Price Discrimination and the Basing-point System: Hearings Before a Subcommittee of the Select Committee on Small Business, United States Senate, Eighty-second Congress, First Session on Price Discrimination and the Basing-point System. July 13,16,17,18,19,23,24,25,26, and 27, 1951United States. Congress. Senate. Committee on Small Business, United States. Congress. Senate. Select Committee on Small Business. Subcommittee on Price Discrimination and the Basing-Point System U.S. Government Printing Office, 1951 - 351 pages |
Common terms and phrases
absorb freight ADAMS advantage amended antitrust laws basing point basing-point pricing basing-point system bill Birmingham mills buyers cement cents chain stores Chairman Chicago Clayton Act committee compete competitor competitor's price concerns Congress consumer cost customers dealers delivered price discrimination in price discriminatory price economic effect England equally low price fact faith to meet favor Federal Trade Commission freight absorption freight charges gasoline geographic pricing HAMILTON hearings independent injury to competition jobbers legislation located long ton Louis mills lower price manufacturers meet competition monopoly MUND operations percent advertising allowance percent for advertising permit pig iron Pittsburgh plant present price discrimination proviso purchasers question retail Robinson-Patman Act Russellville SCHOEPPEL sell seller Senator BENTON Senator DOUGLAS Senator HUNT Senator LONG Sherman Act shipments small business SPINGARN Standard Oil statement substantially sugar supplier supply tion tire United unlawful wholesale
Popular passages
Page 257 - ... case thus made by showing justification shall be upon the person charged with a violation of this section, and unless justification shall be affirmatively shown, the Commission is authorized to issue an order terminating the discrimination...
Page 328 - Provided, That nothing herein contained shall prevent discrimination in price between purchasers of commodities on account of differences in the grade, quality, or quantity of the commodity sold or that makes only due allowance for difference in the cost of selling or transportation or discrimination in price in the same or different communities made in good faith to meet competition : And provided further, That nothing herein contained!
Page 329 - It shall be unlawful for any person engaged in commerce, in the course of such commerce, either directly or indirectly, to discriminate in price between different purchasers of commodities of like grade and quality...
Page 255 - ... That nothing herein contained shall prevent discrimination in price between purchasers of commodities on account of differences in the grade, quality, or quantity of the commodity sold, or that makes only due allowance for difference in the cost of selling or transportation, or discrimination in price in the same or different communities made in good faith to meet competition...
Page 103 - It is enough to say that Congress did not seek by the Robinson-Patman Act either to abolish competition or so radically to curtail it that a seller would have no substantial right of self-defense against a price raid by a competitor.
Page 329 - It also excludes reductions which undercut the "lower price" of a competitor. None of these changes, however, cut into the actual core of the defense. That still consists of the provision that wherever a lawful lower price of a competitor threatens to deprive a seller of a customer, the seller, to retain that customer, may in good faith meet that lower price.
Page 265 - ... for use, consumption, or resale within the United States or any Territory thereof or the District of Columbia or any insular possession or other place under the jurisdiction of the United States...
Page 333 - States, where the effect of such discrimination may be to substantially lessen competition or tend to create a monopoly in any line of commerce...
Page 336 - It is to be noted, however, that this does not set up the meeting of competition as an absolute bar to a charge of discrimination under the bill. It merely permits it to be shown in evidence. This provision is entirely procedural. It does not determine substantive rights! liabilities, and duties.
Page 343 - The heart of our national economic policy long has been faith in the value of competition. In the Sherman and Clayton Acts, as well as in the Robinson-Patman Act, "Congress was dealing with competition, which it sought to protect, and monopoly, which it sought to prevent.".