Events

Two wholesalers in bicycle price-fixing charges get R4m administrative fines each

By Press Office · 253 comments

Tuesday 31 May, the Tribunal has issued both its order and its reasons in the Omnico and Coolheat Cycle case. It has awarded an administrative penalty to Omnico of R4627412 and to Coolheat Cycles a penalty of R4250612. The Tribunal has already confirmed six consent orders by wholesalers and 11 retailers in the bicycle sector who were implicated in a price-fixing investigation by the Competition Commission.

The two wholesalers, Omnico and Coolheat, however, chose to oppose the charges and the matter was heard last year by the Tribunal.

The Commission relied for its case primarily on a meeting held on 10 September 2008 where about 200 bicycle wholesalers and retailers attended a meeting at Midrand Conference Centre in Gauteng to discuss increasing their markup on bicycles to 50% from 35%, and the markup on cycling accessories to 75% from 50%. The wholesalers would give the retailers a higher mark-up by increasing the Recommended Retail Price to consumers. Prices to consumers would be increased so that retailers could make higher margins. Prices were set to increase on 1 October 2008, as it was the beginning of the new cycling season and new bicycles and accessories were usually launched at this time and new price lists issued. Details of these discussions had been posted on an online discussion forum called The Hub and was brought to the attention of the Commission.

Evidence presented at the hearing revealed that both Omnico and Coolheat had attended the September meeting that there was agreement among wholesalers to increase the mark-up on wholesale prices for bicycles and cycling accessories in co-ordination.

In determining the penalties the Tribunal took into account some mitigating factors for Omnico. However, it found no such mitigating factors for Coolheat, who had elected not to give evidence at the Tribunal and to explain its subsequent price increases.

The other 17 companies who settled early with the Commission were not fined for the offence as they had admitted they had contravened section 4(1)(b) of the Competition Act. The Commission had withdrawn its case against one of the companies, Fritz Pienaar Cycles, because the business was liquidated.

Issued by:
Chantelle Benjamin
Communications: Competition Tribunal

Omnico’s official statement on this matter – 1 June 2016

“Four years ago the Competition Commission commenced legal proceedings against a number of wholesalers and retailers contending that they were guilty of price fixing. 17 consent orders were obtained by the Commission ( ie these parties agreed to admitting guilt) and no fine was imposed on them. Omnico and another party denied any contravention as alleged by the Commission and as such refused to consent to an order as required by the Commission. Had Omnico simply consented, that effectively would have been the end of the matter and no fine would have been imposed on them by the Commission.

The matter proceeded and the Competition Tribunal, after a lengthy and expensive legal process has ordered that Omnico contravened the Competition Act and imposed a fine.

Omnico is disappointed at the Tribunal’s decision and maintains that it was not party to any anti-competitive agreement as alleged.

In the circumstances Omnico has instructed its legal advisors to appeal the Tribunal’s decision.”

Related posts

Comments

Mongoose!

Dec 22, 2016, 11:37 AM

joh ! 

 

64%? :eek:

Dicky DQ

Dec 22, 2016, 11:59 AM

Blah blah fish paste.

 

People thinking that getting bust for price fixing would result in a price drop are delusional. The fact is the only thing they are NOT allowed to do is agree on pricing. This does not mean that they have to drop their pricing, they could even increase it if they wanted and as long as the stupid consumer continues to pay no one else is going to drop their prices.

 

So if you think about it we the consumer are allowing them to continue to "collude" in as far as there is no incentive to drop prices if you keep selling at the current price.

 

As a side note, price fixing on non essential goods means nothing as soon as consumers vote with their wallets it all changes. 

Mongoose!

Dec 22, 2016, 12:04 PM

true

RocknRolla

Dec 22, 2016, 12:13 PM

Is that why we get given so much free lube and shammy cream?

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

shawnvan

Dec 22, 2016, 12:44 PM

Competition Appeal Court's judgment attached.  Makes for some interesting reading if you're legally inclined...

