Brown Shoe Company, Inc

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

IN THE MATTER OF BROWN SHOE COMPANY, INC.

SET ASIDE ORDER IN REGARD TO ALLEGED VIOLATION OF THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION ACT Docket 7606. Modified Order, August 1966-order to Set Aside, July, 1984 This order grants petition of Brown Group, Inc. (formerly Brown Shoe Company, Inc. and hereafter " Brown ) to reopen the proceeding in Docket No. 7606 and set aside the 1966 order entered against Brown which prohibited the company from entering into agreements that would prevent retailers from deciding to purchase a competitor s line of shoes or the amount of competitor s shoes to stock. Upon considering Brown s petition, the public comments and other relevant information the Commission found that granting respondent's request would be in the public interest. The Commission noted that given the present characteristics ofthe shoe industry and Brown s lack of market power to exclude competitors, the 1966 order now serves no procompetitive purpose and may impede respondent's efforts to achieve effcient distribution of its products through law practices available to its competitors. Accordingly, the proceeding in Docket No. 7606 is reopened and the Commission s order of August 3, 1966, 70 F. G 491, is set aside. ORDER REOPENING AND SETTING ASIDE ORDER ISSUED AUGUST 3, 1966 By a petition fied on March 19, 1984, respondent Brown Group, Inc. (formerly Brown Shoe Company, Inc. and hereafter "Brown ) requests that the Commission reopen the proceeding in Docket No. 7606 and set aside the order against Brown. Upon consideration of Brown petition, the public comments, and other relevant information, the Commission now finds that the public interest warrants reopening the proceeding and setting aside the order. The record describes an industry in which any attempt by Brown to impose exclusive dealing on retailers today would have no significant anticompetitive effects. Imports have dramatically penetrated the market, representing about 60 percent of present domestic consumption. Some 300 manufacturers account for U.S. production, with 25 providing about half of domestic output. There is no evidence that within this fragmented market structure any single competitor whether a domestic manufacturer or supplier of imports, has significant market power to exclude other competitors. To the contrary, ;ignificant entry continues to occur, demonstrating a lack of natural Jr artificial barriers to entry.

Given the present characteristics of the shoe industry and that :rown does not have market power by which it may exclude competi- Jrs, the order now serves no procompetitive purpose and may impede 266 Set Aside Order Brown s efforts to achieve effcient distribution of its products through lawful practices available to its competitors. Accordingly, It is ordered That this matter be, and it hereby is reopened, and that the Commission s August 3, 1966 order be and it is hereby set aside.

Complaint 104 F.