Golf Digest, Inc.

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

IN THE ~fatter OF GOLF DIGEST, INC.

CONSENT ORDER" ETC., IN REGARD TO THE ALLEGED VIOLATION OF SEC. 2 (d) OF THE CLAYTON ACT Docket C-203. Complaint, Atlg. 1962-Decision, Aug. 1962 Consent order requiring the Evanston, 111., publisher of "Golf Digest" magazine, to cease violating Sec. 2(d) of the Clayton Act by making payments-and on the basis of individual negotiation and not proportionally equalcertain operators of chain retail outlets in railroad, airport, and bus terminals and outlets in hotels and office buildings, while not offering such allowances on proportionally equal terms to all competitors of such outlets, including drug and grocery chains and other newsstands. CO:MPhUNT The Federal Trade Commission, having reason to believe that the party respondent named in the caption hereof and hereinafter more particularly desig11ated and described, has violated and is now violating the provisions of subsection (d) of Section 2 of the Clayton Act (V. C. Title 15, Sec. 13), as amended by the Robinson-Patman Act hereby issues its complaint stating its cha,rges with respect thereto as follows:

PARAGRA.PH 1. Respondent Golf Digest, Inc. is a corporation organized and doing business under the laws of the State of Illinois, with its office and principal place of business located at 1236 Sherman Avenue, Evanston, Ill. Said respondent among other things, has been engaged and is presently engaged in the business of publishing and distributing various publications including magazines under copyrighted titles including "Golf Digest". Respondent's sales of publications during the calendar year 1960 exceeded five hundred thousand dollars.

PAR. 2. Publications published by respondent are distributed by respondent to customers through its national distributor, Publishers Distributing Corporation hereinafter referred to as PDC. PDC has acted and is now acting as national distributor for the publications of several independent publishers, including respondent publisher. PDC, as national distributor of publications published by respondent and other independent publishers, has performed and is now performing various services for these publishers. Among the services performed and still being performed by PDC for the benefit of these publishers are the taking of purchase orders and the 'j28-122~65-2'7 , , Complaint 61 F.

distributing, billing and collecting for such publications from customers. PDC has also negotiated promotional arrangements with the retail customers of the publishers it represents, on behalf of and with the knowledge and approval of said publishers, including respondent publisher.

In its capacity as national distributor for respondent in dealing with the customers of respondent, PDC served and is now serving as a conduit or intermediary for the sale, distribution and promotion of publications published by respondent.

PAR. 3. Respondent, through its conduit or intermediary, PDC has sold and distributed and now sells and distributes its publications in substantial quantities in commerce, as "commerce" is defined in the Clayton Act, as amended, to competing customers located throughout various states of the. Linited States and in the District of Columbia. PAR. 4. In the course and conduct of its business in commerce respondent has paid or contracted for the payment of something of value to or for the benefit of some of its customers as compensation or in consideration for services or facilities furnished, or contracted to be furnished, by or through such customers in connection ,,-ith the handling: sale, or offering for sale of publications sold to them by respondent. Such payments or allmyances "were not made available on proportionally equal terms to all other customers of respondent competing in the distribution of such publications. PAR. 5. As an example of the practices alleged herein, respondent has made payments or allmyances to certain retail customers "ho operate chain retail outlets in railroad, airport and bus terminals as well as outlets located in hotels and office buildings. Such payments or allowances were not offered or otherwise made available on proportionally equal terms to all other customers (including drug chains, grocery chains and other newsstands) competing with the favored customers in the sale and distribution of the publications of respondent publisher. Among the favored customers receiving payments in 1960 which were not offered to other competing customers In connection ,..,.ith the purchase and sale of responclenfs publications were:

jJprOidll/atc Customers: will/Glint RccciL"cll "Cnion Kews Co., ?\ew York City, ?\.Y_---------- ---------------- $3 890. DO ABC Vending Corp., Long hland City, N.Y__--------------------- 61. Freel Haney, Chicago, 11L_-_--------------------------------- 1 123. 00 Barkalow Bros. , Omaha, Nebr-----_----------------------------- 64. 1 ReceiYetl in log!.

GOLF DIGEST) INC. 407 405 Decision and Order Respondent made said payments to its favored customers on the basis of individual negotiations. Among said favored cutomers such payments ",ere not made on proportionally equal terms. PAR. 6. The acts and practices of respondent as alleged above are in violation of the provisions of subsection (d) of Section 2 of the Clayton Act, as amended.

DECISION AND ORDER The Commission ha ving heretofore determined to issue its complaint charging the respondent named in the caption hereof with violation of subsection (d) of Section 2 of the Clayton Act, as amended, and the respondent having been served with notice of said determination and with a copy of the complaint the Commission intended to issue together with a proposed form of order; and The respondent and counsel for the Commission having therea,after executed an agreement containing a consent order, an admission by the respondent of all the jurisdictional facts set forth in the complaint to issue herein, a statement that the signing of said agreement is for settlement purposes only and does not constitute an admission by respondent that the law has been violated as set forth in such complaint ; and waivers and provisions are required by the Commission s rules; and The Commission, having considered the agreement, hereby aecepts same, issues its complaint in the form contemplated by said agreement makes the follo"\ying jurisdictional findings, and enters the follo"\\'ing order:

1. Respondent, Golf Digest, Inc., is a. corporation organized, existing and doing business under and by virtue of the la"\Vs of the State of Illinois, with its office and principal place of business located at 1236 Sherman Avenue, in the city of Evanston, State of Illinois. 2. The Federal Trade Commission has jurisdiction of the subject ma tiel' of this proceeding and of the respondent. ORDER It is onle1' That respondent Golf Digest, Inc., a corporation, its officers, employees, agents and representatives, directly or through flny c.orpornte 01' other device, in connection with the distribution, sale or offering for sale of publicfltions including magazines in commerce as "commerce.e " is c1eJ-ined in the amended Clayton Act, do fortlnyit h cease and desist from:

P~ying or contracting for the payment of an ~llo"\YallCe or anything of vnIne to, 01' for the benefit of, any customer as compensa- Complaint 61 F.

tion or in consideration for any services or facilities furnished by or through such customer in connection with the handling, offering for sale, sale or distribution of publications including magazines published, sold or offered for sale by respondent, unless such payment or consideration is affirmatively offered and otherwise made available on proportionally equal terms to all of its other customers competing with such favored customer in the distribution of such publications including l).lagazines. The word "customer" as use,d above shall be deemed to mean anyone who purchases from Golf Digest, Inc., acting either as principal or agent, or from a distributor or wholesaler where such transaction with such purchaser is essentially a sale by such respondent, acting either as principal or agent.

It i8 fu1other onle1o That the respondent herein shall, within sixty (60) days after service upon it of this order, file with the Commission a report in writing setting forth in detail the manner and form in which it has complied with this order.