EC 2012 Profile Construction T & E Breakout Report Updated ... · 2012 “e lectrical contractor magazine profile ” database report electrical contractors: their purchase and lease

2012 “ELECTRICAL CONTRACTOR MAGAZINE PROFILE”

DATABASE REPORT

ELECTRICAL

CONTRACTORS: THEIR PURCHASE AND LEASE OF:

CONSTRUCTION SITE TOOLS AND EQUIPMENT HAND TOOLS

POWER TOOLS PIPE THREADERS/BENDERS/CUTTERS

DIGGING AND BORING EQUIPMENT AERIAL LIFTS AND SCAFFOLDING

JOBSITE SAFETY EQUIPMENT PERSONAL PROTECTIVE EQUIPMENT/APPAREL

INCLUDING ESTIMATES BASED ON THE 2010 COUNTY BUSINESS PATTERNS

A SPECIAL REPORT PREPARED BY RENAISSANCE RESEARCH & CONSULTING, INC.

FOR:

2012 ELECTRICAL CONTRACTOR MAGAZINE

BETHESDA, MD 20814

NOVEMBER 2012 11-19-12

Draft 11-19-12

TABLE OF CONTENTS KEY FINDINGS .............................................................................. 2

METHODOLOGY .......................................................................... 8 Methodology Notes ............................................................................................................ 9

DETAILED FINDINGS ................................................................ 10

Tool and Equipment Purchase and Lease Overview ...................................................... 10 Percent Who Purchase Different Types of Tools and Equipment ................................... 10 Purchase in Multiple Categories ...................................................................................... 12 Percent Who Lease/Rent Different Types of Tools and Equipment ................................ 15 Lease/Rental in Multiple Categories ................................................................................ 16

Tools: Purchase and Spending ......................................................................................... 18 Hand Tools Purchase Behavior ........................................................................................ 18 Spending Estimates and Projections: Hand Tools ........................................................... 19 Power Tools Purchase Behavior ...................................................................................... 20 Spending Estimates and Projections: Power Tools .......................................................... 21 Pipe Threaders/Benders/Cutters Purchase Behavior ........................................................ 22 Spending Estimates and Projections: Pipe Threaders/Bender/Cutters ............................. 23

Construction Site Equipment ............................................................................................ 24 Aerial Lifts/Scaffolding Purchase and Lease Behavior ................................................... 25 Digging/Boring Equipment Purchase and Lease Behavior .............................................. 29 Spending Estimates and Projections: Digging/Boring Equipment .................................. 32 Jobsite Safety Equipment Purchase Behavior .................................................................. 33 Spending Estimates and Projections: Jobsite Safety Equipment ..................................... 35 Personal Protective Equipment/Apparel Purchase Behavior ........................................... 36 Spending Estimates and Projections: Personal Protective Equipment/Apparel ............... 38

Draft 11-19-12

2

KEY FINDINGS PURCHASE AND LEASE BEHAVIOR OVERVIEW: About three-quarters of electrical contractors (77%) reported purchasing Tools and Equipment in 2011. While still respectable, this is a significant decline from 2009, when 88% of electrical contracting firms made purchases of one or more types of tools and equipment. Hand Tools and Power Tools continue to top the list. Given the poor economic environment, it is not surprising that purchase was significantly lower in 2011 vs. 2009. Of the twelve categories tested in 2011 and 2009, nine posted declines and three remained unchanged. None of the categories posted an increase vs. two years ago. • The three areas that remained statistically unchanged are: Labeling and Documentation, Aerial

Lifts and Scaffolding and Digging and Boring equipment. These were also the areas that either increased or remained unchanged between 2009 and 2007.

• Hand Tools, Power Tools, Electrical Testers and Multimeters, Phones, Personal Protective Equipment, Jobsite Safety Equipment, Pipe Threaders, Benders, Cutters, Software and LAN, Teledata, Low-Voltage equipment all posted declines in 2011 vs. 2009.

As has been the case in earlier Profile studies, in 2011, the bulk of electrical contractors made purchases in multiple categories (72% in 2011); however, this represents a significant decline from 2009 when 83% made multiple category purchases. • Purchase in ‘only 1’, 2-3 or 4-5 categories is statistically unchanged compared to two

years ago. However, compared with two years ago, a significantly lower percentage of electrical contractors made purchases in 6+ categories. This change, by itself, accounts for all of the significant differences in 2011 vs. 2009

. o Further, it does not appear that the shortfall in the ‘6+ category’ moved to a

different purchase level category. This, in turn, resulted in an overall decline in “any” purchase and in purchase in “multiple categories. In contrast, there was a significant increase in the percentage that made purchases in 6+ categories in 2009 compared with 2007.

Lease Behavior: 43% of electrical contracting firms leased/rented equipment in 2011. This is a significant decline versus 57%, the level recorded for 2009. As has been the case in recent Profile studies, fewer electrical contractors obtain tools and equipment through lease/rental (43%) than through outright purchase (77%).

• Aerial Lifts/Scaffolding and Digging/Boring Equipment continue to be the two categories that are leased/rented most often. In fact, these equipment types are far more likely to be obtained by lease/rental than through purchase.

o Compared to two years ago, lease rental of Aerial Lifts/Scaffolding declined significantly while lease/rental of Digging/Boring equipment is statistically unchanged.

Draft 11-19-12

3

KEY FINDINGS: TOOLS

Hand Tools 69% of respondent firms made a purchase in a purchase in the Hand Tools category in 2011, spending an average of about $1,500. Purchase levels were higher among smaller firms and/or firms that work primarily on Residential projects. However, average spending among those making a purchase was higher among larger firms and/or those who work primarily on CII projects. Purchase of Hand Tools declined significantly vs. 2009, when it was 82%. Although spending declined sizably from 2009, when it was over $4,000 on average, the difference is not statistically significant due to the large standard deviation in 2009, indicating that there was a very wide confidence band around the 2009 average spending. Based on the survey, ELECTRICAL CONTRACTOR magazine estimates that the universe of electrical contractors spent in the range of $35.5 million to $57.9 million on Hand Tools in

2011 at the 90% level of confidence.ϒϒϒϒ

Power Tools 64% of electrical contracting firms reported making a 2011 purchase of Power Tools and spent an average of about $4,630. There is no difference in purchase level by company size in 2011. However, purchase spending was significantly higher among large firms. Purchase of Power Tools levels declined significantly from 2009 among the total sample when it was 76%. Average spending is statistically unchanged from 2009 among the total sample and among each of the subgroups (number of employees and primary type of construction), although it was observationally substantially higher among firms with 10+ employees in 2011 compared to 2009. Based on the survey, ELECTRICAL CONTRACTOR magazine estimates that the universe of electrical contractors spent in the range of $53 million to $82.8 million on Power Tools in 2011 at the 90% level of confidence. ү

ϒϒϒϒ As will be noted in the Methodology section, we believe that the actual spending is closer to the top of the range, or possibly even higher because this mean does not include legitimate spending of over $20,000 by a few of the companies in the survey. This was done in order to achieve a tighter confidence band for the estimate.

