Tigerman, J. H

Text (OCR of the scan at left; may contain errors)

IN THE MATTER OF .J. H. TIGERMAN, DOING BUSINESS AS EVER-KEEN DRY SHAVER COMPANY AND ROYCE DRY SHAVER COMPANY COMPLAINT, FINDINGS, AND ORDER IN REGARD TO Tile ALLEGED VIOLATION Ob' SEC, !i OF AN ACT OF CONGRESS APPROVED SEPT. 2G, 1914 Docket 3757. Complaint, Apr. 12, 19J9-Dcrision, June 14, 1939 Where an individual engaged in assembling, and In selling and distributing electric razors to dealers In various States and in the District of Columbia- ( a) Furnished various devices and plans of merchandising which involved operation of games of chance, gift enterprises, or lottery schemes for dis· tribution of said merclwndise to ultimate consun.Jers wholly by lot or chance, and under which he distributed to purchasing pulllic certain literature and Instructions, Including push cards, order blanks, pamphlets illus· trating his products, and circulars explaining his plan of selling the same and allotting pre>miums or ptizcs under f\'U<:h plan, by which person selecting from long list of feminiue names that corresponding with name concealed undet· cnr~'s large master seal, was awarded electt·ic dry shaver being thus dis}Josed of, and amount, if any, paid for chance by customers was contingent upon particular number pushed by chance, in accordance with cards' explanatory legends, and solicitor ·or operator of card was likewise thus compensuted, and customer-purchaser of said individual was compensated uy difference between aggrf'gate receipts from each card and cost to him of two shavers involved in operation thereof; and Supplied thereby to and placed in hands of others means of conducting lotteries in the sale of Ills merchandise, In accordance with aforesaid or similar sales plans involving game of chance or sale of a chance to procure an article of merchandise at a price much less than normal retail price thereof, or without cost, and under which articles of merchandise involved were distribute>d to purchasing public wholly by lot or chance, contrary to an estalllished rmulic policy of the Government of the United States, and in viola ton of the criminal Ia ws, and 'in compe>tition with many who are unwilling to adopt and use said or any method involving game of chance or sale of a chance to win something by chance, or any other method contrary to public policy, and refrain therefrom; With the result that many persons were attracted by said sales plan or method employed by said individual in sale and distribution of his merchandise and element of chance involved therein, and were thereby induced to buy and sE>ll such merchandise in preference to that offe>red and sold by said competltot·s who do not use same or equivalent method, and with effect, because of said game of chance, of unfairly di'l'ertlng substantial trade to said individual from his competitors aforesaid who do not use such or equivalent method; and (b) llepresented, in advertising disseminated through periodicals of general circulation and through circulars and other printed matter, that l1is said products were equal in value to a $15 electric dry shaver and would give I I I EVER-KEEN DRY SHAVER CO., ETC.

108 Complaint performance equal to that of such a device, through such statements, among others, as "* * * a genuine $15 dry sl111ver in trpe and actual value," "* * • has all the featnres of $15 devices-and many others besiues," and "Acclaimeu as the best dry sha~·er on the market regardless of price," facts being products in question were of inferior grade and workmanship, last only a very short period of time, ami will not accomplish the results as satisfactorily as a higher grade mechanism sold at a higher price; (c) Represented, in his advertising disseminated as aforesaid, that his products were sold on a 10-day trial or money-back basis, and that one of his said shavers thus sold was guaranteed for 1 year and another for 5 years. against mechanical defects, facts being he did not sell his said product on such a basis, but failed and refused to make any refund to purchasers, and did not guarantee products referred to for periods alleged, but refused to make rt>pairs unless cost tht>rt>of was paid by purchaser; and (d) Represt>nted that the possible and average earnings of agents and sales-men in the ordinary course of busint>ss was from $:30 to $100 a week, and that certain of his salesmen were earning average pr·ofits of from $300 to $500 a month and more in the ordinary course of business, through such statements, among others, as "l\Iake up to $100 a week :ntroducing thi;; new low priced precision built elt>etric dry shaver," and "It you are making less than $300 a month, drop whatever you are doing and get in on this sensational, new money making proposition," facts being possible and average earnings of salesmen and agents were not $t;O to $100 a week, said sums we~e not true representation of average net earnings orprofits consistently made by his. active full-time agents or salesmen in ordinary course of business and under normal conditions and eircumstances, they earned only a fraction of the amount represented, and noneof them earned $300 to $500 a month, and said sums were never consistently earned by any agent or salesman in ordinary cour!;e of business and under normal conditions and circumstances;

