Printer Friendly
The Free Library
14,497,195 articles and books
Member login
User name  
Password 
 
Join us Forgot password?

Do anti-competitive suppliers blunt your competitive edge?


You may be aware of a number of recent "price fixing price fixing n. a criminal violation of federal anti-trust statutes, in which several competing businesses reach a secret agreement (conspiracy) to set prices for their products to prevent real competition and keep the public from benefiting from price competition. " incidents in the steel and steel-related industries. The U.S. Dept. of Justice's Antitrust Antitrust

The antitrust laws apply to virtually all industries and to every level of business, including manufacturing, transportation, distribution, and marketing. They prohibit a variety of practices that restrain trade.
 Div. and the FBI are conducting ongoing investigations into these matters. What does this mean to you in the foundry business? Plenty.

Let's put anti-competitive behavior into perspective. The "marketplace" philosophy of U.S. economics, embodied em·bod·y  
tr.v. em·bod·ied, em·bod·y·ing, em·bod·ies
1. To give a bodily form to; incarnate.

2. To represent in bodily or material form:
 and ensured by the antitrust laws antitrust laws n. acts adopted by Congress to outlaw or restrict business practices considered to be monopolistic or which restrain interstate commerce. The Sherman Antitrust Act of 1890 declared illegal "every contract, combination.... , means that every business should have the opportunity to compete freely and flourish in a free market. Business com*petition brings consumers the best possible products at the best possible prices.

Knowing the Law

There are two major antitrust statutes: the Sherman Antitrust Act Sherman Antitrust Act, 1890, first measure passed by the U.S. Congress to prohibit trusts; it was named for Senator John Sherman. Prior to its enactment, various states had passed similar laws, but they were limited to intrastate businesses.  and the Robinson-Patman Act Robinson-Patman Act, passed by the U.S. Congress in 1936 to supplement the Clayton Antitrust Act. The act, advanced by Congressman Wright Patman, forbade any person or firm engaged in interstate commerce to discriminate in price to different purchasers of the same . These acts regulate the marketing and distribution of goods. While you, the foundry, are subject to and regulated by these acts, they also regulate your competitors, suppliers and customers. The result is a competitive climate in which the small business can exist and thrive. You can grow deliberately and rapidly, but must always be sensitive to the rights of your competitors and of the public.

In a 1958 ruling, the U.S. Supreme court said the Sherman Antitrust Act "rests on the premise that the unrestrained interaction of competitive forces will yield the best allocation of our economic resources, the lowest prices, the highest quality and greatest material progress... the policy unequivocally laid down by the Act is competition."

Fundamentally, the 100-year-old Sherman Act prohibits unreasonable restraints that would threaten open competition and tend to foster monopolies. Businesses are specifically prohibited from engaging in activities that unduly restrain others from competing freely - boycotts, tying agreements and price fixing, for example. Section 1 is concerned exclusively with anti-competitive agreements between two or more persons ("agreements in restraint of trade restraint of trade

Preventing of free competition in business by some action or condition such as price-fixing or the creation of a monopoly. The U.S. has a long-standing policy of maintaining competition among business enterprises through antitrust laws, the best-known of
"). Section 2 outlaws An outlaw is a person living outside the law. In comic books
  • Outlaws (Marvel Comics)
In computer and video games
  • Outlaws (C64 game) by Rare
  • Outlaws (computer game) by LucasArts
In music
 the unilateral unilateral /uni·lat·er·al/ (-lat´er-al) affecting only one side.

u·ni·lat·er·al
adj.
On, having, or confined to only one side.
 acquisition and maintenance of monopoly power - the power to control price and exclude competitors.

The Robinson-Patman Act, on the other hand, guarantees the right of small businesses to compete by prohibiting price discrimination because of size or economic power. This highly technical act generally means that competing buyers of commodities from a single seller must be able to get the same price and terms for the same product. Thus the act prohibits a supplier from offering discriminatory dis·crim·i·na·to·ry  
adj.
1. Marked by or showing prejudice; biased.

2. Making distinctions.



dis·crim
 prices, and a buyer from inducing or knowingly receiving them.