Draft 11-19-12

4

Pipe Threaders, Benders and Cutters 25% of electrical contracting firms purchased Pipe Threaders/Benders/Cutters in 2011 and spent an average of about $1,400. Large firms are far more likely to both purchase Pipe Threaders/ Benders/Cutters and to spend more on their average purchase compared with smaller firms. (This was also the case two years ago). Not surprisingly, this finding carries over to firms that work primarily on CII projects, since CII projects are more likely to be performed by larger firms. Purchase of Pipe Threaders/Benders/Cutters posted a significant decline from 35% in 2009 to 25% in 2011. Although the average amount spent is observationally substantially lower in 2011 compared to 2009, when it was over $7,000, we are not able to say that it is a statistically significant difference because the standard deviation was very large in 2009, indicating that there was a very wide confidence band around the 2009 average spending. Based on the survey, ELECTRICAL CONTRACTOR magazine estimates that the universe of electrical contractors spent in the range of $14 million to about $ 34 million on Pipe Threaders, Benders and Cutters in 2011 at the 90% level of confidence.

Draft 11-19-12

5

KEY FINDINGS: CONSTRUCTION SITE EQUIPMENT Construction Site Equipment – specifically Aerial Lifts and Scaffolding and Digging/Boring Equipment -- is one of the few categories where equipment is more likely to be obtained through lease/rental than through outright purchase. Aerial Lifts and Scaffolding In 2011, 29% of firms obtained Aerial Lifts and Scaffolding through lease/rental compared with 13% of firms that made a category purchase. Average spending was about $5,600 for category purchase and about $7,600 for category lease. Large firms are significantly more likely to lease in this category and strongly directionally more likely to make a category purchase. However, average purchase spending was higher among firms with 1-9 employees vs. those with 10+, while average lease spending was significantly higher among larger (10+ employee) firms. Firms that work primarily on CII projects are more likely to obtain Aerial Lifts and Scaffolding both through lease and through purchase and to spend more on average on purchases compared to firms that work primarily on Residential projects. Trended Purchase: There was only one change between 2011 and 2009: purchase levels declined for firms with 10+ employees. The sample sizes of those making a purchase are too small to reliably report significant differences in average purchase spending by subgroup. Trended Lease/Rental: The percentage leasing or renting Aerial Lifts/Scaffolding declined significantly among firms with 1-9 employees, among firms with 10+ employees and/or among that work primarily on CII projects. However, average lease/rental spending is statistically unchanged for each of these groups compared to 2009. LEASE/RENTAL: Based on the survey, ELECTRICAL CONTRACTOR magazine estimates that the universe of electrical contractors spent in the range of about $36 million to $70 million

on the lease/rental of Aerial Lifts and Scaffolding in 2011. ϒϒϒϒ PURCHASE: Based on the survey, ELECTRICAL CONTRACTOR magazine estimates that the universe of electrical contractors spent in the range of about $32.6 million to $69.2 million on the purchase of Aerial Lifts and Scaffolding. • However, the sample base of those purchasing Aerial Lifts/Scaffolding equipment is small

and the purchase spending estimates should be used with caution.


Draft 11-19-12

6

KEY FINDINGS: CONSTRUCTION SITE EQUIPMENT Digging Boring Equipment In 2011, 27% of electrical contracting firms obtained Digging/Boring Equipment through lease/rental and 9% through purchase. In 2011, the average spending for purchases of Digging/Boring Equipment was about $28,000 and average spending for leases was about $6,500. Electrical contractors have been spending more, on average, for purchases than for leases in this category since at least 2003. Larger firms are more likely than smaller firms to obtain Digging and Boring equipment – either through purchase or through lease -- and to spend more on average on this type of equipment compared with smaller firms. There is no difference by primary type of construction in the likelihood to lease or purchase Digging and Boring equipment. However, average spending for both purchase and lease was higher among firms working primarily on CII projects compared to their counterparts that work primarily on Residential projects. Trended Lease/Rental: The percentage that leased or rented in this category also did not change significantly between 2011 and 2009 by either company size or by primary type of work. Average lease/rental spending in this category rose significantly among firms with 10+ employees. However, this increase was not enough to move the average spending of the total sample since the much larger group of firms with 1-9 employees did not also spend significantly more in 2011 than in 2009. Trended Purchase: The percentage that made a purchase of Digging and Boring equipment did not change significantly between 2011 and 2009 by either company size or by primary type of work. The sample sizes of those making a purchase are too small to reliably report significant differences in average purchase spending. LEASE/RENTAL: Based on the survey, ELECTRICAL CONTRACTOR magazine estimates that the universe of electrical contractors spent in the range of about $21.8 million to about $47

million on the lease/rental of Digging and Boring equipment in 2011. ϒϒϒϒ PURCHASE: Based on the survey, ELECTRICAL CONTRACTOR magazine estimates that the universe of electrical contractors spent in the range of about $17 million to about $59 million on the purchase of Digging and Boring equipment in 2011. ү • However, the sample base of those purchasing Digging /Boring equipment is very small

and the purchase spending estimates should be used with caution.


Draft 11-19-12

7

Jobsite Safety Equipment 29% of electrical contracting firms reported a 2011 purchase of Jobsite Safety Equipment. On average, respondent firms spent $2,800 on Jobsite Safety Equipment. Comparing the latest survey to the 2009 results indicates a statistically significant decline in purchase level but statistically unchanged average spending among those making a purchase. This was also the case two years ago. In 2011, purchase levels and average spending was higher among larger companies. While purchase levels were also higher among firms that work primarily on CII construction compared with those that perform primarily Residential construction, there is no significant difference in the amount spent among those making a purchase by primary type of construction. Significantly fewer electrical contractors from firms with 10+ employees and/or those who work primarily on CII projects bought Jobsite Safety Equipment in 2011 than in 2009. There is no statistically significant difference in spending over time by subgroups (number of employees or primary type of work performed). Based on the survey, ELECTRICAL CONTRACTOR magazine estimates that the universe of electrical contractors spent in the range of about $16 million to about $39 million on Jobsite

Safety Equipment in 2011 at the 90% level of confidence. ϒϒϒϒ Personal Protective Equipment 42% of firms reported a 2011 purchase of Personal Protective Equipment/Apparel. On average, respondent firms spent about $2,950 on Personal Protective Equipment and Apparel; both are statistically unchanged vs. two years ago. Average spending per purchase was higher among larger companies and/or firms that work primarily on CII construction rather smaller firms and/or those that primarily work on Residential construction. There are no significant differences in purchase levels by number of employees or by primary type of construction. Fewer electrical contractors in large firms and/or firms that work primarily on CII projects made a category purchase in 2011 compared with 2009. In 2011, average spending by firms with 10+ employees, although close to $10,000 among firms that made a purchase, is not significantly different from 2009, when it was about $2,700, due to small base sizes and a large standard deviation in the 2011 results. Based on the survey, ELECTRICAL CONTRACTOR magazine estimates that the universe of electrical contractors spent in the range of $23 million to about $ 39 million on Personal Protective Equipment and Apparel in 2011 at the 90% level of confidence. ү


Draft 11-19-12

8

METHODOLOGY

This report focuses on electrical contractors’ purchase, lease and spending for tools and construction site equipment and their ownership, purchase and lease of vehicles in 2011. Please note that the Profile study is conducted in even years (2012 or 2010) and asks about the previous year (2011 or 2009).

The survey was conducted by postal mail and via the Internet among a random sample of ELECTRICAL CONTRACTOR subscribers. The survey was fielded in March 2012 and as of the deadline for the July 2012 article, 1024 completed surveys were received-- 508 via the Internet and 516 via postal mail. Each respondent who received the survey via the Internet was sent two follow-up e-mails. However, follow-up mailings were not made to non-responders in the postal mail sample. An incentive was offered for participation in the survey: For each completed survey, ELECTRICAL CONTRACTOR magazine would contribute $5 to charity. For trending over time, assuming samples of ~1024, the margin of error is 3.5% for percentage differences around 50% (i.e., the difference between 50% and 46.5% would be significant at the 90% confidence level; any less of a difference would not be). A portion of the questions in the 2012 Profile Survey were given to only a part of the full sample in order to keep the overall survey shorter and more manageable. The findings on Tools and Equipment are based on 234 respondents, while the Vehicles section is based on 253 respondents. The margin of error on these samples is about 7.5 +/- at the 90% level of confidence. For this report, the estimates of market size are based on the 2010 County Business Patterns (CBP).

