtered data exist along the aggregate consumption function. Because the world consists of more than 200 countries, there will always be those countries, especially toward the bottom of the consumption function, where non-linear estimation is simply not possible. For these countries, equilibrium latent demand is assumed to be perfectly parametric and not a function of wealth (i.e., a country’s stock of income), but a function of current income (a country’s flow of income). In the long run, if a country has no current income, the latent demand for high fructose corn syrup sweeteners containing at least 50-percent fructose and crystalline fructose adjusted to a liquid equivalent of 77-percent solids basis is assumed to approach zero. The assumption is that wealth stocks fall rapidly to zero if flow income falls to zero (i.e., countries which earn low levels of income will not use their savings, in the long run, to demand high fructose corn syrup sweeteners containing at least 50-percent fructose and crystalline fructose adjusted to a liquid equivalent of 77-percent solids basis). In a graphical sense, for low income countries, latent demand approaches zero in a parametric linear fashion with a zero-zero intercept. In this stage of the estimation procedure, low-income countries are assumed to have a latent demand proportional to their income, based on the country closest to it on the aggregate consumption function.

Step 6. Aggregation and Benchmarking

Based on the models described above, latent demand figures are estimated for all countries of the world, including for the smallest economies. These are then aggregated to get world totals and regional totals. To make the numbers more meaningful, regional and global demand averages are presented. Figures are rounded, so minor inconsistencies may exist across tables.

Step 7. Latent Demand Density: Allocating Across Cities

With the advent of a “borderless world”, cities become a more important criteria in prioritizing markets, as opposed to regions, continents, or countries. This report also covers the world’s top 2000 cities. The purpose is to understand the density of demand within a country and the extent to which a city might be used as a point of distribution within its region. From an economic perspective, however, a city does not represent a population within rigid geographical boundaries. To an economist or strategic planner, a city represents an area of dominant influence over markets in adjacent areas. This influence varies from one industry to another, but also from one period of time to another.

Similar to country-level data, the reader needs to realize that latent demand allocated to a city may or may not represent real sales. For many items, latent demand is clearly observable in sales, as in the case for food or housing items. Consider, again, the category “satellite launch vehicles.” Clearly, there are no launch pads in most cities of the world. However, the core benefit of the vehicles (e.g. telecommunications, etc.) is "consumed" by residents or industries within the worlds cities. Without certain cities, in other words, the world market for satellite launch vehicles would be lower for the world in general. One needs to allocate, therefore, a portion of the worldwide economic demand for launch vehicles to regions, countries and cities. This report takes the broader definition and considers, therefore, a city as a part of the global market. we allocate latent demand across areas of dominant influence based on the relative economic importance of cities within its home country, within its region and across the world total. Not all cities are estimated within each country as demand may be allocated to adjacent areas of influence. Since some cities have higher economic wealth than others within the same country, a city’s population is not generally used to allocate latent demand. Rather, the level of economic activity of the city vis-à-vis others.
 
