Chapter 2
The bill: provisions and rationale
2.1
The bill requires corporations to supply products at consistent prices
across adjacent markets. All retail outlets owned by the corporation must sell
at this price within a distance of 35 kilometres.
2.2
The bill inserts a new subsection 46C into the Trade Practices Act
1974. Subsection 46C(1)—labelled the Guaranteed Lowest Prices Rule—states:
A corporation must, at a retail outlet operated by the
corporation or a related entity, supply or offer to supply a particular product
to a consumer at a price being the lowest price the product is supplied or
offered for supply at the same time at any retail outlet operated by the
corporation or a related entity under the same trading name within a distance
of 35 kilometres.
2.3
If the corporation or related entity offers a discount, rebate, credit,
allowance or special deal to consumers in relation to products to which the
Guaranteed Lowest Prices Rule applies, it must match the offer for the same
product sold at each retail outlet covered by the Rule (46C(5)). Equally, where
a corporation imposes a surcharge on consumers in relation to products to which
the Guaranteed Lowest Prices Rule applies, it must impose the same surcharge at
each retail outlet covered by the Rule (46C(6)).
Which entities are covered by the bill?
2.4
Subsection 46C(7) of the bill states that the provisions of the
Guaranteed Lowest Price Rule do not apply to a corporation or a related entity
which operates five retail outlets or less in Australia under the same trading
name.
2.5
Subsection 46C(8) of the bill defines 'a retail outlet operated by' in
terms of 'a corporation or a related entity'. All retail entities with more
than five individual outlets will be covered by the legislation including
franchises where the franchisee owns more than five outlets.
2.6
The bill applies only to the sale of goods. It does not apply to
services.
Practices exempt from the bill's provisions
2.7
Subsection 46C(3) of the bill proposes several exceptions to the
Guaranteed Lowest Prices Rule. These include where the price of a product is
marked down because:
- the product is supplied or offered for supply at a genuine
factory, warehouse or clearance outlet;
- the outlet is genuinely closing down;
- the product is imminently perishable;
- the product or its packaging is damaged;
- the product is to be permanently removed from the range of
products supplied or offered for supply at the retail outlet; or
- the product has deteriorated in value as a result of being on
display in a retail outlet for a substantial period of time, having regard to
the nature of the product.
The rationale for the bill
2.8
The drafter of this legislation, Associate Professor Frank Zumbo of the
University of New South Wales, has explained the bill's rationale in the
following terms:
...the focus of the Blacktown Amendment is to ensure that
consumers get the lowest possible price for a product everyday and everywhere
in the same geographic area.[1]
...the Blacktown Amendment simply requires that the company
charges consumers the lowest price for the same product everyday and everywhere
in all retail outlets operated by the company under same trading name in the
same geographic area. Under the Blacktown Amendment so long as the company
charges consumers the lowest price for the same product everyday and everywhere
in the same geographic area, it is a matter for the company to choose that
price, and even whether or not it chooses to sell products below cost.[2]
Concentration of the Australian retail grocery and petrol markets
2.9
The concern that geographic price discrimination allows firms to exploit
a lack of competition in certain locations is partly founded on the view that Australia's
retail grocery and petrol markets are highly concentrated. The argument is that
the higher the market share a company enjoys, the less competition it faces and
the greater its capacity to maintain higher prices in uncompetitive areas and
lower—even predatory—prices in high competition areas.
2.10
The Southern Sydney Retailers Association told the committee that
Australia had 'the highest and fastest accelerating supermarket food prices in
the developed world'. Mr Craig Kelly, President of the Association, noted the
retail price for products such as milk and eggs has been rising faster than the
Consumer Price Index (CPI). The farm gate price for these products, on the
other hand, has not kept pace with the CPI.[3]
2.11
In its 2008 report on the competitiveness of retail grocery prices, the
ACCC noted the view of 'industry commentators' that Coles and Woolworths
account for 80 per cent of retail sales. This estimate comes from analysis
by PriceWaterhouse Coopers of ACNielsen data scan and defines grocery retail as
all branded packaged groceries (dry goods) excluding house-brands.[4]
2.12
The ACCC has argued that in its view, the major supermarket chains:
...account for between 55 per cent and 60 per cent of consumer
expenditure on grocery items. Woolworths accounts for at least 30 per cent and
Coles around 25 per cent. Although each of these shares of retail grocery sales
are large for a single company, to say that the MSCs enjoy an 80 per cent share
of grocery sales exaggerates the position of the retailers.[5]
2.13
Table 2.1 presents the ACCC's view on the percentage share of Woolworths
and Coles' sales for various categories of groceries. It concluded that while
Woolworths and Coles are clearly the largest players in each of the product
categories:
...with the exception of packaged groceries, the share of sales
attributable to each of Coles and Woolworths are not at a level that raises
significant concerns about the current market structure.[6]
Table 2.1: Woolworths' and Coles' share of key grocery category sales
Category
|
Major supermarket chains' share of sales
|
Packaged groceries
|
Approximately 70 per cent
|
Fruit and vegetables
|
Up to 50 per cent
|
Fresh meat
|
Approximately 50 per cent
|
Bakery products
|
Up to 50 per cent
|
Dairy products
|
50–60 per cent
|
Deli products
|
50–60 per cent
|
Eggs
|
Approximately 50 per cent
|
Source: Australian Competition and Consumer
Commission, Inquiry into the competitiveness of retail prices for standard
groceries, July 2008, p. 57.
