COMMENTS ON NUTTER'S RUBLE/DOLLAR RATIOS

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP71T00730R000100060131-1
• Release Decision: RIFPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 2
• Document Creation Date: December 21, 2016
• Sequence Number: 131
• Content Type: REPORT

Approved For Release 2008/08/07: CIA-RDP71T00730R000100060131-1
Comments on Mattel's Rule/dollar Fatios
tion
We are satisfied with our Soviet-US comparison of construction gypsum.
Ours differs with Mutter's because he has compared a ruble price for a
final product with a US price for unprocessed gypsum. In the US, unprocessed
is much cheaper than processed gypsum. Nutter's dollar price is derived from
value and quantity data as measured by mine shipments, sales, or marketable
production for gypsum. While the data cited by Sutter l/ may not have been
exactly clear as to stage of processing, Table 950, p. 740 of the same source,
clearly identifies the data as crude gypsum.
On the other hand Nutter may have been looking for a crude gypsum dollar
price. The source of his ruble price Is not explicit about the Soviet
product. / However, his source relates the price to construction gypsum,
GOST 125-#1. When this GOST (State standards) is examined, / it is clear
that the Soviet product is a finished, rather than a crude one.
Asbestos Shingles
Mutter is comparing a Soviet price for roofing shingles with an average
US price for siding spdngles, clapboard, and roofing shingles. The raw US
data from which Mutter estimates his price is given in terms of squares.
The Department of Commerce advises that a square represents 100 ft of area
covered rather than 100 ft2 of shingles. It is impossible from the data
cited to move from the US price per 100 ft to price per 1,000 pieces. We
o unable to determine comparability with respect to size of shingles.
We have rechecked our can arieon and we are comparing asbestos siding
in the two countries and have adjusted for comparability in dimensions. The
ratio for the specific items being compared appears to be valid.
ltural Gas
It appears that utter Ts Soviet price for natural g
follows:
Average price of coal per metric ton
was estimated as
74.2 Rubles
Factor for converting metric tons of coal to tons of
5)
Average price of coal per ton of standard fuel
(1t2'
.794275
93.1+ Rubles
4) Cost ratio for a ton of gas to a ton of coal .88
Avery ce of gas per ton of standard fuel
00x
82< 47 Rubles
Approved For Release 2008/08/07: CIA-RDP71T00730R000100060131-1
 Approved For Release 2008/08/07: CIA-RDP71T0073OR000100060131-1
6) ractor for converting tons to OOOm3 of Mtt rel. gas 1
7) price of natural San per 0003 (5 x 6
05 F lees
The method used by CIA was the seme as Mutter's. In 1, above, CIA
used an estimated ruble value for the cos of prroodue coal tithe t~ # .
or coal. LWW W V V-W y *..& ..,...,. ~ . --' - --
t Mutter and CIA results is traceable to item 4,
i
n
mey car differences
above. nutter used a gas-coal cost ratio of .883 and CIA Used a ratio of
6.66 -? both taken from the saw source. V Mutter's ratio is based on the
coat of producing gas plus a transportation charge for 1, 300 km relative to
the cost of producing coal exclusive of transportation charges. CIA's
ratio is based on the coat of producing at the veil relative to the
cost of producing coal at the pit. The source clearly points out that the
st of ctaal. and that gas
cost of gas is 6.6 lower than the DOBICHA co
~: ---.. ..
f 4%-1 m ., if it. is
o
---
Is uzai-L mJ4U.ia.w---J - ..y - cost for gas Including
transported 1,200 - 1, ka. For exazle, the cost transportation for 1, 300 km is 582.5 relative to the Pit cost of 00 61 of
6,. V. ( 883)
Since fitter cored the ruble price to a price for gas at the
well, he was obviously striving for a well bead ruble price which was not
obtained from his calculation. CIA's calculation yields an estimated veil
bead ruble price which was ocopred to a US veil bead price.
Mutter used the 6.66 cost conversion ratio, bis price for natural
woo have been very similar to CIA's. If we were constructing R/
ratios today, we would adjust the ruble price by 5-10 percent to take into
ot available at the
opt profit. 'The data for this a Ustment were n
study was undertaken.
Stietica1 Abstra+at of the US, 1957, P- 722.
vocbnik teen na stroitel' materialy i oborudovs ! p cow,
re=AA Staaadarty. lcbi ri*1 , be
betona, Moscow, 1 , p? 12.
1956o no 1, p. 23.
Approved For Release 2008/08/07: CIA-RDP71T0073OR000100060131-1