This research was conducted by New York, NY-based Renaissance Research & Consulting, Inc. (www.renaiss.com), an independent marketing research firm that has, as one of its specialties, market research for the construction industry.

Draft 11-19-12

9

Methodology Notes

The All-Industry Spending Estimates are being reported in total only rather than being reported separately for firms with 1-9 employees and 10+ employees to increase the stability and reliability of the projections.

• Reason for the Change: As in the past, the tools and equipment spending is asked of only about one-quarter of the total sample. This is done to keep the length of the survey more manageable. However, the poor economy has resulted in fewer purchases or leases on which the projections are based. In our judgment, the resulting base sizes are too small to be further split into firms with 1-9 and 10+ employees.

The projections will be based only on those who spent but more than zero but under $20,001.

• Reason for the Change: This is being done to dampen the effect that outliers will have on the mean or average, so that the projections will have a smaller confidence band around them.

• Because legitimate spending is being excluded from the mean, the All-Industry Spending Estimates are conservative. That is, they are likely to be at the high end of the range, and possibly even higher than the top end of the range, but we cannot peg the upper bound with any degree of certainty

Because of the change in how the results are reported, these estimates cannot be compared with those from two years ago.

Draft 11-19-12

10

DETAILED FINDINGS Tool and Equipment Purchase and Lease Overview

Percent Who Purchase Different Types of Tools and Equipment

About three-quarters of electrical contractors (77%) reported purchasing Tools and Equipment in 2011. This is a significant decline from 2009, when 88% of electrical contractors made purchases of one or more types of tools and equipment. Hand Tools and Power Tools continue to top the list. • However, given the poor economic environment, it is not surprising that purchase was

significantly lower in 2011 than in 2009.

• Of the twelve categories tested in 2011 and 2009 nine posted declines and three remained unchanged. None of the categories posted an increase vs. two years ago.

o The three areas that remained statistically unchanged are: Labeling and

Documentation, Aerial Lifts and Scaffolding and Digging and Boring equipment. These were also the areas that either increased or remained unchanged between 2009 and 2007.

o Hand Tools, Power Tools, Electrical Tester and Multimeters, Phones, Personal

Protective Equipment, Jobsite Safety Equipment, Pipe Threaders, Benders, Cutters, Software and LAN, Teledata, Low-Voltage equipment all posted declines in 2011 vs. 2009.

• The category of Tablets or Portable Reading Devices was first included in the 2012 Profile

Study and cannot be trended.

Draft 11-19-12

11

PURCHASE OF TOOLS AND EQUIPMENT In 2011 In 2009 In 2007 Total Total Total (234) (274) (278) % % % “Any” Purchase … 77 < 88 < 94 Hand Tools 69 < 82 < 88 Power Tools 64 < 76 < 82 Electrical Testers, Multimeters 47 < 66 > 59

Phones: Smart/Mobile/Cell or Two-Way Radios 42 < 53 59

Personal Protective Equipment/ Apparel (Clothing, Boots, etc.) 41 < 50 --

Jobsite Safety Equipment 28 < 36 < 45 Labeling & Documentation 27 = 32 33

Pipe Threaders, Benders, Cutters 25 < 35 32

Software (e.g. CAD, Estimating, Procurement, etc) 16 < 27 30

Tablets or Portable Reading Devices 10 NA NA LAN, Teledata, Low Voltage 12 < 18 < 24 Aerial Lifts/Scaffolding 13 = 16 > 11

Digging/Boring Equipment 9 = 11 10 Bolded numbers denote and arrows significant differences at the 90% level of confidence.

Draft 11-19-12

12

Purchase in Multiple Categories

As has been the case in earlier Profile studies, in 2011, the bulk of electrical contractors made purchases in multiple categories (72% in 2011); however, this represents a significant decline from 2009 when 83% made multiple category purchases.

• Purchase in ‘only 1’, 2-3 or 4-5 categories is statistically unchanged compared to two years ago. However, compared with two years ago, a significantly lower percentage of electrical contractors made purchases in 6+ categories. This change, by itself, accounts for all of the significant differences in 2011 vs. 2009.

• Further, it does not appear that the shortfall in the 6+ category moved to a different purchase level category. This, in turn, resulted in an overall decline in “any” purchase and in purchase in “multiple categories. In contrast, there was a significant increase in the percentage that made purchases in 6+ categories in 2009 compared with 2007, suggesting that purchasing was more concentrated – fewer firms making purchases in more categories.

PURCHASE IN MULTIPLE CATEGORIES

In 2011 In 2009 In 2007

Total Total Total (234) (274) (278) % % % Any Purchase 77 < 88 < 94 Purchased Only 1 Category 5 5 4 Purchase in Multiple Categories 72 < 83 < 90 Purchased in 2 – 3 Categories 17 18 < 24

Purchase in 4+ Categories 55 < 65 66 Purchased in 4 – 5 Categories 24 22 < 30 Purchased in 6+ Categories 31 < 43 > 36

Bolded numbers denote significant differences at the 90% level of confidence in the direction of the arrow.

Draft 11-19-12

13

Purchase in Multiple Categories, continued By Number of Employees: Overall, 55% of electrical contractors made 2011 purchases in 4 or more tools and equipment categories. As in the past, larger firms are more likely than smaller firms to have made purchases in 4 or more categories, particularly to have made purchases in 6+ categories. .

� About one-half of electrical contracting firms with 1-9 employees report having made 2011 purchases in 4 or more categories.

� 65% of electrical contracting firms with 10+ employees report having made 2011 purchases in 4 or more categories.

� In 2011, a higher percentage of firms that work in Residential construction purchased in 4 or more categories. (In 2009 and generally in previous studies, there was more a similarity between larger firms and that work primarily in CII rather than those that work primarily on Residential projects.)

In 2011 Work Primarily In Residential CII Total 1-9 10+ (97) (103) (234) (182) (52) % % % % % Any Purchase 77 78 75 78 75

Purchased Only 1 Category 5 6> 0 4 5 Purchase in Multiple Categories 72 72 75 75 = 70 Purchased in 2 – 3 Categories 17 20> 10 15 = 22 Purchase in 4+ Categories 55 52 <65 60> 48 Purchased in 4 – 5 Categories 24 24 21 33> 15 Purchased in 6+ Categories 31 28 <44 27 = 33

Draft 11-19-12

14

Trended Results

• As noted, compared with two years ago, a significantly lower percentage of electrical contractors made purchases in 6+ categories. This is the case among the total sample as well as among both firms with 1-9 employees as well as those with 10+ employees.

� Purchase in 4+ categories also declined among the total and among firms with 1-9 employees

� The difference among firms with 10+ employees is just short of not significance on this base size.

