| Author |
Message |
Mabsy
Moderator
 
Joined: 17 Aug 2003
Posts: 9644
|
|
|
Sun Oct 15, 2006 12:03 am  |
I thought some of you might find this to be an an interesting development if you have been following the story.
A few months ago the Australian consumer protection body (ACCC) took Jurlique to court after retailers complained that Jurlique was enforcing pricing. Indeed, I remember that about two years back the online store in Australia that I used to buy Jurlique from at 20% off was refused further stock by Jurlique because they were selling it cheaper.
http://www.news.com.au/business/story/0,,20561671-462,00.html?from=public_rss
| Quote: |
Skinned by illegal price-fixing
By Carin Pickworth
October 11, 2006 07:31am
Article from: The Courier-Mail
LUXURY skincare manufacturer Jurlique has pleaded guilty in the Federal Court in Brisbane to illegal price fixing and now faces up to $10 million in fines.
The nation's competition regulator, The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission, acted against Jurlique and its founder Dr Jurgen Klein in August this year after allegations were made of illegal price maintenance on skincare, cosmetic and herbal products.
While the Act maintains suppliers can control wholesale prices, it is illegal for them to dictate to retailers and franchisees their retail prices for products. The ACCC is seeking financial penalties and costs.
It has accused Jurlique parent companies of attempting to induce franchisees to sell Jurlique products at a specialised price and withholding supply to retailers selling below that price between 1991 and 2003.
ACCC Queensland regional director Alan Ducret said the move by Jurlique had allegedly kept the price of its products artificially inflated.
He urged retailers facing similar price fixing issues to come forward.
"If any resellers in Australia are being forced by their suppliers to raise their prices, or being stopped from discounting a product, the ACCC would like to hear from them," he said.
Federal court justice Geoffrey Spender yesterday reserved his decision on the penalty for the Adelaide-based skincare company.
A sentence is expected to be handed down by the court within a fortnight. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sun Oct 15, 2006 12:56 am |
I remember how you mentioned about Jurlique kept tight regulations on prices amongst its distributors.. I wonder if there will be a big decrease in prices now 
But on a serious note, it really disappoints me that a supposedly environmentally ethical company would plays those sort of cards.. And this probably goes on with so many big brands out there too... |
|
|
|
|
|
Sun Oct 15, 2006 2:08 am |
| Thanks Mabsy, I didn't see that article but I find it quite interesting. I wonder how many other manufacturer/wholesalers of skin products may be doing the same thing. |
_________________
Skin: Over 60, ex combination now sensitive, Cellcosmet |
|
|
|
|
Sun Oct 15, 2006 7:31 am |
| I remember a big tado regarding ISC doing this as well, sad to bring that up, since I do love the stuff. |
|
|
|
|
|
Mon Oct 16, 2006 1:00 pm |
This is probably quite common. We'll see if we can get Jurlique for cheaper now  Really love their stuff! |
_________________
20's: rare pimples and oily T-zone..annoying little blackhead buggers on nose |
|
|
|
| Mon Apr 29, 2024 6:09 am |
If this is your first visit to the EDS Forums please take the time to register. Registration is required for you to post on the forums. Registration will also give you the ability to track messages of interest, send private messages to other users, participate in Gift Certificates draws and enjoy automatic discounts for shopping at our online store. Registration is free and takes just a few seconds to complete.
Click Here to join our community.
If you are already a registered member on the forums, please login to gain full access to the site. |
|
 |
|
