Clitheroe the Future: Market Shopper Survey

APPENDIX 1 – MARKET SHOPPER SURVEY RESULTS

The Survey

Fifty face to face interviews were conducted with a random sample of shoppers at each of the following five markets:

Clitheroe, Padiham, Penrith, Sandbach and Ulverston.

The interviews were conducted on market day in March and April 2004. These were the weeks either side of Easter week. They were conducted by CN Research, a Carlisle based market research company in accordance with Market Research Society Guidelines.

The Questionnaire.

A total of 17 questions were asked to establish demographic and occupational profiles; shopper behaviour, and opinions on the respective markets. The interviews were carried out through the morning and early afternoon.

Figure 1: Demographic Profile.

The survey results show a marked concentration in the older age groups, with over one third of all respondents being over 654, and 54% over 55. This reflects a widely held perception that traditional week day markets are serving an ageing population.

Common reasons cited for this pattern include the reliance of the younger generations on one stop shopping at supermarkets; reliance on credit cards; and changing work patterns resulting in fewer people being available to shop during the day.

The pattern was reasonably constant across all markets expect Penrith , where only 16% of all respondents were over 65.

It is assumed that the concentration would be rather less at weekend markets.

Figure 2: Gender Profile

Over 70% of respondents were female, a pattern which remained fairly constant across all markets and occupational groups. This would appear to reflect the traditional family roles adopted by market users. There was little variation across occupational groups or age groups.

Figure 3: Occupational Groups

Respondents were asked their occupation which was subsequently coded to the Market Research Society’s occupation groups – see note 2. Where respondents are retired, they are classified by their prior occupation if they have an occupational or private pension. Where they are reliant on a state pension they are classified as E1.
The dominant occupational class is E1, accounting for 20% of the respondents, compared to 8% for the population as a whole. Conversely, the professional and managerial categories, A and B, accounted for only 13% of respondents, compared to 23% of the general population.

There is marked variation between markets, at least partially reflecting the characteristics of the markets’ respective catchment areas.

Figure 4: Demographic and Occupational Structure

Figure 4 graphically emphasises the reliance on markets to the older, lower occupational groups for their customers - state pension retirees accounting for 18% of all respondents – more than double the 8% that the group represent in the population at large.

Figures 5 & 6 : Distance Travelled

Shopper Behaviour

Figures 7 & 8: Frequency of Visits to Market

The result show markets to be serving a predominantly local customer base, with 43% of all respondents travelling under 1 mile to get to the market, and only 25% travelling more than 2 miles to get there. There was considerable variation between markets – at partially a reflection of the characteristics of their respective catchment areas – Penrith’s large rural hinterland necessitating greater distances to reach the market, whilst the more urban Padiham attracts over 90% of its customers form within 2 miles. Variations in travelling patterns between occupational groupings were rather less obvious.

The majority of market goers use their market as a matter of course as part of their weekly shopping routine -over 57% attending the market most weeks. Less than one third of respondents go to the market monthly or less.

The pattern is reasonably uniform across four of the markets, with Penrith providing the exception – with under a quarter of those interviewed attending most weeks, and almost as many only going to the market once a year or less. The rural nature of Penrith’s large and scattered catchment area may provide a partial explanation, as may Penrith’s role as gateway town the to Lake District, resulting in tourists visiting the town, augmenting the local shoppers.

The importance of markets to the less well-off sectors of the population is again emphasised in the occupational analyis of the frequency data - 70% of classes D (semi and unskilled workers) and E1 (retired on state pension) visited the market most weeks, compared to 43% of professionals and mangers (classes A and B).

Figures 9 & 10: Influence of the Market in Travelling to town.

For a quarter of people using the markets, it is the primary motivating factor in travelling to the town centre, and for a further one third of market users, it is an important factor in influencing the timing of shopping trips to town. This compares to forty percent of respondents, who would have come to town whether or not there was a market, and a very small proportion who were unaware that it was market day.

The market was the primary motive for travelling to town in both Clitheroe and Sandbach, where 40% of shoppers stated they had travelled specifically to go to the market, and a further 30% timed their visit for market day. This contrasts with Penrith (where 70% of residents said the market was irrelevant to their decision to travel), and Padiham, (55% said the market was irrelevant). The difference in the size of the markets – 40 plus stalls at Sandbach and Clitheroe - compared to under 15 at Penrith and Padiham – is likely to be part of the explanation.

Awareness of the market was good, with only 3% overall being unaware that it was market day before they came to town. The higher figure in Penrith may be explained by its role as a tourist centre.

