Consumer Law Library

Refusal of alternatives in tripartite promotional assistance plan

Topics: AdvertisingPromotional allowances

76 F.T.C. 1112 · May 29, 1969 · Digest No. 379

source volume section (76 F.T.C. 1112)

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. 379. Refusal of alternatives in tripartite promotional assistance plan. The Commission advised the requesting party herein that it would not object if a proposed tripartite promotional assistance plan were to be implemented as described. The requesting party proposes to enter into agreements with grocery stores for use of the space immediately above store gondolas (oblong fixtures in a row, on the shelves of which products are displayed for sale). The space is to be used for display fixtures which wil hold, back to back, 20" x 24" placards advertising supplier goods.

Smaller stores not possessing space to display these large placards wil be given the option of obtaining smaller placards of shelf talkers (small signs suitable for being affxed to shelf edges) .

Stores wil be reimbursed for use of the space by being given a fixed percentage of the dollar value of purchases of the advertised products from suppliers during a specified period. Notice to entitled customers and checking of customer performance will be as set forth in the Commission s Advertising Allowances Guides promulgated May 29, 1969. The requesting party wil offer to perform seller obligations as provided by Guide 13. In question was the requesting party s right to refuse an alternate plan to those outlets functionally able to use the larger sign. ADVISORY OPINION DIGESTS 1113 To this the Commission had no objection. (File No. 703 7020 Released October 9 1969)