•  
  •  
 

Keywords

sells margin, margin, acquisition price, product value chain, complementary services, economic usage, budgetary restraints, consumer’s choice, direct costs, indirect costs, market definition, market access impediment

Abstract

It is truly necessary to tilt the approach that has been applied nowadays towards Article 15(1)(4) of the Combating Unfair Competition Act because the charges collected by retail chains (large-format stores) constitute usually an integral part of the value chain of the given product as well as a reflection of the price policy of such store. This fact suggests that such charges cannot by automatically deemed as an additional and unfair income generated by the purchaser (retail chain) from the seller. Charges collected from sellers (which can look dubious at first glance) can be nothing more than a retail chain’s remuneration for services rendered to the supplier. If those services are connected to the value chain and the ‘slotting fees’ cover costs of managing and selling acquired stock (direct and indirect costs), than the retail-chain does not impose any illegal charges. It should also be noted that even if a retail-chain plays a significant role as a commercial partner, it cannot be seen as an unavoidable link between the producer (importer) and customers. If that was indeed so than every action taken by such retail chain would be subject to an antitrust analysis. Going down this path, it would be necessary to verify the actual legalistic fundamentalism in favour of a more economic approach (based on free market paradigm). One must note that economics is used more extensively nowadays in antitrust proceedings, contributing substantially thereto.

First Page

72

Last Page

77

Page Count

5

Publisher

University of Warsaw

Download

Share

COinS