Consumer Law Library

Suppliers and grocery chain exhibition, in-store promotion

Topics: Clayton Act §2(d): promotional payments to customersRobinson-Patman ActFTC Act §5: unfair or deceptive actsPromotional allowances

69 F.T.C. 1234 · June 21, 1966 · Digest No. 62

source volume section (69 F.T.C. 1234)

Text is machine-OCR of the printed volume and may contain errors. Advisory opinions are the Commission's views on proposed conduct, not binding orders.

No. 62. Suppliers and grocery chain exhibition, in-store promotion. The landlord of an exhibition building has been advised by ,

ADVISORY OPINION DIGESTS 1235

the Federa1 Trade Commission that a proposed promotional p1an in which suppJiers and a grocery chain would lease exhibition display space with the chain also providing in-store promotion of suppliers' displayed products wou1d probably result in violation of Commission administered statutes.

According to the proposed plan , part of the exhibit in the building wou1d be displays provided and maintained by manufacturers, processors and distributors of food products and grocery store items. These exhibitors, the suppliers, may give away samples, take orders for "off premise" deJivery and sel1 at retail. The grocery chain s contract with the landlord would provide that the chain wou1d conduct one-week, chain-wide, in-store promotions of the exhibitors' products; that exhibitors may be required to furnish the chain with materials for the promotion; that the landlord and the chain wou1d cooperate in setting up the exhibitors' displays; and that the chain would have the right to approve only exhibitors whose products are sold in its stores. The Commission advised the 1andlord that imp1ementation of the plan probab1y wou1d result in violation of Section 2 (d) and (e) of the Robinson-Patman Amendment to the Clayton Act and Section 5 of the FTC Act un1ess promotional payments or services were made available to the exhibitor-suppliers' competing customers on proportional1y equal terms. The 2 (d) and (e) aspects, the Commission said, stem from the fact that exhibitor-suppJiers wou1d be vulnerable to a charge that they were i1egal1y discriminating between their customers in according promotional benefits. The Section 5 aspects inv01ve questions as to whether the chain and the landlord would be inducing a violation of Section 2 (d) by participating exhibitorsuppliers. (File No. 6437022, released June 21 1966.