With effect of misleading substantial portion of purchasing public into erroneous belief that such statements and representations were true, and into purchase of substantial quantities of his products by reason of such belief, nud of thereby unfairly diverting, through such statements and representations, trade to himself from many competitor-dealers in like and similar products engaged in commerce among the various States and in the District of Columbia,-and who do not make such false, deceptive and misleading statements and representations concerning their products and their methods of doing business:

Ileld, That such acts and practices, as above set forth, wre all to the prejudice and Injury of the public and competitors and constituted unfail'" methods of competition and unfair and deceptive acts and practices in commerce.

Mr. B. G. 1Vilson for the Commission.

Complaint Pursuant to the provisions of the Federal Trade Commission Act and by virtue of the authority vested in it by said act, the Federal Trade Commission, having reason to believe that J. H. Tigerman~ 213706'"-10-YOL 29--10 Complaint 29F.T.C.

individually, and trading as Ever-Keen Dry Shaver Co. and Royce Dry Shaver Co., hereafter referred to as respondent, has violated the provisions of the said act and it appearing to the Commission that a proceeding by it in respect thereof would be in the public interest, hereby issues its complaint stating its charges in that respect as follows:

PARAGRAPH 1. The respondent is an individual trading under the names of Ever-Keen Dry Shaver Co. and Royce Dry Shaver Co., with his principal office and place of business located at 43 East Ohio Street, in the city of Chicago, Ill. Respondent is now and for some time past has been engaged in the business of assembling electric razors and in the sale and distribution thereof to dealers located in the various States of the United States and in the District of Columbia. Respondent causes and has caused said merchandise, when sold, to be shipped or transported from his place of business in the State of Illinois into and through other States of the United States and the District of Columbia to purchasers thereof at their respective points of location. There is now and has been for some time last past a course of trade by said respondent in such merchandise in commerce between and among the various States of the United States and in the District of Columbia. In the course and conduct of his business, respondent is in competition with other individuals and with partnerships and corporations engaged in the sale and distribution of like and similar articles of merchandise in commerce between and among the various States of the United States and in the District of Columbia.

PAR. 2. In the course and conduct of his business, as described in paragraph 1 hereof, respondent in soliciting the sale of and selling and distributing his merchandise in said commerce, furnishes and has furnished various devices and plans of merchandising which involve the operation of games of chance, gift· enterprises, or lottery schemes by which said merchandise is distributed to the ultimate consumers thereof wholly by lot or chance. The method and sales plan adopted and used by respondent was and is substantially as follows:

Respondent distributes and has distributed to the purchasing public in said commerce certain literature and instructions including, among other things, push cards, order blanks, pamphlets containing illustrations of his said products, and circulars explaining respondent's plan of selling merchandise and of allotting extra premiums or prizes to the operators of said push cards. One of respondent's push cards bears 81 names with ruled columns on the reverse side thereof for recording the name of the customer opposite the feminine name EVER-KEEN DRY SHAVER CO., ETC. 111 108 Complaint selected. Said push card has 81 small partially perforated disks marl-eel "push," below each of which is printed one of the feminine names printed alphabetically on the reverse side of the card. Con- ('ealed 'within each disk is a number which is disclosed when the disk is pushed or separated from the card. The push card also has a large mast11r seal, concealed within which is one of the feminine names appearing on the reverse side of the said push card. The push card bears printed legends or instructions as follows: NAl\IE UNDER SEAL RECEIVES A $15 VALUE ELECTRIC DRY SHAVER Numbers 1 to 16 Do not remove FREE seal until All Numbers Over 16 entire card Pay Only 15 Cents. is sold. NO HIGHER Respondent furnishes and has furnished his representatives with additional printed instructions or suggestions for using said push card, which are as follows:

PLAN NO. 3 SALES CARD PLAN Here is a plan that brings big profits without selling. It is the sales card method. You actually give away Ever-Keen Electric Shavers. You distribute sales cards to friends, neighbors aud others. They in turn present their cards to their friends who "take selections" paying the small sums of It to 1~ for an opportunity to own an Ever-Keen Dry Shaver. The person selecting the name corresponding with the one appearing under the seal on the card receives .an Ever-Keen Dry Shaver. Each one of your solicitors colll'cts a total of $10.00 from his sales card which he turns over to you. You give him 2 Ever-Kee-n Dry Shavers 1 for himself and for the person who selected the name corresponding with the one appearing under the seal. Two Ever-Kern Dry Shavers cost you as little as $5.GO--so you can make as much as $4.50 on every :!'alls card. Think of the big profits that can come from operating a dozen to two dozl'n cards at one time.

Sales of respondent's products by means of said push card are made in accordance with the above-described legends or instructions. Said prizes or premiums are allotted to the customers or purchasers in accordance with the above legends. The said articles of merchan· -lise are thus distributed to the purchasing public wholly by lot or ~hance. Respondent furnishes and has furnished various push cards accompanied by a set of order blanks, instructions, and other printed matter for use in the sale and distribution of his merchandise by 112 FEDEkAL TRADE COl\fl\USSION DECISIONS Complaint 29F. T. C.

means of a game of chance, gift enterprise, or lottery scheme. Such push cards are similar to the push cards hereinabove described and. vary only in detail.

PAR. 3. The persons to whom respondent furnishes, and has furnished, said push cards use, and have used, the same in purchasing, selling, and distributing respondent's merchandise in accordance with the aforesaid sales plan. Respondent thus supplies to and places in the hands of others a means of conducting lotteries in the sale of his merchandise in accordance with the sales plan hereinabove set forth. The use by respondent of said method in the sale of his merchandise and the sale of such merchandise by and through the use thereof and by the aid of said method is a practice of the sort which is contrary to an established public policy of the Government of the United States and in violation of the criminal laws.

PAR. 4. The sale of merchandise to the purchasing public in the manner alleged involves a game of chance or the sale of a chance ta· procure an article of merchandise at a price much less than the normal retail price thereof or without cost. Many persons, firms, and corporations who sell and distribute merchandise in competition with there- ~pondent as above alleged are unwilling to adopt and use said method or any method involving a game of chance or the sale of a chance to win something by chance or any other method that is contrary to public policy, and such competitors refrain therefrom. l\f:my persons are attracted by said sales plan or method employed by respondent in the sale and distribution of his merchandise and the element of chance involved therein and are thereby induced to buy and sell respondent's merchandise in preference to merchandise offered for sale and sold by said competitors of respondent who do not use the same or an equivalent method. The use of said method by respondent, because of said game of chance, has a tendency and capacity to, and does, unfairly divert substantial trade to the respondent from his said competitors who do not use the same or an equivalent method. PAR. 5. In the course and conduct of his business, respondent has disseminated and does now disseminate false and misleading representations with reference to his eledric razors designated as "New Royce Dry Shaver" and "Ever-Keen Electric Dry Shaver" by means of advertising copy inserted in magazines and periodicals having a general circulation and by circulars and by other printed matter, which representations purport to be descriptive of said products and the effectiveness of their use. By means of this advertising disseminated as aforesaid the respondent represents that said products are equal in value to a $15 electric dry shaver and will give per- EVER-KEEN DRY SHAVER CO., ETC. 113 108 Complaint formance equal to that of a $15 device. Typical of such representations are the following:

It bas everything claimed for any other dry shaver-and more. It is closer cutting, self-starting-a genuine $15 dry shaver In type and actual value. The Royce Dry Shaver has all the features of $15 devices-and many otheril besides.