PURCHASE in MULTIPLE CATEGORIES (By Firm Size) Total Sample 1-9 Employees 10+ Employees 2011 2009 2007 2011 2009 2007 2011 2009 2007 (234) (274) (278) (182) (205) (192) (52) (67) (85)

% % % % % % % % Any Purchase 77 <88 <94 78 <86 <94 75 <94 94 Only 1 Category 5 5 4 6 5 4 0 3 2 In Multiple ategories 72 <83 <90 72 <79 <89 75 <91 91 In 2 – 3 Categories 17 18 <24> 20 19 <32> 10 13= 8 In 4+ Categories 55 <65 66 52 <62 =57 65▲ ▲78 =83 In 4 – 5 Categories 24 22 <30 24 26 <34 21> 10 <21 In 6+ Categories 31 <43> 36 28 <36> 23 44 <68 =62

Checked and tested on 8-31-12

▲

Not significant on this base size

Comment [MSOffice1]: 1-9 for 2009 vs. 2007 stat tested on 9-12-10

Comment [MSOffice2]: 10+ for 2009 vs. 2007 stat tested on 9-12-10

Draft 11-19-12

15

Percent Who Lease/Rent Different Types of Tools and Equipment 43% of electrical contractors leased/rented equipment in 2011. This is a significant decline versus 57%, the level recorded for 2009. As has been the case in recent Profile studies, fewer electrical contractors obtain tools and equipment through lease/rental (43%) than through outright purchase (77%). Aerial Lifts/Scaffolding and Digging/Boring Equipment continue to be the two categories that are leased/rented most often. In fact, these equipment types are far more likely to be obtained by lease/rental than through purchase.

• Compared to two years ago, lease rental of Aerial Lifts/Scaffolding declined significantly while lease/rental of Digging/Boring equipment is statistically unchanged.

o The lease/rental of Electrical Testers/Multimeters also posted a significant

decline from an already low percentage, 5% to 2%.

LEASE/ RENTAL OF TOOLS AND EQUIPMENT

In 2011 In 2009 In 2007

Total Total Total (234) (274) (278) % % % “Any” Lease/Rental… 43 <57 60 Aerial Lifts/Scaffolding 29 < 46 46 Digging/Boring Equipment 27 29 29 Power Tools 10 9 < 18 Hand Tools 5 4 < 11 Phones: Smart/Mobile/Cell or Two-Way Radios 3 6 < 10 Pipe Threaders, Benders, Cutters 3 6 6 Jobsite Safety Equipment 3 6 5 Electrical Testers, Multimeters 2 <5 6 LAN, Teledata, Low Voltage 0.9 2 2 Labeling & Documentation 0.9 2 1 Personal Protective Equipment/Apparel (Clothing, Boots, Equipment) 0.9 2 -- Software 0.4 1 1 Tablets 0 -- --

Bolded numbers denote significant differences at the 90% level of confidence in the direction of the arrow

Draft 11-19-12

16

Lease/Rental in Multiple Categories

Among the total sample, 25% of electrical contractors leased or rented in two or more categories. This is statistically unchanged from two years ago when it was 30%.

LEASE/RENTAL IN MULTIPLE CATEGORIES

2011 2009 2007

(234) (274) (278) % % % Any Lease/Rental 43 <57 60

Only 1 Category 18 <27 22

Lease/Rent in Multiple/2+ Categories 25

30

<38

In 2 Categories 14 19 20 In 3+ Categories 11 11 <18

Checked and tested on 8-31-12 Larger electrical contracting companies are more likely than smaller electrical contractors to have leased/rented tools and equipment at all (any) and also in several categories. As noted in the past, we believe that this is due to the larger companies being more involved in larger, more sophisticated projects that require more different types of tools and equipment.

• Only about 10% of the smallest companies (with 1-9 employees) leased/rented in 3+ categories compared to about 20% of firms with 10+ employees.

• There is only one difference by primary type of construction. A higher percentage of firms that work primarily on CII projects have rented in 3 + categories compared to their primarily Residential counterparts. None of the other differences are statistically significant.

In 2011 Work Primarily In Total 1-9 10+ Residential CII (234) (182) (52) (97) (103) % % % % %

Any Lease/Rental 43 40 <54 37 =45

Only 1 Category 18 20 14 19 19 Lease/Rent in Multiple/2+ Categories 25 20 <40 18 = 26 In 2 Categories 14 12 <21 12 13 In 3+ Categories 11 8 <19 6 <13

Draft 11-19-12

17

Lease/Rental in Multiple Categories, continued

Trended: There are only a few significant differences shown below:

• Any lease/rental declined among the total sample and among firms with 1-9 and with 10+ employees.

• Lease/rental in only a single category declined among the total sample and among firms with 10+ employees.

LEASE/RENTAL in MULTIPLE CATEGORIES (By Firm Size)

Total Sample 1-9 Employees 10+ Employees

2011 2009 2007 2011 2009 2007 2011 2009 2007

(234) (274) (278) (182) (205) (192) (52) (67) (85)

% % % % % % % % %

Any Lease/Rental 43 <57 60 40 <50 52 54 <79 79

Only 1 Category 18 <27 22 20 = 26 22 14 <28 22 Lease/Rent in Multiple/2+ Categories 25 30 <38 20 24 29 40 = 51 56

In 2 Categories 14 19 20 12 16 18 21 = 30 22

In 3+ Categories 11 11 <18 8 8 11 19 21 <34 Bolded numbers denote significant differences at the 90% level of confidence in the direction of the arrow.

• Any lease/rental and lease/rental in only a single category declined among CII firms compared with two years earlier.

LEASE/Rental IN MULTIPLE CATEGORIES

(By Primary Work Type) Work Primarily In

Total Sample Residential CII

2011 2009 2007 2011 2009 2007 2011 2009 2007 (234) (274) (278) (97) (108) (105) (103) (125) (142)

% % % % % % % % % Any Lease/Rental 43 <57 60 37 = 42 = 52 45 <69 68 Only 1 Category 18 <27 22 19 20 23 19 <36> 23 Lease/Rent in Multiple/2+ Categories 25 =30 <38 18 22 =29 26 =33 <46 In 2 Categories 14 19 20 12 15 15 13▲ 21 25 In 3+ Categories 11 11 <18 6 7 <14 13 13 <21

▲ Not significant on this base size Bolded numbers denote significant differences at the 90% level of confidence in the direction of the arrow.

Draft 11-19-12

18

Tools: Purchase and Spending

Hand Tools Purchase Behavior

69% of respondent firms made a purchase in a purchase in the Hand Tools category in 2011. Purchase of Hand Tools declined vs. 2009.

• In 2011, the average electrical contracting firm spent $1,494 on Hand Tools. Although this is a sizable drop from the average spending in 2009, we are not able to say that it is a statistically significant decline because the standard deviation was very large in 2009, indicating that there was a very wide confidence band around the 2009 average spending.

HAND TOOLS (2011 Vs. 2009)

In 2011 In 2009 In 2007 Total Total Total (234) (274) (278) Purchase Level 69% < 82% < 88%

Average Spending $1,494 = $4,359 = $3,955 SD 4886

N 161

• In 2011, small firms and/or firms working primarily in Residential construction were more likely than larger firms and/or firms working primarily on CII projects to have purchased Hand Tools.

• However, average spending was unsurprisingly higher among larger firms and/or those that work primarily on CII projects.

HAND TOOLS (2011)

Number of Employees Work Primarily In Total 1-9 10+ Residential CII (234) (182) (527) (108) (125)

Purchase Level 69% 71%> 60% 74%> 63%

Average Spending $1,494 $657 <$5718 $727 <$2116 SD 807 10942 1417 6966

N 130 31 72 65


Draft 11-19-12

19

Trended Results

Purchase levels dropped substantially and significantly in each of the sub-categories shown below

• Spending is statistically unchanged among small firms and/or firms that work primarily on Residential projects.