2.14
The concentration of Australia's retail grocery market is also indicated
in a comparison of food price inflation with other countries. Australia's
prices for food and non-alcoholic beverages are compared with those in some
comparable economies in Table 2.2. In 2005, Australian food prices were notably
higher than in the US, comparable to those in most European countries and well
below those in Japan. Since 2005, food prices (in local currency terms) have
grown faster in Australia than in most comparable countries, but so have prices
in general (Table 2.3), reflecting among other factors the milder economic
slowdown here. The relative price of food has increased in most comparable
economies.
Table 2.2: Price level indices: Food and
non-alcoholic beverages, 2005, World =100
Australia
|
137
|
Japan
|
241
|
Belgium
|
138
|
Netherlands
|
112
|
Canada
|
137
|
New Zealand
|
147
|
France
|
133
|
Singapore
|
119
|
Germany
|
133
|
Sweden
|
152
|
Hong Kong
|
127
|
Switzerland
|
186
|
Ireland
|
159
|
United Kingdom
|
144
|
Italy
|
147
|
United States
|
112
|
Source: Global Purchasing
Power Parities and Real Expenditures: 2006 International Comparison Program,
World Bank, Table 2.
Table 2.3: Consumer prices: % change 2005 to 2009 (Q3)
|
Food
|
Core*
|
|
|
Food
|
Core*
|
Australia
|
18.3
|
11.7
|
|
Japan
|
4.2
|
-1.1
|
Belgium
|
13.0
|
6.8
|
|
Netherlands
|
8.6
|
5.8
|
Canada
|
14.9
|
6.5
|
|
New Zealand
|
25.7
|
9.8
|
France
|
7.5
|
5.9
|
|
Sweden
|
12.9
|
4.7
|
Germany
|
9.7
|
5.6
|
|
Switzerland
|
3.2
|
3.4
|
Ireland
|
5.6
|
7.2
|
|
United Kingdom
|
22.4
|
7.1
|
Italy
|
12.2
|
7.6
|
|
United States
|
12.5
|
9.4
|
* All items excluding food
and energy. Source: Secretariat, based on OECD, Main Economic Indicators.
2.15 Independent retailers have increased their sales
over the 2000s, as the (nominal) economy has expanded. The number of
independent stores has increased by about 50 per cent since 1999, although this
is mostly ‘convenience’ stores rather than large supermarkets.[7]
2.16 The market share of Metcash-affilated independent
supermarkets has held up, but this appears to mainly reflect takeovers of other
independent supermarkets.[8]
2.17 Aldi is the most significant new entrant, now having
over 200 stores and aspiring to expand to around 700. Costco has only one
store, but plans others in the capital cities.[9]
2.18 The market share of independents also varies
considerably from state to state. During the inquiry into the GROCERYchoice
website the National Association of Retail Grocers discussed what proportion of
the market independent retailers covered:
In Sydney the independent sector is below 10 per cent. It is
somewhere around eight per cent...In Victoria, the independent sector sits at about
18 per cent...South Australia sits at about 24 or 25 per cent, and WA is 31 per
cent...[and Tasmania] I think the independent sector is somewhere around 12 per
cent or 13 per cent.[10]
2.19 In the retail petrol market, the ACCC estimated in a
2007 report that Woolworths/Caltex and Coles Express/Shell account for about 63
per cent of all petrol sales (Table 2.4). As Woolworths/Caltex and Coles
Express/Shell have become market leaders, the process of petrol station
rationalisation has continued. The ACCC also reported increased use of both
outlets' 'shopper docket' schemes, which give shoppers at the respective
supermarkets a discount when purchasing their petrol.[11]
Table 2.4: Shares of retail sales by volume by brand in Australia (%)
|
2002–03
|
2003–04
|
2004–05
|
2005–06
|
2006–07
|
BP
|
20
|
20
|
18
|
19
|
19
|
Shell/
Coles Express
|
20
|
20
|
28
|
28
|
25
|
Mobil*
|
19
|
19
|
12
|
11
|
11
|
Caltex/
Woolworths
|
34
|
34
|
36
|
36
|
38
|
Independents
|
6
|
6
|
6
|
6
|
7
|
Source: Petrol Prices and
Australian Consumers, Report of the ACCC inquiry into the price of unleaded
petrol, December 2007, p. 77. The committee notes that at the time of writing,
the ACCC was considering Caltex's proposed $300 million acquisition of 302
Mobil service stations.
Navigation: Previous Page | Contents | Next Page