Analysis of occupational groups provides some further evidence of the importance of markets to the lower income groups – with 70% of both state pension retirees and the unemployed either coming specifically to go to the market, or timing the trip to coincide with the market.

Figures 11 to 13 : Spending at the Market

(Average spend is estimated by assuming actual spend occurred at the mid midpoint of each spending band )

Average spend at the market was £5.90, varying from £7.80 in Ulverston to £2.90 in Padiham. The occupational profiles of Padiham’s shoppers ( dominated by unskilled and retired), coupled with the small number of stalls, are likely to be important factors here. In contrast Ulverston had the highest proportion of occupational class A and B, and over 40 stall at their market.

Over half respondents spent £5.00 or less at the market, compared to only 15% who spent over £15. Despite their lack of numbers, this group accounted for just under half (47%) of all expenditure at the markets.

Shopper Opinions

Respondents were given a series of statements and given the option to ‘strongly agree’, agree’, disagree’, and ‘strongly disagree’ with each statement. Agreements were scored as +1, strong agreements as +2, disagreements as –2, and strong disagreements –2. Thus an aggregate score for each statement was arrived at – the higher the score the more positive the respondents. The score was rebased to a maximum of 200 – ie if all respondents strongly agreed, the score would be 200, and if all strongly disagreed, the score would be –200.

Figures 14 –15 “ The market is usually cheaper than the shops”

There was wide consensus that goods were cheaper at the market than in the shops – with all markets and occupational groups recording a positive score. Overall, a positive score of over 50 was recorded.

Figures 16 & 17 “You get better value for money at the market”

Similar responses were forthcoming to the statement “You get better value for money a the market - with all markets and social groups again recording a positive score.

Figures 18 & 19 “The quality of goods on the market is equal to or better than in the shops”

Perhaps surprisingly, all social groups and all but one market also recorded positive scores when asked about the quality of goods at the market. The exception was Penrith, which recorded a score of over minus 50. There is no immediately apparent explanation for Penrith’s marked divergence.

Figures 20 & 21 “The market is a better place to find local produce”

The market was seen as a better source of local produce at all markets, although only a small positive score was recorded at Padiham – compared to a score of over 100 at Clitheroe. There was less variation between occupational groups.

Figures 22 & 23 “It is easier to use the market than using the shops”

Figures 24 & 25 “I enjoy shopping at the market more than using the shops”

There was degree of correlation between whether shoppers found the markets easy to use, and how enjoyable they found them. All markets except Penrith recorded a positive score for both of these statements, but Penrith recorded a markedly negative score in both cases. Again, there is no obvious explanation for Penrith’s divergence – parking or access to the market being no more difficult in Penrith than elsewhere.

Social groups AB and C were less likely to find the market easier to use and more enjoyable than social groups D and E. Higher levels of car ownership, less time available for shopping, and a greater reliance on card purchases, may all be factors influencing the responses from groups A, B and C.

Figures 26 & 27 “I come to the market because it is part of a day out, not just to go shopping”

This question attempted to address how market users saw their own use of the market – was it purely as a way of buying goods, or did their visit serve wider social /leisure purposes? This is important in terms of judging the markets’ potential as a tourist attraction, for instance, can also help inform the marketing of the markets.

There was no strong overall consensus – a positive score of under 10 suggests a broadly neutral response. There were, however, strong differences between markets – Padiham recording a negative score of 40 - suggesting its purpose is more utilitarian than other markets. Both Penrith and Clitheroe recorded a positive score of over 25, suggesting the traditional role of market day as a social gathering for the surrounding rural population still persisted to some degree.

Those retired on a state pension recorded a positive score of over 50, compared to smaller scores for other social groups. Again, this could reflect the traditional role of the market as meeting place persisting amongst older customers.

Table 1: Shopper’s Comments.

The final question on the questionnaire asked respondents if they had any other comments they would like to make about the market. The responses are summarised below by market.