Contents:
1 INTRODUCTION 10 1.1 Overview 10 1.2 What is Latent Demand and the P.I.E.? 10 1.3 The Methodology 11 1.3.1 Step 1. Product Definition and Data Collection 12 1.3.2 Step 2. Filtering and Smoothing 14 1.3.3 Step 3. Filling in Missing Values 14 1.3.4 Step 4. Varying Parameter, Non-linear Estimation 14 1.3.5 Step 5. Fixed-Parameter Linear Estimation 15 1.3.6 Step 6. Aggregation and Benchmarking 15 1.3.7 Step 7. Latent Demand Density: Allocating Across Cities 15 2 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS 16 2.1 The Worldwide Market Potential 16 3 AFRICA 18 3.1 Executive Summary 18 3.2 Algeria 19 3.3 Angola 20 3.4 Benin 21 3.5 Botswana 22 3.6 Burkina Faso 23 3.7 Burundi 23 3.8 Cameroon 24 3.9 Cape Verde 25 3.10 Central African Republic 25 3.11 Chad 26 3.12 Comoros 27 3.13 Congo (formerly Zaire) 27 3.14 Cote dIvoire 28 3.15 Djibouti 29 3.16 Egypt 30 3.17 Equatorial Guinea 31 3.18 Ethiopia 31 3.19 Gabon 32 3.20 Ghana 33 3.21 Guinea 34 3.22 Guinea-Bissau 34 3.23 Kenya 35 3.24 Lesotho 36 3.25 Liberia 36 3.26 Libya 37 3.27 Madagascar 38 3.28 Malawi 38 3.29 Mali 39 3.30 Mauritania 40 3.31 Mauritius 40 3.32 Morocco 41 3.33 Mozambique 42 3.34 Namibia 42 3.35 Niger 43 3.36 Nigeria 44 3.37 Republic of Congo 45 3.38 Reunion 45 3.39 Rwanda 46 3.40 Sao Tome E Principe 47 3.41 Senegal 47 3.42 Sierra Leone 48 3.43 Somalia 49 3.44 South Africa 50 3.45 Sudan 51 3.46 Swaziland 52 3.47 Tanzania 52 3.48 The Gambia 53 3.49 Togo 54 3.50 Tunisia 55 3.51 Uganda 56 3.52 Western Sahara 57 3.53 Zambia 57 3.54 Zimbabwe 58 4 ASIA 60 4.1 Executive Summary 60 4.2 Bangladesh 61 4.3 Bhutan 62 4.4 Brunei 63 4.5 Burma 64 4.6 Cambodia 65 4.7 China 65 4.8 Hong Kong 66 4.9 India 67 4.10 Indonesia 68 4.11 Japan 69 4.12 Laos 70 4.13 Macau 70 4.14 Malaysia 71 4.15 Maldives 72 4.16 Mongolia 73 4.17 Nepal 73 4.18 North Korea 74 4.19 Papua New Guinea 75 4.20 Philippines 75 4.21 Seychelles 76 4.22 Singapore 77 4.23 South Korea 78 4.24 Sri Lanka 79 4.25 Taiwan 80 4.26 Thailand 81 4.27 Vietnam 82 5 EUROPE 83 5.1 Executive Summary 83 5.2 Albania 84 5.3 Andorra 85 5.4 Austria 86 5.5 Belarus 87 5.6 Belgium 88 5.7 Bosnia and Herzegovina 89 5.8 Bulgaria 90 5.9 Croatia 91 5.10 Cyprus 92 5.11 Czech Republic 92 5.12 Denmark 93 5.13 Estonia 94 5.14 Finland 95 5.15 France 96 5.16 Georgia 97 5.17 Germany 98 5.18 Greece 99 5.19 Hungary 100 5.20 Iceland 101 5.21 Ireland 102 5.22 Italy 102 5.23 Kazakhstan 103 5.24 Latvia 104 5.25 Liechtenstein 105 5.26 Lithuania 106 5.27 Luxembourg 106 5.28 Malta 107 5.29 Moldova 108 5.30 Monaco 108 5.31 Netherlands 109 5.32 Norway 110 5.33 Poland 111 5.34 Portugal 112 5.35 Romania 113 5.36 Russia 114 5.37 San Marino 115 5.38 Slovakia 115 5.39 Slovenia 116 5.40 Spain 117 5.41 Sweden 118 5.42 Switzerland 119 5.43 Ukraine 120 5.44 United Kingdom 121 6 LATIN AMERICA 122 6.1 Executive Summary 122 6.2 Argentina 123 6.3 Belize 124 6.4 Bolivia 125 6.5 Brazil 126 6.6 Chile 127 6.7 Colombia 128 6.8 Costa Rica 129 6.9 Ecuador 129 6.10 El Salvador 130 6.11 Falkland Islands 131 6.12 French Guiana 131 6.13 Guatemala 132 6.14 Guyana 133 6.15 Honduras 133 6.16 Mexico 134 6.17 Nicaragua 135 6.18 Panama 136 6.19 Paraguay 137 6.20 Peru 138 6.21 Suriname 139 6.22 Uruguay 139 6.23 Venezuela 140 7 NORTH AMERICA & THE CARIBBEAN 142 7.1 Executive Summary 142 7.2 Antigua and Barbuda 143 7.3 Aruba 144 7.4 Bahamas 145 7.5 Barbados 145 7.6 Bermuda 146 7.7 British Virgin Islands 147 7.8 Canada 147 7.9 Cayman Islands 148 7.10 Cuba 149 7.11 Dominica 150 7.12 Dominican Republic 150 7.13 Greenland 151 7.14 Grenada 152 7.15 Guadeloupe 153 7.16 Haiti 154 7.17 Jamaica 154 7.18 Martinique 155 7.19 Netherlands Antilles 156 7.20 Puerto Rico 156 7.21 St. Kitts and Nevis 157 7.22 St. Lucia 158 7.23 St. Vincent and the Grenadines 158 7.24 Trinidad and Tobago 159 7.25 United States 160 7.26 Virgin Islands, US 161 8 OCEANA 162 8.1 Executive Summary 162 8.2 American Samoa 163 8.3 Australia 164 8.4 Christmas Island 165 8.5 Cook Islands 165 8.6 Fiji 166 8.7 French Polynesia 167 8.8 Guam 167 8.9 Kiribati 168 8.10 Marshall Islands 169 8.11 Micronesia Federation 169 8.12 Nauru 170 8.13 New Caledonia 171 8.14 New Zealand 171 8.15 Niue 172 8.16 Norfolk Island 173 8.17 Northern Mariana Island 173 8.18 Palau 174 8.19 Solomon Islands 175 8.20 Tokelau 175 8.21 Tonga 176 8.22 Tuvalu 177 8.23 Vanuatu 177 8.24 Wallis and Futuna 178 8.25 Western Samoa 179 9 THE MIDDLE EAST 180 9.1 Executive Summary 180 9.2 Afghanistan 181 9.3 Armenia 182 9.4 Azerbaijan 183 9.5 Bahrain 184 9.6 Iran 185 9.7 Iraq 186 9.8 Israel 187 9.9 Jordan 188 9.10 Kuwait 188 9.11 Kyrgyzstan 189 9.12 Lebanon 190 9.13 Oman 190 9.14 Pakistan 191 9.15 Palestine 192 9.16 Qatar 192 9.17 Saudi Arabia 193 9.18 Syrian Arab Republic 194 9.19 Tajikistan 195 9.20 Turkey 195 9.21 Turkmenistan 196 9.22 United Arab Emirates 197 9.23 Uzbekistan 198 9.24 Yemen 199 10 DISCLAIMERS, WARRANTEES, AND USER AGREEMENT PROVISIONS 200 10.1 Disclaimers & Safe Harbor 200 10.2 User Agreement Provisions 201
 
