AGRR™ magazine/glassBYTEs.com™ Message Forum

AGRR Magazine
AGRR™ Magazine

glassBYTEs.com

AGRSS

NWRA

Key Media & Research
Privacy Policy


ATTENTIONThe glassBYTEs.com forum is being retooled and will return with a new look and functionality that will hopefully help our readers even more. Watch for an announcement when it will be ready, it will be a few months.

You can still stay up on daily news and comment on stories by signing up for the glassBYTEs daily e-newsletter at glass.com/subcenter. There is no charge. Hope to see you there!
General Forum
This Forum is Locked
Author
Comment
Does this sound like SGC and the Lizzard to you?

Discrimination in rebates, discounts, or advertising service charges; underselling in particular localities; penalties, 15 U.S.C. § 13a


It shall be unlawful for any person engaged in commerce, in the course of such commerce, to be a party to, or assist in, any transaction of sale, or contract to sell, which discriminates to his knowledge against competitors of the purchaser, in that, any discount, rebate, allowance, or advertising service charge is granted to the purchaser over and above any discount, rebate, allowance, or advertising service charge available at the time of such transaction to said competitors in respect of a sale of goods of like grade, quality, and quantity; to sell, or contract to sell, goods in any part of the United States at prices lower than those exacted by said person elsewhere in the United States for the purpose of destroying competition, or eliminating a competitor in such part of the United States; or, to sell, or contract to sell, goods at unreasonably low prices for the purpose of destroying competition or eliminating a competitor.

Any person violating any of the provisions of this section shall, upon conviction thereof, be fined not more than $5,000 or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.



sounds like the $200.00 any claim deal they have fits into this

Re: Does this sound like SGC and the Lizzard to you?

You're absolutely right, but the part that they hide behind is this: "...for the purpose of destroying competition, or eliminating a competitor... "

Very hard to prove that was the intent of the practice, and they know it.

There's a fine line between competition and predatory practices or predatory pricing, and it's extremely hard to define/prove. It's unlikely that you will find company memos or minutes that document the discussion of how the implementation of these practices will "hurt competitors", rather, they will note how they will "enhance our competitive position".

One is about competition, the other is eliminating competetion. One is healthy, the other is illegal.

Of course, we haven't even touched on the 'steering' issues in this yet either, which muddies the water even further.

Copyright © AGRR™/glassBYTEs™ All rights reserved.
20 PGA Drive, Suite 201, Stafford, Virginia 22554
540-720-5584 (P) 540-720-5687 (F) info@agrrmag.com
www.agrrmag.com / www.glassbytes.com