• Although there is a sizable drop from 2009 average spending in the case of firms with 10+ employees and/or firms that work primarily on CII projects, we are not able to say that it is a statistically significant decline because the standard deviation was very large in 2009, indicating that there was a very wide confidence band around the 2009 average spending.

HAND TOOLS (2011 vs. 2009) Work Primarily In… 1-9 10+ Residential CII 2011 2009 2011 2009 2011 2009 2011 2009 (182) (205) (52) (67) (97) (108) (103) (125) Purchase Level 71% <83% 60% <78% 74% <82% 64% <79% Average Spending $657 $837 $5,718 $11,346# $727 $695 $2,116 $9,017 SD 807 1286 10942 103603 1417 1522 6966 60937

N 130 170 31 52 72 88 65 99

# Estimate: Average spending for firms with 10+ employees was calculated differently than other averages in that we used a higher number for its base. This was done because a few electrical contractors had very high spending, which we judged to be legitimate based on their company size. However, it skewed the average so we recomputed the mean for firms with 10+ employees in the Hand Tools category.

Spending Estimates and Projections: Hand Tools

The 234 companies that responded to this portion of the survey, by themselves, reported spending about $190,000 on Hand Tools in 2011 (not shown).

Based on the survey, ELECTRICAL CONTRACTOR magazine estimates that the universe of electrical contractors spent in the range of $35.5 million to $57.9 million on Hand Tools in 2011 at the 90% level of confidence.

As noted in the Methodology section, we believe that the actual spending is closer to the top of the range, or possibly even higher because this mean does not include legitimate spending of over $20,000 by a few of the companies in the survey*. This was done in order to achieve a tighter confidence band for the estimate.

ALL INDUSTRY ESTIMATE OF 2011 SPENDING (EXCLUDING SPENDING OVER $20,000)

Excluding zero and Over $20,000

Average Spent Per Company

Percent of Respondent

Firms Buying

Number of EC Firms

(Source: 2010 CBP)

Projected Number Firms

Buying

Estimated Spending by

EC Firms

Hand Tools $ % Mean $958 69% 70,824 48,727 $46,680,382

Upper Estimate $1,187.35 69% 70,824 48,727 $57,855,899

Lower Estimate $728.65 69% 70,824 48,727 $35,504,864 * In this case, a single very large firm accounted for almost $70,000 of the total of the approximately $190,000 reported above.

Comment [MSOffice3]: Mean excluding zero (1- 60,000)

Draft 11-19-12

20

Power Tools Purchase Behavior

64% of electrical contracting firms reported making a 2011 purchase of Power Tools. This level represents a significant decline from the 2009 purchase level of 76%. In fact, as shown below, the percentage of electrical contractors purchasing Power Tools has been trending down since 2005.

• In 2009, the average spending was $4,627, which is statistically unchanged from the 2009 average spending of $3,136.

• 10% of electrical contractors reported leasing or renting Power Tools in 2011, statistically unchanged from two years ago. Because so few ecs leased or rented Power Tools, this report will not include spending or estimated category spending for lease/rental of Power Tools.

POWER TOOLS (2011 Trended) In 2011 In 2009 In 2007 In 2005 Total Total Total Total (234) (274) (278) (384)

PURCHASE Made a Purchase 64% < 76% <82% <90% Average Spending $4,627 = $3,136 <$9,333 > $5,758

LEASE

Leased/Rented 10% 9% < <18% = 20%

Purchase: There is no difference in purchase level by company size in 2011. However, purchase spending was significantly higher among large firms. The purchase level is significantly higher among firms working primarily on Residential projects, while there is no difference in the average amount spent by primary type of work performed. This finding is a little surprising because there is usually more of a similarity between large firms (in terms of purchase level and spending) with those working primarily on CII Projects.

POWER TOOLS (2011)

Number of Employees Work Primarily In Total 1-9 10+ Residential CII (234) (182) (52) (97) (103)

PURCHASE Made a Purchase 64% 64% 65% 72%> 56%

Average Spending $4,627 $1,052 <$20,551 $5,779 = $3,198 SD 27633 1118 62039 37999 7551

N 150 116 34 70 58


Draft 11-19-12

21

Trended Results Purchase levels declined among firms with 1-9 employees, among those with 10+ employees and/or among those that work primarily on CII projects. There is no change in purchase level among firms that work primarily on Residential construction. Although some of the differences shown below are quite large, we are not able to say that it is a statistically significant decline because the standard deviation was very large in 2011, indicating that there was a very wide confidence band around the 2011 average spending.

POWER TOOLS Work Primarily In… 1-9 10+ Residential CII 2011 2009 2011 2009 2011 2009 2011 2009 (182) (205) (52) (67) (97) (108) (103 (125)

Purchase Level 64% <73% 65% <82% 72% 73% 56% <77% Average Spending $1,052 = $1,289 $20,551 = $12,289 $5,779 =$1,026 $3,198 = $5,043 SD 1118 1311 62039 21,756 37999 1109 7551 13398

N 116 150 34 55 70 58 58 97

Spending Estimates and Projections: Power Tools

Spending Estimates and Projections: The 234 companies that responded to this portion of the survey, by themselves, reported spending about $555,000 on Power Tools in 2011 (not shown).

Based on the survey, ELECTRICAL CONTRACTOR magazine estimates that the universe of electrical contractors spent in the range of $53 million to $82.8 million on Power Tools in 2011 at the 90% level of confidence.

As noted in the Methodology section, we believe that the actual spending is closer to the top of the range, or possibly even higher because this mean does not include legitimate spending of over $20,000 by a few of the companies in the survey*. This was done in order to achieve a tighter confidence band for the estimate.





Firms Buying

Number of EC Firms

(Source: 2010 CBP)


Buying


EC Firms

Power Tools $ %

Mean $1,497 64% 70,824 45,398 $67,961,081

Upper Estimate $1,823.70 64% 70,824 45,398 $82,792,668

Lower Estimate $1,170.30 64% 70,824 45,398 $53,129,495 * In this case, three very large firms accounted for about $380,000 of the total of about $555,000 reported above.

Comment [MSOffice4]: Mean excluding zero (1- 60,000)

Draft 11-19-12

22

Pipe Threaders/Benders/Cutters Purchase Behavior

25% of electrical contracting firms purchased Pipe Threaders/Benders/Cutters in 2011, a statistically significant drop from 2009 when it was 35%. In 2011, the average electrical contracting firm spent $1,371, statistically unchanged from the $7,059 reported for 2009 purchases. Although this is a huge decline, we are not able to say that it is a statistically significant difference because the standard deviation was very large in 2009, indicating that there was a very wide confidence band around the 2009 average spending.

PIPE THREADERS/BENDERS/CUTTERS (2011 Trended) In 2011 In 2009 In 2007 Total Total Total (234) (274) (278)

PURCHASE Made a Purchase 25% <35% = 32%

Average Spending $1,371 = $7,059 = $6,225 SD 2211 37997

N 58 96

• Large firms are far more likely to both purchase Pipe Threaders/ Benders/Cutters and to spend more on their average purchase compared with smaller firms. (This was also the case two years ago not shown.)

o Not surprisingly, this finding carries over to firms that work primarily on CII projects, since CII projects are more likely to be performed by larger firms.

PIPE THREADERS/BENDERS/CUTTERS (2011) Number of Employees Work Primarily In Total 1-9 10+ Residential CII (234) (182) (52) (97) (103)

PURCHASE Made a Purchase 25% 19% <44% 17% <28% Average Spending $1,371 770 <$2,713 $567 <$1,567 SD 2211 1019 3296 723 2273

N 58 35 23 16 29


Draft 11-19-12

23

Trended Results Purchase levels declined significantly among firms with 1-9 employees and/or among firms that work primarily on CII projects. The sample sizes of those making a purchase are too small to trend the average spending.