Ordering:
Order Online - visit http://www.researchandmarkets.com/reports/498474

Order by Fax - using the order form below

Order By Post - print the order form below and send to

Research and Markets,
Guinness Centre,
Taylors Lane,
Dublin 8,
Ireland.

 
Page 1 of 2
Printed Jul 29th 2014
11:58:07 PM

Fax order form

To place a fax order simply print this form, fill in and fax the completed form to the number below. If you have any questions please email help@researchandmarkets.net

Order information

Please verify that the product information is correct and select the format you require.

Product name

The 2007-2012 World Outlook for High Fructose Corn Syrup Sweeteners Containing at Least 50-Percent Fructose and Crystalline Fructose Adjusted to a Liquid Equivalent of 77-Percent Solids Basis

Web Address

http://www.researchandmarkets.com/reports/498474

Office Code

OC8DIMOTTTWWPT

 

Report Formats

Please enter the quantity of the report format you require.

Format Quantity Price
Electronic - Single User USD 795

Contact information

Please enter all the information below in block capitals.

Title:
Mr Mrs Dr Miss Ms Prof
First Name:
Last Name:
Email Address:
Job Title:
Organisation:
Address:
City:
Postal / Zip Code:
Country:
Phone Number:
Fax Number:

Please fax this form to:
(646) 607-1907 or (646) 964-6609 (from USA)
+353-1-481-1716 or +353-1-653-1571 (from Rest of World)

Page 2 of 2
Printed Jul 29th 2014
11:58:07 PM

Payment information

Please indicate the payment method you would like to use by selecting the appropriate box.

Pay by Credit Card:

American Express

Diners Club

Master Card

Visa

Cardholder's Name:
Cardholder's Signature:
Expiry Date:
/
Card Number:
CVV Security Code:
Issue date:
/ (Diners Club only)
 
Pay by Check:

Please post the check, accompanied by this form, to:

Research and Markets,
Guinness Centre,
Taylors Lane,
Dublin 8,
Ireland.

 
Pay by Wire Transfer:

Please transfer funds to:

Account Number:
83313083
Sort Code:
98-53-30
Swift Code:
ULSBIE2D
IBAN Number:
IE78ULSB98533083313083
Bank Address:
Ulster Bank,
27-35 Main Street
Blackrock,
Co. Dublin
Ireland.
 

If you have a Marketing Code please enter it below:

Marketing Code:

Please note that by ordering from Research and Markets you are agreeing to our Terms and Conditions at http://www.researchandmarkets.com/info/terms.asp

Please fax this form to:
(646) 607-1907 or (646) 964-6609 (from USA)
+353-1-481-1716 or +353-1-653-1571 (from Rest of World)