Acclaimed as the best dry shaver on the market regardless of price. We build a dry shaver that will do everything a $15 shaver will do and do it much better than many higher priced shavers. In truth and in fact respondent's products designated as New Royce Dry Shaver and Ever-Keen Electric Dry Shaver are not equal in value and will not give the performance of a $15 electric dry shaver. Instead these products are of inferior grade and workmanship and last only a very short period of time. They will not accomplish the results as satisfactorily as a higher-grade mechanism sold at a higher price.

PAR. 6. In his advertising disseminated as aforesaid respondent represents that his products are sold on a "10 day trial or moneyback basis" and that the New Royce Dry Shaver is guaranteed for 1 year and that the Ever-Keen Electric Dry Shaver is guaranteed for 5 years against mechanical defects.

In truth and in fact the respondent does not sell said products on a 10-day-trial basis but instead fails and refuses to make any refund to purchasers. Furthermore, the respondent does not guarantee said products for the periods alleged but instead refuses to make repairs unless the cost thereof is paid by the purchaser. PAR. 7. For the purpose of inducing salesmen and agents to sell hi~ products, respondent represents that the possible and average earnings of agents and salesmen in the ordinary course of business is from $50 to $100 per week and that certain of his salesmen are earning average profits of from $300 to $500 per month and more in the ordinary course of business. Typical of these representations are the following:

Make up to $100 a week Introducing this new low priced precision built electric dry shaver.

If you are making less than $300 a month, drop whatever you are doing and get in on this sensational, new money making proposition. Profits up to $5-$10-even $25 in a day are possible. If $50, $GO or $75 a week sound good to yuu, don't delay. The same proposition is paying others up to $300, $400, $500 and more every month in all sections of the country.

In truth and in fact the possible and average earnings of salesmen and agents are not $50 to $100 a week and said sums are not a true representation of the average net earnings or profits consistently 114 FEDERAL TRADE COl\Il\lission DECISIONS Findings 29F. T. C.

made by respondent's active full-time agents or salesmen in the ordinary course of business and under normal conditions and circumstances. In fact such agents and salesmen earn only a fraction of the amount represented. Furthermore, none of the respondent's salesmen have earned or now eari). $300 to $500 per month, and s<tid sums so represented have never been consistently earned by any agent or salesman in the ordinary course of business and under normal conditions and circumstances.

PAR. 8. The use by respondent of the false, deceptive, and misleading statements and representations above referred to have had, and now have, the capacity and tendency to mislead and deceive and have misled a substantial portion of the purchasing public into the erroneous belief that such statements and representations are true at1d to purchase substantial quantities of respondent's products as a result of such erroneous belief. There are among said competitors of respondent many dealers in like and similar products who do not make such false, deceptive, and misleading statements and representations concerning their products and tbei.r method of doing business. lly the aforesaid statements and representations by respondent trade is unfairly diverted to respondent from such competitors, and as a. result thereof substantial injury is being done, and has been done, by respondent to competition in commerce between and among the various States of the United States, and in the District of Columbia. PAR. 9. The aforesaid acts and practices of respondent, as herein alleged, are all to the prejudice and injury of the public and of respondent's competitors and constitute unfair methods of competition in commerce and unfair and deceptive acts and practices in commerce within the intent and meaning of the Federal Trade Commission Act.

REPORT, FINDINGS As TO THE FAcrs, AND Onder Pursuant to the provisions of the Federal Trade Commission Acti the Federal Trade Commission on April 12, 1939, issued and served its complaint in this proceeding upon respondent J. H. Tigerman individually and trading as Ever-Keen Dry Shaver Co. and Royce Dry Shaver Co., charging him with the use of unfair methods of competition in commerce, and unfair and deceptive acts and practices in commerce in violation of the provisions of said act. On May 15~ 1939, the respondent filed his answer, in which answer he admitted all the material allegations of fact set forth in said complaint, and waived all intervening procedure a.nd further hearing as to said facts. Thereafter the proceeding regularly came on for final hearing before the Commission on the said complaint and the answer thereto, and EVER-KEEN DRY SHAVER CO., ETC. 115 108 Findings the Commission having duly considered the matter, and being now fully advised in the premises, finds that this proceeding is in the interest of the public, and makes this its findings as to the facts and its conclusion drawn therefrom:

FINDINGS AS TO THE Facts PARAGRAPH 1. The respondent is an individual trading under the names of Ever-Keen Dry Shaver Co. and Royce Dry Shaver Co., with his principal office and place of business located at 43 East Ohio Street in the city of Chicago, Ill. Respondent is now and for some time past has been engaged in the business of assembling electric razors and in the sale and distribution thereof to dealers located in the various States of the United States and in the District of Columbia. Respondent causes and has caused said merchandise, when sold, to be shipped or transported _from his place of business in the State of Illinois into and through other States of the United States and the District of Columbia to purchasers thereof at their respective points of location. There is now and has been for some time last past a course of trade by said respondent in such merchandise in commerce between and among the various States of the United States and in the District of Columbia. In the course and conduct of his business, respondent is in competition with other individuals and with partnerships and corporations engaged in the sale and distribution of like and similar articles of merchandise in commerce between and among the various States of the United States and in the District of Columbia:

PAR. 2. In the course and conduct of his business, as described in paragraph 1 hereof, respondent in soliciting the sale of and selling and distributing his merchandise in said commerce, furnishes and has furnished various devices and plans of merchandising which involve the operation of games of chance, gift enterprises, or lottery schemes by which said merchandise is distributed to the ultimate consumers thereof wholly by lot or chance. The method and sales plan adopted and used by respondent wns nnd is substantially as follows:

Respondent distributes and has distributed to the purchasing public in said commerce certain literature and instructions including, among other things, push cards, order blanks, pamphlets cmitaining illustrations of his said products, and circulars explaining respondent's plan of selling merchandise and of allotting extra premiums or prizes too the operators of said push cards. One of respondent's push cards bears 81 names with ruled columns on the reverse side thereof for recording the name of the customer opposite the femi1~ine name FEDERAL TRADE COl\Il\IISSION DECISlONS116 Findings 29F.T.C.

selected. Said push card has 81 small partially perforated disks ·marked "push," below each of which is printed one of the feminine names printed alphabetically on the reverse side of the card. Con- ·cealed within each disk is a number which is disclosed when the disk is pushed or separated from the card. The push card also has a large master seal, concealed within which is one of the feminine names appearing on the reverse side of the said push card. The push card bears printed legends or instructions as follows: NAME UNDER SEAL RECEIVES A $15 VALUE Numbers 1 to 18 ELECTRIC Do not remove ll"REEl DRY seal until -All Numbers over 16 SHAVER entire card Pay Only 15 Cents. is sold NO HIGHER Respondent furnishes and has furnished his representatives with additional printed instructions or suggestions for using said push -card, which are as follows:

PLAN NO.3 SALES CARD PLAN Here is n plan that brings big profits without selling. It is the sales card method. You actually give away Ever-Keen Electric Shavers. You distribute sales cards to friends, neighbors and others. They in turn present their cards to their friends who "take selections" paying the small sums of lc to 15c for an opportunity to own an Ever-Keen Dry Shaver. The person selecting the name corresponding with the one appearing under the seal on the card receives an Ever-Keen Dry Shaver. Each one of your solicitors collects a total of $10.00 from his sales card which he turns over to you. You give him 2 Ever-Keen Dry Shavers 1 for himself and for the person who selected the name corre- ~<ponding with the one appearing under the seal. Two Ever-Keen Dry Shavers cost you as little as $5.50-so you can make as much as $4.50 on every sales card. Think of the big profits that can come from operating a dozen to two ·dozen cards at one time.

Sales of respondent's products by means of said push card are made in accordance with the above-described legends or instructions. Said prizes or premiums are allotted to the customers or purchasers in accordance with the above legends. The said articles of merchandise are thus distributed to the purchasing public wholly by lot or chance. Respondent furnishes and has furnished various push cards accompanied by a set of order blanks, instructions, and other printed matter for use in the sale and distribution of his merchandise by means of a game of chance, gift enterprise, or lottery scheme. Such EVER-KEEN DRY SHAVER CO., ETC. 117 108 Findings push cards are similar to the push cards hereinabove described and vary only in detail.

