Our Curious Amalgam #302 Are the Critics Wrong? How the Robinson-Patman Act Has Been Misunderstood by Its Detractors
17 snips
Dec 2, 2024 Mark Poe, a partner at Gaw Poe LLP and a key player in Robinson-Patman Act litigation, joins hosts Puja Patel and Aaron Yeater to debunk misconceptions about the RPA. They delve into its origins, highlighting its role in protecting independent merchants against chain store pricing power. The conversation covers recent FTC investigations into big retailers' pricing disparities and discusses how the Act could promote fairer pricing for consumers. Poe’s unique insights challenge mainstream critiques and reveal the Act's potential benefits for smaller businesses.
AI Snips
Chapters
Transcript
Episode notes
Bork's Critique and Lack of Empirical Support
- Judge Robert Bork criticized the Robinson-Patman Act (RPA), viewing price discrimination as beneficial for competition.
- Mark Poe argues that Bork's critique lacks empirical evidence supporting claims that the RPA leads to higher prices.
RPA, Discounts, and Baseline Price
- The RPA doesn't prohibit discounts; it prohibits discriminatory pricing between competitors.
- The baseline price should be the negotiated price between strong buyers and sellers, not the manufacturer's list price.
Real-World Examples and Settlements
- Plaintiffs in RPA cases typically seek the same low price as favored purchasers, not the elimination of discounts.
- In settlements, suppliers often agree to offer the same price to all, demonstrating that enforcement benefits consumers.