 

Judgment CAC.pdf

Mongoose!

Dec 22, 2016, 12:50 PM

wish I was legally inclined ^_^

Sepia

Dec 22, 2016, 1:08 PM

I read the court document as linked to this thread and cannot understand why that bloke at Cycle Lab was never implicated?

He seemed to be involved with other price fixing efforts in the past?

 

Just asking.

Mongoose!

Dec 22, 2016, 1:26 PM

I read the court document as linked to this thread and cannot understand why that bloke at Cycle Lab was never implicated?

He seemed to be involved with other price fixing efforts in the past?

 

Just asking.

 

quit interesting question yes

Phatman

Dec 22, 2016, 1:30 PM

Surely the brands who are distributed by these wholesalers would want to distance themselves from this?

It likely means nothing to them, all that matters is that their product continues to get marketed and distributed. Imagine Tiger Brands deciding to stop supplying the Big 4 if/when they get bust for price fixing. They'll probably just laugh it off over a round of Bohemian Pilsners from "that" brewery.

Jooste

Dec 22, 2016, 1:30 PM

Dodgy deals follow the skelms everywhere they go

Tumbleweed

Dec 22, 2016, 1:57 PM

Truth is, though, is that the Comp Comm's case in this had been flimsy from the start.

JXV

Dec 22, 2016, 4:13 PM

Competition Appeal Court's judgment attached. Makes for some interesting reading if you're legally inclined...

 

attachicon.gifJudgment CAC.pdf

Interesting. The way they determine penalty and the principle that silent attendance at a meeting constitutes acceptance of any agreement reached unless one makes it publicly clear that you don't agree. Also the principle that remaining silent means one is party to the financial harm caused to customers and also that it conceals the anti competitive behaviour, delaying its discovery and correction. There is also an onus to disclose such behaviour to authorities once you become aware of it.

 

Coolheat gets hit with R4.25m because they failed to provide data that would have indicated a lower affected turnover ( they only apparently increased RRP on 94 out of 4000 stock items but failed to isolate the value thereof and were thus fined using their total turnover as a basis). Seems a bit harsh and I bet they are not overly happy with their legal team's advice.....the 6 step principle for determining the penalty was available from recent case law and could have been applied to the appeal even though it probably wasn't available when the original finding was made by the tribunal.

 

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

V12man

Dec 22, 2016, 4:28 PM

Interesting. The way they determine penalty and the principle that silent attendance at a meeting constitutes acceptance of any agreement reached unless one makes it publicly clear that you don't agree. Also the principle that remaining silent means one is party to the financial harm caused to customers and also that it conceals the anti competitive behaviour, delaying its discovery and correction. There is also an onus to disclose such behaviour to authorities once you become aware of it.

 

Coolheat gets hit with R4.25m because they failed to provide data that would have indicated a lower affected turnover ( they only apparently increased RRP on 94 out of 4000 stock items but failed to isolate the value thereof and were thus fined using their total turnover as a basis). Seems a bit harsh and I bet they are not overly happy with their legal team's advice.....the 6 step principle for determining the penalty was available from recent case law and could have been applied to the appeal even though it probably wasn't available when the original finding was made by the tribunal.

 

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

Concealing a crime is of itself a crime....

 

So attending a meeting and remaining silent means concealment and therefore guilty.... of something anyway....

 

But the consumer will pay the fine in the end... the local distributors rip the ring out of pricing... In a big way... local prices are sometimes 60% or more higher than international prices... including shipping... kind of hard to explain that... my eagle xo1 upgrade cost me r9930.... local price over 15k when you add a chainring - even on special....

Kalahari Vegmot

Dec 22, 2016, 4:36 PM

It costs me about half to service my bike if I order from Wiggle, rather than my LBS.

And the LBS doesn't stock anything Campag...

fanievb

Dec 22, 2016, 4:38 PM

Truth is, though, is that the Comp Comm's case in this had been flimsy from the start.