PIPE THREADERS/BENDERS/CUTTERS (2011 vs. 2009) Work Primarily In… 1-9 10+ Residential CII 2011 2009 2011 2009 2011 2009 2011 2009 (182) (205) (52) (67) (97) (108) (103) (125)

Purchase Level 19% <28% 44% = 57% 17% = 21% 28% <44%

Spending Estimates and Projections: Pipe Threaders/Bender/Cutters

The 234 companies that responded to this portion of the survey reported spending about $58,000 on Pipe Threaders and Cutters in 2011 (not shown).

Based on the survey, ELECTRICAL CONTRACTOR magazine estimates that the universe of electrical contractors spent in the range of $14 million to about $ 34 million on Pipe Threaders, Benders and Cutters in 2011 at the 90% level of confidence. Note that unlike a number of other categories of tools and equipment none of the spending per firm in this survey was above $20,000.

ALL INDUSTRY ESTIMATE OF 2011 SPENDING (EXCLUDING SPENDING OVER $20,000)*




Firms Buying

Number of EC Firms

(Source: 2010 CBP)


Buying


EC Firms

Pipe Threaders, Benders, Cutters $ %

Mean $1,371 25% 70,824 17,564 $24,080,727

Upper Estimate $1,933.65 25% 70,824 17,564 $33,963,309

Lower Estimate $808.35 25% 70,824 17,564 $14,198,144 * None of the firms in the survey spent over 20,000 on Pipe Benders, Threaders or Cutters in 2011.

Draft 11-19-12

24

Construction Site Equipment Construction Site Equipment is one of the few categories where equipment is obtained through lease/rental as well as through purchase. In fact, more ec firms obtain Aerial Lifts and/or Digging/Boring equipment through lease than through purchase.

• In 2011, about three times as many firms obtained Digging/Boring Equipment through lease than through purchase. Similarly, Aerial Lifts, Scaffolding was obtained more than twice as often through lease than through purchase.

• In contrast, however, Jobsite Safety Equipment and Personal Protective gear was -- and is -- much more likely to be obtained through purchase. The lease/rental of Jobsite Safety equipment and Personal Protective Equipment/Apparel is almost non-existent.

2011 Purchase/Lease Comparison

Purchase Lease 2011 2011 (234) (234)

% %

“Any” Purchase/Lease …

Aerial Lifts, Scaffolding 13 <29

Digging/Boring Equipment 9 <27 Jobsite Safety 29> 3

Personal Protective Equipment/Apparel 42> 0.9

Trended

• Purchase of Aerial Lifts/Scaffolding is statistically unchanged compared with its 2009 level; however, the percentage of ecs that reported leasing Aerial Lifts/Scaffolding decreased significantly vs. two years ago.

• In contrast, both the purchase and lease of Digging/Boring Equipment is unchanged compared with 2009.

Purchase Comparison Lease Comparison

2011 2009 2007 2011 2009 2007

(234) (274) (278) (234) (274) (278)

% % % % %

“Any” Purchase/Lease …

Aerial Lifts, Scaffolding 13 = 16> 11 29 <46 46

Digging/Boring Equipment 9 = 11 10 27 29 29 Bolded numbers denote significant differences at the 90% level of confidence in the direction of the arrow.

Draft 11-19-12

25

Aerial Lifts/Scaffolding Purchase and Lease Behavior

In 2011, 29% of firms obtained Aerial Lifts and Scaffolding through lease/rental and 13% through purchase.

• Purchase: Both the percentage making a purchase and the average amount spent on Aerial Lifts, Scaffolding purchases is statistically unchanged from 2009.

• Lease/Rental: The percentage leasing or renting Aerial Lifts, Scaffolding declined significantly from 46% in 2009 to 29% in 2011; however, the average amount spent is statistically unchanged vs. 2009.

Aerial Lifts/Scaffolding (2011 Trended)

In 2011 In 2009 In 2007 Total Total Total (234) (274) (278)

PURCHASE Made a Purchase 13% = 16% > 11% Average Spending $5,620 = $6,231 < $16,837 LEASE

Leased/Rented 29% <46% 46%

Average Spending $7,604 = $7,006 < $12,340


Draft 11-19-12

26

Aerial Lifts/Scaffolding Purchase and Lease Behavior, continued Purchase: While there is no statistically significant difference in the percent of firms that made a 2011 purchase in this category by number of employees, the difference in favor of large firms is just short of significance. However firms that work primarily on CII projects are significantly more likely than firms working primarily on Residential projects to have made a 2011 purchase in this category.

• In contrast, though, average purchase spending is higher among firms with 1-9 employees and/or among firms that work primarily on CII projects.

o This is somewhat surprising since CII and large firms are more likely to trend together.

Lease/Rental: Larger firms and/or those that work primarily on CII projects are more likely than smaller firms and/or those that work primarily on Residential projects to have leased or rented Aerial Lifts, Scaffolding in 2011.

• Average lease/rental spending is significantly higher among larger firms (10+ employees) than smaller firms (1-9 employees). However, there is no statistically significant difference in average lease spending by primary type of work.

AERIAL LIFTS/SCAFFOLDING PURCHASE and LEASE /RENTAL

(By Firm Size and Primary Work Type) In 2011 Number of Employees Work Primarily In Total 1-9 10+ Residential CII (234) (182) (52) (97) (103)

PURCHASE Made a Purchase 13% 11%▲ ▲19% 8% <16% Average Spending $5,620 $6,482> $3,250 $2,075 <$6,500 SD 4735 5226 1146 1446 4909

N 30 20 10 8 16

LEASE

Leased/Rented 29% 24% <44% 20% <35%

Average Spending $7,604 $2,408 <$22,392 $2,367 =$11,880 SD 21489 3556 38007 4750 28766

N 67 44 23 19 36

▲ Not significant on this base size Bolded numbers denote significant differences at the 90% level of confidence in the direction of the arrow.

Draft 11-19-12

27

Trended Results

• Purchase: There was only one change between 2011 and 2009: purchase levels declined for firms with 10+ employees. The sample sizes of those making a purchase are too small to reliably report significant differences in average purchase spending by subgroup.

• Lease/Rental: The percentage leasing or renting Aerial Lifts/Scaffolding declined

significantly among firms with 1-9 employees, firms with 10+ employees and/or among that work primarily on CII projects. However, average spending is statistically unchanged for each of these groups compared to 2009.

AERIAL LIFTS AND SCAFFOLDING (2011 Vs. 2009)

Work Primarily In… 1-9 10+ Residential CII 2011 2009 2011 2009 2011 2009 2011 2009 (182) (205) (52) (67) (97) (108) (103) (125)

PURCHASE

Made a Purchase 11% 11% 19% <28% 8% 6% 16% 22%

Average Spending $6,482 $4,963 $3,250** $9,467 ** $2,075** $5,767** $6,500** $6,267**

LEASE/RENTAL

Leased/Rented 24% <38% 44% <72% 20% =28% 35% <62% Average Spending $2,408 =$2,734 $22,392 =$18,654 $2,367 =$1,322 $11,880 =$9,852 SD 4750 1669 28766 21928

N 19 30 36 78

** Base size is too small for trending

Draft 11-19-12

28

Spending Estimates and Projections: The 234 companies that responded to this portion of the survey, by themselves, reported spending about $380,000 on the lease/rental of Aerial Lifts and Scaffolding and an additional $84,000 on the purchase of Aerial Lifts and Scaffolding in 2011 (not shown).

