According to a press release from the Federal Competition Authority (FCA), the Austrian Court of Cartels ruled on 24 September 2020 that the maker of musical instruments Roland Germany GmbH (“Roland Germany”) has breached competition rules with minimum resale agreements (…) FE Sports is alleged to have been involved in the continuation of the sale of conservation prices – The ACCC has filed an action in the Federal Court against B-K Holdings (QLD) Pty Ltd, which acts as FE Sports, arguing that the resale price for the wholesale supply of cycling and sports products is maintained in (…) The Luxembourg Competition Council imposes sanctions on Bahlsen and Auchan supermarkets, In three decisions of 18 November 2020, the Competition Council imposes 3.3 million euros in fines on Bahlsen and supermarkets Auchan, Cactus and Delhaize for EUR 3.3 million for the maintenance of Bahlsen`s resale price (…) A supplier that indicates the minimum (or maximum) price at which the product must be resold to customers. From the point of view of competition policy, the indication of the minimum price is of concern. It was suggested that a supplier could exercise some control over the product market by maintaining prices. This form of vertical pricing can prevent competition from reducing the margin of retail and wholesale prices. However, another argument is that the supplier wants to protect the reputation or image of the product and prevent it from being used by retailers as a loss guide to attract customers. Maintaining profit margins through rotational regimes may also encourage retailers to spend more services, invest in inventory, advertise and other efforts to increase product demand for the mutual benefit of both supplier and retailer. RPM can also be used to prevent the free flow of retailers on the efforts of other competing retailers who, instead of offering lower prices, spend time, money and effort to promote and explain the technical complexities or characteristics of the product. For example, a retailer cannot lower the price, but explain and demonstrate to customers the use of a complex product such as a computer. After purchasing this information, the customer can buy the computer from a merchant who sells it at a lower price and does not explain or demonstrate its uses.
In many countries, RPM is itself illegal, with a few exceptions or products. Many economists are now in favour of a less stringent approach to competition law with respect to MPRs and other vertical restrictions. © OECD On 21 April 2020, the Turkish Competition Authority (TCA) made public its reasoned decision on price maintenance and, de facto, exclusive leaders focused on the practices of Red Bull`s Géda Da`da`tem ve Pazarlama Tic. Ltd. (“Red Bull”) Preservation and exclusion of the resale price (…) A new case of ACCC resale price maintenance reminds us in due course that manufacturers and suppliers must carefully treat distribution agreements regarding the price in Australia. The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) has launched proceedings against FE Sports , (…) Find out how to give your customers more purchasing power for the purchase of priority maintenance According to a press release from the Czech Competition Authority (the Authority) of 3 September 2020, the Authority has fined the gardening equipment manufacturer V-GARDEN 7,687,000 CZK for the maintenance of the resale price. The Authority has indicated that priority maintenance agreements are non-servable and not transferable during the period of […) – However, if you purchased this agreement from a California dealer or if the device was financed by the American Honda Finance Corp., an exception may be made. All other customers are not allowed to cancel. Roland was fined $4 million for illegally preventing online delivery – Lessons from the CMA`s investigation into the use of Roland`s Illegal Resale Price Maintenance (RPM).