accounts for the remaining 46.9 percent of the total sales of the sporting goods segment of the leisure time industry (Standard & Poor's, 1991).
ECONOMIC STRUCTURE AND MAJOR COMPETITORS
When the national sporting goods industry first began to take shape, a large number of firms entered the industry, most of which were independent operations, whose products bore the names of their producing companies, such as Spaulding (Moskowitz, Katz, and Levering, 1986). In some instances, such a firm might have appeared to be an independent operation, while, in fact, it was a subsidiary of a larger firm. Such an example was Wilson Sporting Goods, which was actually a wholly owned subsidiary of the Wilson Meatpacking Company (Moskowitz, Katz, and Levering, 1986). Wilson formed a sporting goods manufacturing subsidiary for the purpose of making productive use of several of the byproducts of the company's meatpacking operations (Moskowitz, Katz, and Levering, 1986).
As the sporting goods industry matured, consolidation reduced the number of competitors. As the leisure time industry formed, conglomerate firms emerged in the industry, which owned operating subsidiaries in several segments of the leisure time industry. Many of the formerly independent manufacturers of sporting goods were acquired by these conglomerates. As acquisition and merger fever swept the American economy in the 1970s and 1980s, conglomerates from outside the leisure time industry began to acquire operating subsidiaries in one or more segments of the leisure time industry. As a consequence, in the early 1990s, one truly cannot tell the players in the sporting goods industry without a program. As examples, consider the folowing:
1. AMF Corporation produces Ben Hogan brand golf clubs, other sporting goods, and other leisure time products. AMF has spread its wings to such an extent, however, that the company is no longer classified by industry analysis firms as a ...