LEASE/RENTAL: Based on the survey, ELECTRICAL CONTRACTOR magazine estimates that the universe of electrical contractors spent in the range of about $36 million to about $70 million on the lease/rental of Aerial Lifts and Scaffolding in 2011 (90% confidence). As noted in the Methodology section, we believe that the actual spending is closer to the top of the range, or possibly even higher because this mean does not include legitimate spending of over $20,000 by a few of the companies in the survey*. This was done in order to achieve a tighter confidence band for the estimate.

ALL INDUSTRY ESTIMATE OF 2011 SPENDING -- LEASE/RENTAL

(EXCLUDING SPENDING OVER $20,000)*




Firms Buying

Number of EC Firms

(Source: 2010 CBP)


Buying


EC Firms

Aerial Lifts and Scaffolding LEASE/RENTAL $ %

Mean $2,618 29% 70,824 20,256 $53,029,328

Upper Estimate $3,460 29% 70,824 20,256 $70,074,470

Lower Estimate $1,777 29% 70,824 20,256 $35,984,187 * In this case, four very large firms accounted for almost $260,000 of the approximately $380,000 of the lease/rental spending reported above. PURCHASE: Based on the survey, ELECTRICAL CONTRACTOR magazine estimates that the universe of electrical contractors spent in the range of about $32.6 million to $69.2 million on the purchase of Aerial Lifts and Scaffolding (90% confidence level).

• However, the sample base of those purchasing Aerial Lifts/Scaffolding equipment is very small and the purchase spending estimates should be used with caution.

ALL INDUSTRY ESTIMATE OF 2011 SPENDING -- PURCHASE

(EXCLUDING SPENDING OVER $20,000)v




Firms Buying

Number of EC Firms

(Source: 2010 CBP)


Buying


EC Firms

PURCHASE $ %

Mean $5,620 13% 70,824 9,065 $50,947,953

Upper Estimate $7,638 13% 70,824 9,065 $69,241,622

Lower Estimate $3,602 13% 70,824 9,065 $32,654,283 v In this case, there were no firms that spent over $20,000 on the purchase of Aerial Lifts/Scaffolding in 2011.

Draft 11-19-12

29

Digging/Boring Equipment Purchase and Lease Behavior In 2011, 27% of electrical contracting firms obtained Digging/Boring Equipment through lease/rental and 9% through purchase.

• In 2011, the average spending for purchases of Digging/Boring Equipment was about $28,000 and average spending for leases was about $6,500. Electrical contractors have been spending more, on average, for purchases than for leases in this category since at least 2003 (2003 and 2005 results are not shown).

The percentages that purchased and that leased/rented Digging/Boring equipment and the average amount spent for purchase and for lease/rental is a statistically unchanged among the total sample compared with two years ago.

DIGGING/BORING EQUIPMENT (2011 Trended) In 2011 In 2009 In 2007 Total Total Total (234) (274) (278)

PURCHASE Made a Purchase 9% 11% 10%

Average Spending $28,387 = $16,197 = $23,675 SD $78,666 14421

N 22 29

LEASE

Leased/Rented 27% 29% 29%

Average Spending $6,564 = $5,924 = $7,176 SD 16281 10545

N 63 78

Draft 11-19-12

30

Larger firms are more likely than smaller firms to obtain Digging and Boring equipment – either through purchase or through lease -- and to spend more on average on this type of equipment compared with smaller firms. There is no difference by primary type of construction in the likelihood to lease or purchase Digging and Boring equipment. However, average spending for both purchase and lease was higher among firms working primarily on CII projects compared to their counterparts that work primarily on Residential projects.

DIGGING/BORING EQUIPMENT PURCHASE and LEASE /RENTAL (By Firm Size and Primary Work Type)

In 2011 Number of Employees Work Primarily In Total 1-9 10+ Residential CII (234) (182) (52) (97) (103)

PURCHASE Made a Purchase 9% 7% <17% 8% 9%

Average Spending $28,387 $3,816 <$67,700 $3,404 <$9,700 SD $78,666 5404 $11,632 4253 7427

N 22 13 9 8 9

LEASE

Leased/Rented 27% 25% <35% 21% 26%

Average Spending $6,564 $1,838 <$24,944 $2,256 <$7,425 SD 16281 3501 28696 4684 10521

N 63 45 18 20 27


Draft 11-19-12

31

Trended Results

• The percentage that made a purchase of Digging and Boring equipment did not change significantly between 2011 and 2009 by either company size or by primary type of work. The sample sizes of those making a purchase are too small to reliably report significant differences in average purchase spending.

• The percentage that leased or rented in this category also did not change significantly between 2011 and 2009 by either company

size or by primary type of work. Average lease/rental spending in this category rose significantly among firms with 10+ employees.

• However, this increase was not enough to move the average spending of the total sample since the much larger group of firms with 1-9 employees did not also spend significantly more in 2011 than in 2009.

DIGGING AND BORING EQUIPMENT (2011 Vs. 2009) Work Primarily In… 1-9 10+ Residential CII 2011 2009 2011 2009 2011 2009 2011 2009 (182) (205) (52) (67) (97) (108) (103) (125)

PURCHASE

Purchase 7% 6% 17% =24% 8% =6% 9% =12%

Average Spending $3,816 ** $17,063** $67,700** $17,800** $3,404** $3,533** $9,700** $19,133**

LEASE/RENTAL

Leased/Rented 25% 24% 35% = 42% 21% 19% 26% = 33%

Average Spending $1,838▲ ▲$3,840 $24,944> $12,175 $2,256 = $1,593 $7,425 =$8,469

▲


** Base size is too small for trending

Draft 11-19-12

32

Spending Estimates and Projections: Digging/Boring Equipment

The 234 companies that responded to this portion of the survey, by themselves, reported spending $289,000 on the lease/rental of Digging and Boring equipment and $369,000 on the purchase of Digging and Boring equipment in 2011 (not shown). LEASE/RENTAL: Based on the survey, ELECTRICAL CONTRACTOR magazine estimates that the universe of electrical contractors spent in the range of about $21.8 million to about $47 million on the lease/rental of Digging and Boring equipment in 2011 at the 90% level of

confidence. ϒϒϒϒ

ALL INDUSTRY ESTIMATE OF 2011 SPENDING -- LEASE/RENTAL

(EXCLUDING SPENDING OVER $20,000)*




Firms Buying

Number of EC Firms

(Source: 2010 CBP)

Projected Number

Firms Buying


EC Firms

LEASE $ %

Mean $1,811 27% 70,824 19,052 $34,502,549

Upper Estimate $2,474.30 27% 70,824 19,052 $47,139,512

Lower Estimate $1,147.70 27% 70,824 19,052 $21,865,586 * In this case, two very large firms accounted for almost $212,000 of the approximately $290,000 of the lease/rental spending reported above. PURCHASE: Based on the survey, ELECTRICAL CONTRACTOR magazine estimates that the universe of electrical contractors spent in the range of about $17 million to about $59 million on the purchase of Digging and Boring equipment in 2011 (90% level of confidence). ү

• However, the sample base of those purchasing Digging/Boring equipment is very small and the purchase spending estimates should be used with caution.