What does all this mean in actual practice? You need to know how to recognize illegal, anti-competitive behavior, and what to do about it. There are at least four business situations that may indicate you're being "held hostage hostage, person held by another as a guarantee that certain actions or promises will or will not be carried out. During periods of internal turmoil, insurgents often seize hostages; recent examples include seizures of Americans and other foreigners by militants in " by illegal behavior.

Recognizing a Violation

The first scenario looks like this: a supplier of products you need has an agreement with other suppliers. When you call one of those other companies, they refuse to quote you a price, quote a price significantly higher than that of your regular manufacturer, or even suggest that you instead deal with your regular supply source. When this happens, you may be the victim of price fixing. A variation on this theme is the "territorial deal," which forces you to deal with the supplier that a larger group of suppliers wants you to deal with - a supplier who can then fix prices at a level that suits them. This kind of market, or territorial, allocation is clearly illegal.

In the second scenario - discriminatory pricing - you become aware that a competitor of yours is getting a much better price or better terms when buying the same product from the same supplier in the same quantities as you do. This activity may be in violation of the Robinson-Patman Act because your supplier is selling the same goods to the same class of customer at different prices.

Scenario three - a boycott - is when a supplier refuses to deal with you, but deals instead with your competitor.

The fourth scenario is the "tying arrangement An agreement in which a vendor conditions the sale of a particular product on a vendee's promise to purchase an additional, unrelated product.

In a tying arrangement, the product that the vendee actually wants to purchase is known as the "tying product," while the
," in which a supplier will only sell you a product you need if you agree to buy another product that you don't need or want.

Finally, if you become aware that suppliers cooperate with each other to limit price or production choices, to divide markets or initiate boycotts or blacklists, you may be the victim of antitrust violations.

Taking Action

The Sherman and Robinson-Patman Acts are, for the most part, enforced by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC FTC

See Federal Trade Commission (FTC).
), and the Dept. of Justice's Antitrust Div. Both provide for private actions for the recovery of damages brought by those who have been harmed through anti-competitive conduct. If you suspect or experience any of the above anti-competitive activities, you have the right to complain to the Antitrust Div. or the FTC. Neither agency will seek to recover any of your losses, but they will investigate. If they believe a violation occurred, they'll take steps to stop the anti-competitive conduct.

You may also want to seek advice from your own counsel, who can also investigate and initiate action to stop the illegal activity and recover damages. You may carry out both courses of action: seek agency and private enforcement of the antitrust laws.

As a participant in a free market economy, you are entitled en·ti·tle  
tr.v. en·ti·tled, en·ti·tling, en·ti·tles
1. To give a name or title to.

2. To furnish with a right or claim to something:
 to aggressively pursue a remedy for conduct that victimizes you with anti-competitive behavior that limits your ability to compete effectively in the marketplace.
COPYRIGHT 1996 American Foundry Society, Inc.
No portion of this article can be reproduced without the express written permission from the copyright holder.
Copyright 1996, Gale Group. All rights reserved. Gale Group is a Thomson Corporation Company.

 Reader Opinion

Title:

Comment:



 

Article Details
Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback
Author:Spector, Eugene
Publication:Modern Casting
Date:Aug 1, 1996
Words:872
Previous Article:Considering the cupola.
Next Article:Iron- and manganese oxides: culprits of refractory erosion.
Topics:



Related Articles
Statements to the Congress. (Edward C. Ettin testimony concerning bank mergers) (Transcript)
Are judges leading economic theory? Sunk costs, the threat of entry and the competitive process.
Supreme Court focuses on associations.
Minimizing Antitrust Concerns Relating to Supplier Memberships.
Antitrust Risks for Associations Setting Standards for Suppliers.
States' anti-competitive laws can harm consumers.
Forming physician network joint ventures.(Revised Antitrust Guidelines)
Bad policy, pure and simple.(monopoly)
Treat your suppliers well.(NOTABLE)

Terms of use | Copyright © 2009 Farlex, Inc. | Feedback | For webmasters | Submit articles