Advisory opinion letter to Mr. Johnson

From your letter, it appcars that Brown proposes to co11ect certain information from its dealcr customers for use by it in scheduling its manufacture of popular styles of shoes. Dealer customers wi1 be asked to report, on a voluntary basis, their sales of Brown brand shoes, by brand and stock number, for the first four to six weeks of each se11ing season. You state that the intended result of this program is to improve Brown s ability to respond to reorders for popular types of shoes by its dealer customers.

On thc basis of the facts submitted , you are advised that the Commission is of the opinion that the operation of the proposed dealer reporting program, on a voluntary basis, would not violate the modified order issued in this matter.

By direction of thc Commission.

Supplemental Letter Relative tLJ Req?J1!st

February 13 , 1976

Dear Mr. Johnson:

In connection with our letter request of January 7 , 1976, for an advisory opinion of the Commission on the proposed early dealer sales reporting program for Brown brand shoes dcscribcd in that letter, Mr. Gravatt of your office has indicated that you wanted to know whether or not the annual IRD storc profitahility survey was still being prcparcd for Brown by the Russe11 A11en Company of ew York. The Company has informed me that the last such survey prepared for Brown by the Russe11 Allen Company was bascd upon 1969 annual

2)(;-%90- 1.': - 77 - 91 1442 FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSIO!\ DECISIO"S

87 F.

store statistics and was prepared and distrihuted in 1970, and that no similar report has since been prepared by or for Brown. As indicated in our previous letter, the Company continues to request and obtain necessary credit information from its dealer customers for use by its Credit Department and monthly gTOSS sales figures (which are voluntarily reported by approximately one-fourth of the IRD outlets) on the same basis as previously described to the Commission in the Company s compJiance reports. I hope this is the information you require and that we may obtain a favorable ruling on our request in the near future. Very truly yours /s/ Edwin S. Taylor

utlt/ of Request

January 7, 1976

Dear Mr. Gereke:

This firm represents Brown Group, Inc. (formerly Brown Shoe Company, Inc.) which, as you may recall, is operating under a Modified Order to Cease and Desist issued by the Commission on August 3, 1966 in connection with Brown s Independent Retailers Division ("IRD" program (FTC DocKet :'0. 7606). A copy of the Order is enclosed. In connection with its manufacture and sale of in-stock branded Jines of shoes , i. , hranded shoes that are stocked by Brown for reorder by its dealer customers during the selling season, Brown would Jike to ask its dealer customers to report their sales of Brown brand shoes , by brand and stock number , for the first four to six weeks of each selling season. Such a report would be entirely voluntary on the dealers' part and would only pertain to Brown brand shoes. Sales of competitors shoes would not be reported. The request for this sales information and the reports themselves would be handled by Brown s Research Department, and the individual reports and any information contained in them would not be available to Brown IRD division or to any of its branded lines sel1ing divisions, although summaries of such information would be published to such divisions for their information and guidance but without disclosing particular information as to any individual dealer customer.

These reports of early sales would be tabulated by computer and would provide Brown with an eariy indication as to the particular styles of Brown brand shoes that \vere and \vere not selling well in each rehrion of the country. This , in turn , would enable Brown to modify its manufacturing schedules for in-stock shoes to increasE-; production of popular styles in each brand and cut back on apparently