ALL INDUSTRY ESTIMATE OF 2011 SPENDING -- PURCHASE

(EXCLUDING SPENDING OVER $20,000)v




Firms Buying

Number of EC Firms (2010 CBP)

Projected Number

Firms Buying


EC Firms

PURCHASE $ %

Mean $5,752 9% 70,824 6,657 $38,293,687

Upper Estimate $8,910 9% 70,824 6,657 $59,318,599

Lower Estimate $2,594 9% 70,824 6,657 $17,268,775 v In this case, the one firm that spent over $20,000 on the purchase of Digging and Boring Equipment accounted for $ 300,000 of the $369,000 spent on Digging and Boring equipment in 2011.

ϒϒϒϒ As noted in the Methodology section, we believe that the actual spending is closer to the top of the range, or possibly even higher because this mean does not include legitimate spending of over $20,000 by a few of the companies in the survey. This was done in order to achieve a tighter confidence band for the estimate.

Draft 11-19-12

33

Jobsite Safety Equipment Purchase Behavior

29% of electrical contracting firms reported a 2011 purchase of Jobsite Safety Equipment. On average, respondent firms spent $2,800 on Jobsite Safety Equipment.

• Comparing the latest survey to the 2009 results indicates a statistically significant decline in purchase level but statistically unchanged average spending among those making a purchase. This was also the case two years ago.

JOBSITE SAFETY (2011 vs. 2009) In 2011 In 2009 In 2007 Total Total Total (234) (274) (278)

PURCHASE Made a Purchase 29% < 36% < 45% Average Spending $2,837 = $3,401 = $4,686 SD 7928 13447

N 67 98

In 2011, purchase levels and average spending was higher among larger companies. While purchase levels were also higher among firms that work primarily on CII construction compared with those that perform primarily Residential construction, there is no significant difference in the amount spent among those making a purchase by primary type of construction.

JOBSITE SAFETY (2011) Number of Employees Work Primarily In Total 1-9 10+ Residential CII (234) (182) (52) (97) (103)

PURCHASE Made a Purchase 29% 23% <50% 22% <33% Average Spending 2,837 $755 <$6,422 $982 =$2,323 SD 7928 1212 12175 2376 4738

N 67 41 26 21 34

Bolded numbers denote significant differences at the 90% level of confidence in the direction of the arrow

Draft_9-25-12

34

Trended Results

• Significantly fewer electrical contractors from firms with 10+ employees and/or those who work primarily on CII projects bought Jobsite Safety Equipment in 2011 than in 2009. There is no statistically significant difference in spending over time by the subgroups shown below.

JOBSITE SAFETY EQUIPMENT

Number of Employees Work Primarily In 1-9 10+ Residential CII 2011 2009 2011 2009 2011 2009 2011 2009

(182) (205) (52) (67) (97) (108) (103) (125)

PURCHASE

Made a Purchase 23% 26% 50% <67% 22 =17% 33% < 47%

Average Spending $755 $793 $6,422 ▲ ▲ $9,385 $982 ▲ ▲ $345 $2,323▲ ▲$4,910 SD 1212 996 12175 23284 2376 339 4738 16996 N 41 53 26 45 21 18 34 59

Bolded numbers denote significant differences at the 90% level of confidence in the direction of the arrow. ▲


Draft_9-25-12

35

Spending Estimates and Projections: Jobsite Safety Equipment

The 234 companies that responded to this portion of the survey, by themselves, reported spending $139,000 on Jobsite Safety Equipment in 2011 (not shown).

Based on the survey, ELECTRICAL CONTRACTOR magazine estimates that the universe of electrical contractors spent in the range of about $16 million to about $ 39 million on Jobsite Safety Equipment in 2011 at the 90% level of confidence. As noted in the Methodology section, we believe that the actual spending is closer to the top of the range, or possibly even higher because this mean does not include legitimate spending of over $20,000 by a few of the companies in the survey*. This was done in order to achieve a tighter confidence band for the estimate.





Firms Buying

Number of EC Firms

(Source: 2010 CBP)


Buying


EC Firms

Jobsite Safety Equipment $ %

Mean $1,362 29% 70,824 20,256 $27,588,214

Upper Estimate $1,929.60 29% 70,824 20,256 $39,085,329

Lower Estimate $794.40 29% 70,824 20,256 $16,091,099

* In this case, two very large firms accounted for about $75,000 of the total of the approximately $139,000 reported above.

Draft_9-25-12

36

Personal Protective Equipment/Apparel Purchase Behavior

42% of firms reported a 2011 purchase of Personal Protective Equipment/Apparel. On average, respondent firms spent about $2,950 on Personal Protective Equipment and Apparel; both are statistically unchanged vs. two years ago.

PERSONAL PROTECTIVE EQUIPMENT/ APPAREL

In 2011 In 2009 Total Total (234) (274)

PURCHASE Made a Purchase 42% 50%

Average Spending $2,950 $1,245 SD 16814 2558

N 99 134

Average spending per purchase was higher among larger companies and/or firms that work primarily on CII construction rather smaller firms and/or those that primarily work on Residential construction. There are no significant differences in purchase levels by number of employees or by primary type of construction.

PERSONAL PROTECTIVE EQUIPMENT (2011) Number of Employees Work Primarily In Total 1-9 10+ Residential CII (234) (182) (52) (97) (103)

PURCHASE Made a Purchase 42% 40%▲ ▲52% 39% 42%

Average Spending $2,950 $724 <$9,886 687 <$1,269 SD 16814 759 33100 986 1458

N 99 72 27 38 43

▲ Not significant at this base size

Draft_9-25-12

37

Trended:

• Fewer electrical contractors in large firms and/or firms that work primarily on CII projects made a category purchase in 2011 compared with 2009.

• In 2011, average spending by firms with 10+ employees, although close to $10,000 among firms that made a purchase, is not significantly different from 2009, when it was about $2,700, due to small base sizes and a large standard deviation in the 2011 results.

PERSONAL PROTECTIVE EQUIPMENT Number of Employees Work Primarily In 1-9 10+ Residential CII 2011 2009 2011 2009 2011 2009 2011 2009 (182) (205) (52) (67) (97) (108) (103) (125)

PURCHASE

Made a Purchase 40% 43% 52% <70% 39% =33% 42% <62% Average Spending $724 $895 $9,886 ▲ ▲$2,665 $687 $491 $1,269 $1,557 SD 759 1326 33,100 4791 986 620 1458 3070 N 72 88 27 47 38 36 43 78


▲ Not significant at this base size

Draft_9-25-12

38

Spending Estimates and Projections: Personal Protective Equipment/Apparel

The 234 companies that responded to this portion of the survey, by themselves, reported spending of about $230,000 on Personal Protective Equipment /Apparel purchases in 2011. Based on the survey, ELECTRICAL CONTRACTOR magazine estimates that the universe of electrical contractors spent in the range of $23 million to about $ 39 million on Personal Protective Equipment and Apparel in 2011 at the 90% level of confidence. As noted in the Methodology section, we believe that the actual spending is closer to the top of the range, or possibly even higher because this mean does not include legitimate spending of over $20,000 by a few of the companies in the survey*. This was done in order to achieve a tighter confidence band for the estimate.





Firms Buying

Number of EC Firms

(Source: 2010 CBP)


Buying


EC Firms

Personal Protective Equipment $ %

Mean $1,041 42% 70,824 29,959 $31,186,853

Upper Estimate $1,301.70 42% 70,824 29,959 $38,997,047

Lower Estimate $780.30 42% 70,824 29,959 $23,376,658

* In this case, a single very large firm accounted for about $150,000 of the total of the approximately $230,000 reported above.

Documents

EC 2012 Profile Construction T & E Breakout Report Updated ... · 2012 “e lectrical contractor magazine profile ” database report electrical contractors: their purchase and lease