 

like most of them

 

*construction *fertilizer *bread

 

at the end of the day the consumer kaks off, no matter how you look at it

Kalahari Vegmot

Dec 22, 2016, 4:41 PM

I don't know where most LBSs order stock, but someone is definitely making a killing.

Just don't know whether it's bike shops or manufacturers...

 

Suspect it's the latter

JXV

Dec 22, 2016, 4:47 PM

Concealing a crime is of itself a crime....

 

So attending a meeting and remaining silent means concealment and therefore guilty.... of something anyway....

 

But the consumer will pay the fine in the end... the local distributors rip the ring out of pricing... In a big way... local prices are sometimes 60% or more higher than international prices... including shipping... kind of hard to explain that... my eagle xo1 upgrade cost me r9930.... local price over 15k when you add a chainring - even on special....

If they attempt to recover the penalties by simply raising prices they will be less competitive and we will buy elsewhere.

 

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

Kalahari Vegmot

Dec 22, 2016, 4:54 PM

If they attempt to recover the penalties by simply raising prices they will be less competitive and we will buy elsewhere.

 

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

True. A lot of 'new' online shops have also popped up lately, adding to the mix

Malpiet

Dec 22, 2016, 6:28 PM

Wonder when Shimano "online offshore competition" will be eliminated as Sram did tried?

Many ways to get shimano into the country especially via malaysia.

 

Sram on the other hand is a bit of schlep but guys can get them in although not in quantity.

 

Truth is most high end bikes are insured these days so it makes it easier to claim if you have a fault hardly anyone is really worried about guarentee if they know they buying a legit product yet saving 20-30%.

gtr1

Dec 23, 2016, 5:44 AM

Seen some markups on bikes and about 50%. Give or take a bit of rounding.

 

R123k to LBS and recommended retail R180k

Hairy

Dec 23, 2016, 8:27 PM

Seen some markups on bikes and about 50%. Give or take a bit of rounding.

 

R123k to LBS and recommended retail R180k

with that sort of percentage mark-up on bikes, no wonder some bikes shop's are pushing ebikes so hard on the floor. ......
Jewbacca

Dec 24, 2016, 7:05 AM

Seen some markups on bikes and about 50%. Give or take a bit of rounding.

 

R123k to LBS and recommended retail R180k

RRP was 45 to 50% on complete bikes and 64% on bits and spares....

 

It really is ridiculous.

 

Makes having 1 or 2 versatile bikes a whole lot more attractive that a fleet. 

andydude

Dec 24, 2016, 12:42 PM

with that sort of percentage mark-up on bikes, no wonder some bikes shop's are pushing ebikes so hard on the floor. ......

RRP was 45 to 50% on complete bikes and 64% on bits and spares....

 

It really is ridiculous.

 

Makes having 1 or 2 versatile bikes a whole lot more attractive that a fleet.

Would be nice to see actual financial statements for my analytical minded brain.

 

I assume those margins are gross, therefore excludes all other expenses like rent, salaries, etc.

 

If the net margin is about 20 to 30% I would assume people would be more comfortable? Large listed companies very roughly aims for 15 to 20% net margin / return on capital, therefore you would expect higher for a small cycling shop which is more risky?

Patchelicious

Dec 24, 2016, 1:00 PM

Funny how we love margins when we share in the profits.....

BigDL

Dec 24, 2016, 1:00 PM

Would be nice to see actual financial statements for my analytical minded brain.

 

I assume those margins are gross, therefore excludes all other expenses like rent, salaries, etc.

 

If the net margin is about 20 to 30% I would assume people would be more comfortable? Large listed companies very roughly aims for 15 to 20% net margin / return on capital, therefore you would expect higher for a small cycling shop which is more risky?

True

 

Those mark-ups are pretty reasonable for a retailer. 50% mark-up equals a 33% gross margin, which will be eaten quickly by costs. Would be surprised if the nett margin is more than 10 or 12 percent.

Add a comment

You must log in to comment