Clitheroe

It's very clean; the layouts very good; the stall holders are very friendly.
You don't always find what you want but most things are there.
It's changed over the years - less stalls and it's not covered; I'd prefer it to be covered.
It's always kept clean. The cafe could be a bit better. The market's not as big nowadays.
It's very nice; clean and neat. They have lovely, fresh vegetables and fruit.
It's very clean and the people are friendly. It could be a bit bigger.
The centre is a waste of space. If they had a trolley service it would be good. The cafe's 'grotty'. It hasn't an 'olde worlde' feel like it should.
It's kept clean; nice to walk around - the toilets are handy.
The stalls are old fashioned - they need younger clothes and attract all ages.
It's lovely and clean; nice lay out and easy to get round.
I used to have a regular order of vegetables and used to park to pick them up. I can't do that now. The market is not as good - less stalls and variety.
It's ok today because it's fine but it should be covered. It can be really cold and windy - everything else is fine.
It's lovely - more modern than it was - the way they've done the buildings - very nice.
The stall holders are friendly and outgoing. It's very pleasant visiting here.
It's not as big. There's a lot of different stalls but not enough variety - the space in the middle is a waste.
It's a very good market - it has most things you're looking for and has a pleasant atmosphere.
It's rather old fashioned - needs modernising. The range of goods is quite poor.
I like the atmosphere on Tuesdays. The space in the middle is a bit wasted - have more stalls or local interest displays.
It's clean and has a good variety. Good local produce - looks like it's well run; good toilet facilities.
Sometimes could do with a few more stalls and it would be better partially covered.
It's tidy and pleasant. It's a nice day but it's a bit open and might be windy and cold.
It's ok - a bit on the small side but it's ok for me.
I like the friendliness of the people; it has a certain charm although it is quite small.
It's too small - it used to be thriving; they could put a roof on it like Burnley.
It's nice to come in and have a chat with the people on the stalls - you don't get that in the shops. It's clean as well.
It's alright I suppose - it could be better, bigger with more different stalls.

Ulverston

Would hate to see it go; not as good as it used to be.
Traffic busy (on Thursday) but not too bad on a Saturday.
It's a great thing to have locally.
Less busy than it used to be.
It's a valuable part of the town.
Hope it stays; it's part of the history of the place. Partly because of the supermarkets it's gone down hill - use it to show support for it.
A good mix of products.
Fresh produce; atmosphere is better at market.
It's a good place to meet and shop.
Queues can be long at some stalls.
I come every week; good atmosphere and friendly.
Have come for a day out.
Nice and friendly.
Friendly atmosphere.
Good for fresh products.
Important for the area. The heritage has been here for years.
Enjoy it; fresh cakes are nce.
Better parking would make it better.
Friendly; nice atmosphere.
Very quiet on a Saturday - 'perked up' on a Thursday.
Good market; nice to see it in Ulverston.
The shops tend to have better quality nowadays and are sometimes cheaper.
Enjoy shopping in the market.
Sometimes hardly any stalls.
More stalls required - not consistent - they come and go every week.
Not enough stalls - would like to see more.
Shame if the market was to disappear.
Nice to see more stalls here - it seemed to be dwindling. It helps Ulverston for tourists/economy etc.
Like to see the market stay.
Wouldn't visit the market specifically - goes to the bank.
Hope the market carrys on.
Could do with more variety.
Nice displays; friendly people.
Ulverston is wonderful.
Could do with more stalls.
Very good cafe beside the market.
It's good as it is.
Very pleasant atmosphere.
Could be more diverse.
Products in the market that aren't available in the shops eg fish, electrical goods.
Nice layout; friendly people - it's very important for a small town.
It's easy to use a 'buggy' in the market.
Sometimes the goods/produce in the market can be more expensive than the shops.
Not as big as it used to be (New Market Street is very quiet).
Too many queues and not enough stalls.

Sandbach

It's part of the way of life; enjoyable.
Parking is awkward. Like the choice and the atmosphere of the market.
I'm a Sandbach person and I love the market - it's always been there.
Too many clothing stalls.
It's not the market it was, there aren't as many stalls and the prices are going up. They are trying to privatise it.
They are ruining the market. They have put a pavement around it and have cut the stalls down. Not as much choice.
They're making a mess of it. The footpath they are putting around it is dreadful.
hey should keep the market whatever town it's in. More variety and cheaper items are found there.
We think it's poor today; not as many stalls as before.
I think the character has gone - it isn't as good as it used to be. Not the local people that we used to know.
It's gone down hill. All these Indians who have taken over the stalls. The stalls are not as good - they do not have the variety.
Don't agree with what they are doing with the paths and the one-way system. I agree with the disabled monopoly parking.
It's alright - you have the variations and can get fixed up usually with what you want.
You take it for granted - it' s a good market; you can get want you want.
The parking is poor.
It needs to get better; it's gone down-hill. The clothes aren't as good but the fruit and vegetables are good.
I'd like it to stay. There should be more to make it more accessable for people whilst the work is happening.
It's well organised.
I like the indoor market. I buy my diabetic products from there.
It's a waste of time - there's nothing on it. I've lived here all my life and it used to be great.
It's gone down - there aren't as many stalls and people don't seem as friendly as they used to be.
It's gone down. Not as many stalls and not the variety.
The stall holders are nice and chatty - if you can find an English one.
I want to see the market continue. I like markets - you get things like materials and haberdashery that you can't find elsewhere.
You can't park. Everywhere is jammed packed. The market is fine - it's just parking.
Not happy about the takeover - they say there will not be changes but I'm cynical.
It's fading - it needs something doing. More variety - if you don't want clothes or local produce you're lost.
I wouldn't like them to move it - I like it as it is. Parking is poor.
Don't agree with them moving it. It's going downhill because of the disagreement. A lot of the stall holders are packing up.
Think it's good for clothes and fruit and veg.
It's a good market. It's the best round here. Variety, friendly, generally helpful stall holders.
Just hope it stays. We should support it.
That pavement around the common - where was the public notice? It's pointless, ugly and has ruined the place.
Just like it to expand a little; more local stalls selling arts and crafts.
It's a valuable part of Sandbach life and I hope it stays. Concerned about the proposed changes. Hope road works aren't interfering with local businesses.
Nice variety.
Don't think there are as many stalls as there used to be which is a shame.
I object to it being privatised because I think a lot of them will pack up. The prices on the stalls will go up.
It's quite a good one; a good selection of stalls.