PAR. 3. The persons to whom respondent furnishes, and has f~rnished, said push cards use, and have used, the same in purchasing, selling, and distributing respondent's merchandise in accordance with the aforesaid sales plan. Respondent thus supplies to and places. in the hands of others a means of conducting lotteries in the sale of his merchandise in accordance with the sales plan hereinabove set forth. The use by respondent of said method in the sale of his merchandise and the sale of such merchandise by :mel through the use thereof and by the aid of said method is a practice of the sort which is contrary to an established public policy of the Government of the United States and in violation of the criminal laws. · PAR. 4. The sale of merchandise to the purchasing public in the manner alleged involves a game of chance or the sale of a chance to procure an article of merchandise at a price much less than the normal retail price thereof or without cost. l\Iany persons, firms, and corporations who sell and distribute merchandise in competition with the respondent as above alleged are unwilling to adopt and use said method or any method involving a game of chance or the sale of a chance to win something by chance or any other method that is contrary to public policy, and such competitors refrain therefrom. Many persons are attracted by said sales plan or method employed by respondent in the sale and distribution of his merchandise and the element of chance involved therein and are thereby induced to buy and sell respondent's merchandise in preference to merchandise offered for sale and sold by said competitors of respondent who do not use the same or an equivalent method. The use of said method by respondent, because of said game of chance, has a tendency and capacity to, and does, unfairly divert substantial trade to the respondent from his said competitors who do not use the same or an equivalent method.

PAn. 5. In the course and conduct of his business, respondent has disseminated and does now disseminate false and misleading representations with reference to his electric razors designated as "New Royce Dry Shaver" and "Ever-Keen Electric Dry Shaver" by means of advertising copy inserted in magazines and periodicals having a general circulation and by circulars and by other printed matter, which representations purport to be descriptive of said products and the effectiveness of their use. By means of this advertising disseminated as aforesaid the respondent represents that said products are equal in value to a $15 electric dry shaver and will give per- 118 FEDERAL TRADE UOMMISSION DECISIONS Findings 29 F. T. C. formance equal to that of a $15 device. Typical of such representations are the following :

lt has everything claimed for any other dry shaver-and more. It is closer -cutting, self-starting-a genuine $15 dry shaver in type and actual value. The Royce Dry Shaver has all the features of $15 devices-and many others besides.

Acclaimed as the best dry shaver on the market regardless of price. We build a dry shaver that will do everything a $15 shaver will do and odo it much better than many higher priced shavers. In truth and in fact respondent's products designated as New Royce Dry Shaver and Ever-Keen Electric Dry Shaver are not equal in value and will not give the performance of a $15 electric dry shaver. Instead these products are of inferior grade and workmanship and last only a very short period of time.. They will not accomplish the results as satisfactorily as a higher-grade mechanism sold at a higher price.

PAR. G. In his advertising disseminated as aforesaid respondent Tepresents that his products are sold on a "10 day trial or moneyback basis" and that the New Royce Dry Shaver is guaranteed for 1 year and that the Ever-Keen Electric Dry Shaver is guaranteed for 5 years against mechanical defects. . In truth and in fact the respondent does not sell said products on a 10-day-trial basis but instead fails and refuses to make any refund to purchasers. Furthermore, the respondent does not guarantee said products for the periods alleged but instead refuses to .make repairs unless the cost thereof is paid by the purchaser. PAR. 7. For the purpose of inducing salesmen and agents to sell his products, respondent represents that the possible and average -earnings of agents and salesmen in the ordinary course of business is from $50 to $100 per week and that certain of his salesmen are earning average profits of from $300 to $500 per month and more in the ordinary course of business. Typical of these representations .are the following:

Make up to $100 a week introducing this new low priced precision built .electric dry shaver.

If you ore making less them $300 a month, drop whatever you are doing and :get in on this sensational, new money making proposition. Profits up to $5-$1Q--even $25 in a day are possible. If $ti0, $60 or $75 a week sound good to you, don't delay. The same proposition is paying others up to $300, $400, $500 and more ·every month in all sections of the country. In truth and in fact the possible and average earnings of salesmen .and agents are not $50 to $100 a week and said sums are not a true representation of the average net earnings or profits consistently EVER-KEEN DRY SHAVER CO., ETC. 119 Order made by r~spondent's active full-time agents or salesmen in the ·ordinary course of business and under normal conditions and cir- ·cumstances. In fact such agents and salesmen earn only a fraction .of the amount represented. Furthermore, none of the respondent'sI· ·salesmen have earned or now earn $300 to $500 per month, and said 1, :sums so represented have never been consistently earned by any -agent or salesman in the ordinary course of business and under normal conditions and circumstances.I: PAn. 8. The use by respondent of the false, deceptive, imd misleading statements and representations above referred to have had, and now have, the capacity and tendency to mislead and deceive and have misled a substantial portion of the purchasing public into the erroneous belief that such statements and representations are true and to purchase substantial quantities of respondent's products as a result of such erroneous belief. There are among said competitors of respondent many dealers in like and similar products who do not make such false, deceptive, and misleading statements and representations concerning their products and their method of doing business. By the aforesaid statements and representations by respondent trade is unfairly diverted to respondent from such competitors who are likewise engaged in commerce between and among the various States of the United States, and in the Dist.rict of Columbia. CONCLUSION The aforesaid acts and practices of respondent as herein found are all to the prej~dice and injury of the public and of respondent's competitors, and constitute unfair methods of competition in commerce and unfair and deceptive acts and practices in commerce within the intent and meaning of the Federal Trade Commission Act. ORDER TO CEASE AND DESIST This proceeding having been heard by the Federal Trade Commission, upon the complaint of the Commission and the answer of respondent, in which answer respondent admits all the material .allegations of fact set forth in said complaint, and states that" he waives all intervening procedure and further hearing as to said facts, nnd the Commission having made its findings as to the said facts and conclusion that said respondent has violated the provisions of the Federal Trade Commission Act.

It is ordered, That the respondent J. H. Tigerman, individually, and trading as Ever-Keen Dry Shaver Co., and as Royce Dry Shaver Co., or under any other name or names, his representatives, agents, Order 29F.T.C.

and employees, directly or through any corporate or other device, in connection with the offering for sale, sale and distribution' of electric razors or any other merchandise in commerce as commerce is defined in the Federal Trade Commission Act, do forthwith cease and desist from:

1. Supplying to, or placing in the hands o:f, others push or pull cards, punchboards, or other lottery devices, for the purpose o:f enabling such persons to dispose o:f, or sell, any merchandise by the use thereof.

2. Mailing, shipping, or transporting to agents, or to distributors or to members of the public, push or pull cards, punchboards, or other lottery devices so prepared or printed as to enable said persons to sell or distribute any merchandise by the use thereof. 3. Selling or otherwise disposing of any merchandise by the use of push or pull cards, punchboards, or other lottery devices. 4. Representing any specified sum of money as possible earnings or profits o:f agents, salesmen, representatives, or distributors for any given period of time, which is not a true representation o:f the average net earnings or profits consistently made by respondent's active fulltime agents, salesmen, .representatives, or distributors in the ordinary course of business under normal conditions and circumstances. 5. Representing any specified sum of money as earnings or profits of any specified agent, salesman, representative, or distributor for any given period of time, which has not in :fact been consistently earned net by such agent, salesman, representative, or distributor in the ordinary course of business, under normal conditions and circumstances.

6. Representing that electric razors or any similar products which are of inferior grade and workmanship are equal in value to products sold at a much higher price, or will give performance equal to such higher-priced products.

7. Representing that respondent's products are sold on a "trial" or "money-back basis," or on any similar plan unless the respondent does in :fact make refunds to dissatisfied purchasers. 8. Representing that respondent's electric razors or similar products nre guaranteed :for any specified period of time when such is not the fact. · It is further ordered, That the respondent shall, within GO days after service upon him of this order, file with the Commission a report in writing setting :forth in detail the manner and :form in which he has complied with this order.

I.

STANDARD BRANDS INC., ET AL. 121 Syllabus