Penrith

Looks ok from what I've seen.
Only started looking - a bit small.
Not enough for younger people (for the over 50's).
More stalls with clothes for younger people.
Fairly good for a week day market.
More produce stalls.
Like it.
Local produce is awful on Tuesday market.
Need better stalls for younger people.
More clothes stalls.
More variety and could be cleaner.
Needs more individual stalls and local crafts.
It used to be bigger.
It's very small.
Not as good as it used to be.
More variety required.
Friendly and wide variety; not pushy.
More stalls required.
Happy with it the way it is.
Would like to see more stalls.
Needs more choice.
More stalls would be good.
It's traditional - has been affected by Saturday and Sunday markets.
Used to be very good - not now. The bedding stall has gone.
Could be improved - more variety.
It's cheaper.
Parking spaces.
Getting too small due to Saturday and Sunday market.
Should be bigger.
It's a bit small.
Nicely laid out and tidy; plenty of space between stalls.
It's always been here; somewhere to look around.
Could be bigger.
Small but good.
Ok in good weather.
Smaller than it used to be.
Too small; local produce looks terrible and expensive.
Not big enough or good enough. No food or local produce/
Would be better if bigger.
Could be bigger - Saturday market has not helped.
Is better than the past few weeks; weather helps.
Well stocked for it's size.
More stalls - not as good as it used to be.
Good for clothing for manual workers; CD stall good.
It has deteriorated in the past ten years.
It's better and bigger.
More local produce; breads, fruit and veg.
Hope they keep it here.
Small and pleasant; never too busy.

Padiham

It's useless really - they haven't anything to sell on it.
It could do with being covered - not enough stalls. If they put boards round to keep the wind off it would be better.
It's a bit cold and draughty - they should cover it in; it might bring more people in.
They need more stalls and should be open more days - a Sunday car boot sale?
They're nice, obliging people. It's a shame there aren't any more stalls.
Could do with more variation; very poor selection; not enough traders here.
They do a good job with what they've got - it's hard for them to earn a living here; the Council don't help - the rates must be too high.
It's a bit lacking - not enough variety. They should attract more people - the place is going down fast.
It's rubbish now - nobody's here. Friday is better but it doesn't say much for the town the way they've let it go.
I'd like to see more stalls - it would lift the town aswell.
They need traders/more variety. It's always the same - flowers,cards, jeans stalls etc.
It's not very good although it's not bad on a Friday.
More stalls so it would make more people support it - it's not a proper market any more.
They could make it a warmer place - something to stop the wind whistling round.
It's not the half it once was - the town isn't either. The Council don't seem to care what's happening.
It's too cold - you can go into the supermarkets where it's warm. Cover it in and it would be warmer and encourage more people to shop here.
They should cover it in. It's too small and people don't use it. Today there's nothing in - only cards and flowers.
It's rubbish - it's a waste of time. There's more stalls on the flea market. It should be covered in.
There's a good vegetable shop on Friday but not on a Wednesday - could do with more. Offer a good variety - all the empty stalls are depressing.
Not much going on here - the cards are good value. Attract more people by making it a better place to visit.
It's a shame all the stalls aren't full - it's a niice atmosphere when there's more people here and it should be encouraged.
It's a shame more people don't sell things on it. It could be pleasant with more people on it.
The people are friendly. It's not very attractive. Unless you're local you don't know where it is - it could do with brightening up.
On Friday it's a lot better - they have more stalls.
I'd use it all the time if there was more stalls - people should be encouraged to use it. The overall Padiham outlook needs upgrading - people would travel to a good market.
It's a shame that it's gone downhill over the last few years.
I wish there were more stalls.
Where has it gone? There's only three stalls here.
There's nothing in Padiham to bring shoppers here - the market certainly doesn't.
I feel that there should be more stalls; maybe a farm stall or maybe a farmers' market once a month.
It's a shame it's not better used.
There's nothing here to encourage people to come to this market
A pity it's not better organised and better promoted.
Could do with more stalls and and more products.
It's a pity there's not more stalls.
Wish there was a few more stalls selling a better variety of things.
It should be covered in.
Needs to be under cover and it might attract more people.
The Council should spend some money on the market becasue the people in Padiham really need it.
The stalls that are there are reasonable but it's really not busy enough.
If it wasn't for the fish van I wouldn't come here - there's nothing to come for.
Could do with being busier and more stalls.
Not enough stalls.
Not a lot on - only three stalls.
There's only a few stalls - it could be better.
It's a shame it's not used more than it is.
Just needs more stalls - has gone down considerably.
We could do with more stalls and under cover.

Appendix 2: Consultations and Consultees

1. Our starting point in the 6 case study towns was to contact Market Town Initiative Project Officers. They in turn identified organisations and individuals re the operation of local traditional markets. All those contacted are listed below.

2. In addition we spoke to traders standing at each market – including traders operating from market halls. A structured interview posed questions on: where they were based? What they sold? How wares were sourced? Support from the local authority? How long/often they have stood at the market? Trends in trade at the market and others at which they stand? Who are their customers? We managed speak to between 5 and 10 traders at each market on the main market days. We also consulted chambers of trade and shop keepers to get their views on the impact of and operation of markets. The qualitative information obtained is reported in each of the case studies.

Consultees

Helen Beech Sandbach Market Town Initiative
John France Sandbach Partnership/Chamber of Trade
Sue Hannah Cockermouth Partnership
Steve Heaton North West Development Agency
Pauline Herbert Cumbria Rural Enterprise Agency
Colin Hill Burnley Borough Council
Richard Jackson Clitheroe the Future
Mark Jinkinson Padiham Town Council
Barry Johnson Congleton Borough Council
Jayne Kendall Ulverston Market Town Initiative
Angela Knowles Lake District Peninsulas Tourism Partnership
David Mcgifford South East Cheshire Enterprise
Ann Neston Eden District Council
Terry Parkinson National Market Traders’ Federation
Judith Quigley Penrith Market Town Partnership
Ann Rankin South Lakeland District Council
James Russell Ribble Valley Borough Council
Ralph Spours Ulverston Traders’ Association
Maureen Stewart South Lakeland District Council
Jane Sylvester Ribble Valley Borough Council
Frank Watson Ribble Valley Borough Council
Karin Wilson Initiative Burnley
Eddie Woodthorpe Allerdale Borough Council

Appendix 3: References

Clitheroe Healthcheck. 2002
Clitheroe the Future: Action Plan. 2002
Clitheroe the Future: Household Survey Report. May 2002
Cockermouth Partnership Action Plan. Feb 2003
Countryside Agency Market Towns Initiative. John Burns presentation to an Oxford
Brookes seminar 2002
Economic Benefits of Farmers’ Markets. Friends of the Earth Sept 2000
Local Food and Market Towns – C Brown, L Nicol, and J Shorten. Paper prepared
for the Countryside Agency for discussion at the meeting of the Market Towns
Advisory Forum on 21 November 2002.
Market Towns Initiative: evaluating the first year. CRN 60 Countryside Agency 2003
Our Countryside: the Future. HMSO 2000
Padiham Life Healthcheck. May 2002
Padiham Life Action Plan. May 2002
Penrith and Hinterland Market Town Health Check and Action Plan. Sep 2002
Rural Delivery Review. DEFRA 2003
Rural Economies of the North West - Countryside Agency. 2004
Rural Economies Report. Policy and Innovation Unit, Cabinet Office 1999
Rural Economies: Stepping Stones to Healthier Futures. Countryside Agency 2003
Sandbach Healthcheck Report. June 2002
Sandbach Action Plan. June 2002
Ulverston and Low Furness Strategy and Action Plan. Nov 2002

Market Town Report Links.

Case Study: Clitheroe	Case Study: Penrith	Case Study: Sandbach
Case Study: Cockermouth	Case Study: Padiham	Case Study: Ulverston
-	Market Town Report	-

You can download the Countryside Agency Market Town Report complete in Adobe Acrobat PDF Format 6.7MB.
(Right click on the link and choose 'save target as' from the menu)