When you walk around in a mall, you see these small booths and big stalls and stores where they sell all sorts of items.
When you walk pass by, you have promo girls saying, "Bili na, sir (or "Would you like to buy something to you white guys who can't speak the local language)."
Even the real estate stalls where they sell condo units? What they really want to say is, "We want your money."
So when prospective distributors come to multinationals, these companies, all they see is money, opportunity, and money. They want your money. They want everyone else's money. They want money. Yes, that's what they want. Even the birds and the bees because they know they can slap a tag on it say, SM Bonus or Nestle, then make a gazillion bucks.
Business. That's how it is. Money makes the world go round. Not anything else although physics and science will tell you otherwise.
Now they enter into supposedly simple things like distributors' agreements except that it is so slanted against the distributor because of unrealistic prices set by the sales director. Failure to comply means termination of a the relationship.
Then during a marathon they recently sponsored there was a news blackout after a runner expired!
They not only want your money but they want to suppress the truth.
Remember what we were saying about Philippine distributors of Nestle products getting shafted by unethical quotas, bullying tactics (Fear Factor these multinationals are fans of), and unreasonable pressure unbecoming of a partner? Well there are a lot of them out there but are afraid of of taking on the big sonofagun. That is why they are stalling on the FDII case. But now they will be fighting on another front this time with the big dog -- Banco De Oro that is owned by the Sy family of SM Malls fame (yeah we aren't a fan of them either because of their corporate practices). BDO has been assured by Nestle that one of its distributors is in the pink of health etc etc etc (with a nod towards Yul Brynner). TWICE. Except they are not because of the same shit they pulled on FDII.
So BDO has taken this to court. And what could this mean if Nestle don't cooperate? Say goodbye to your products in all SM Malls dopesters.
Wednesday, June 30, 2010
Dear John Miller,
Today, the 15th President of Republic of the Philippines will be sworn into office. He has pledged to turn around this country from the quagmire of corruption that we find ourselves in.
And we are rooting for him. Most voted for him and some did not. But now is not the time for taking sides because there are larger issues at hand. To put it very simply, the mission is to do what is right.
Bad things only beget bad things.
What does this all have to do with you? Plenty. For one, the company you represent is entrenched in our country. And two, you know that not everything is kosher. Witness to those poor SMEs that have been bullied left and right by your people. For sure you had nothing to do with it but you can definitely do something about it.
Every war has an ending. Even Afghanistan and Iraq will find a solution. It took Vietnam three decades to end a long and bloody struggle but in your case, who wants this to drag for 30 years?
We voted for you on the premise of hope and battling corruption that has wrecked and stalled the growth of this country of ours. We like to think that there is still hope otherwise we would have migrated already. It’s a new administration and a new start so to borrow a line from those days when the Man Above created things, “Let there be no corruption!”
We would like to ask your help in this problem of ours. You see, small business enterprises like ours are our life’s savings or maybe even worse, our soul held hostage since we borrowed the moon and the stars to start up our own distribution business.
Unfortunately we have been bullied and cheated out of our earnings by a greedy multinational. They couldn’t care less for the little guy. The bottom line for them is their profit and earnings then damn everyone else. As if their predatory pricing and bullying tactics aren’t enough, they threaten us with removal if quotas aren’t met.
We know they waited for a Manny Villar victory because someone in his inner circle is related to someone who works at Nestle. A Villar win meant railroading our case, whitewashing it, and spitting us out.
Now it looks like that they finally want to mend fences, however not under government mediation. What are they hiding? They know that the person you’ve appointed is incorruptible and they know that paying off people isn’t going to work.
We ask that you look into unfair business practices because what does the little guy have? This isn’t a matter we can report to Raffy Tulfo. It is damn clear that the BPO industry is here to stay. For the nation’s economy to thrive there must be a healthy climate for business. They will always have their billions but never at the cost of exploiting the little guy.
We ask that you tell the Department of Trade and Industry that they should step in and investigate this. Ours is a perfect case study. If the current rules and regulations continue without amendment then it is open to further abuse of power. And you of all people should know what that means.
We hope that you heed our meek request. We believe in you and we know you can do it.
Nestle controls 70% of the market for powdered milk (Bear Brand), chocolate milk (Milo), and coffee (Nescafe), and non-dairy creamer (Coffeemate). Other products have a strong market share with Nestle enjoying a virtual monopoly on these markets.
For the monopoly to achieve, they organized a nationwide chain of distributors with a semi-exclusive right to distribute products in their allotted areas.
Distributors are required to sell the products at a certain price that is dictated by Nestle. They are also prohibited from adjusting the price for retailers to absorb. That means their profit margins shrink and over a period of time, they begin to absorb bigger losses.
It is logical that distributors make their profits in marked up prices to retailers. Now they are left with scraps.
Because of Nestle’s domination of the market, they can unilaterally increase prices. Instead, the multinational predator bullies its distributors and threatens them with sanctions and removal should they not hit quotas.
In business and economics, predatory pricing is the practice of selling a product or service at a very low price, intending to drive competitors out of the market, or create barriers for entry by potential new competitors. In the Philippines, or in the crap that Nestle Philippines pulls, it’s the distributors who are the victims of this nefarious practice.
Distributors cannot sustain equal or lower prices without losing money, they go out of business or choose not to enter the business. Nestle is able to meet its quota while leaving its distributors losing money or worse borrowing money just to keep its business afloat. It’s a vicious cycle and they can hardly raise prices above what the market would otherwise bear.
In many countries predatory pricing is considered anti-competitive and is illegal under anti-trust laws. It is usually difficult to prove that prices dropped because of deliberate predatory pricing rather than legitimate price competition. In any case, competitors may be driven out of the market before the case is ever heard.
In the short term predatory pricing through sharp discounting reduces profit margins, as would a price war and will cause profits to fall.
The only winner is that bird on the damned nest.
That is why the Department of Trade and Industry should step in. Down with these multinational buggers!
Is it corporate culture to stiff a partner? Mohandas Gandhi once said that, "There is sufficiency in the world for man's need. Not man's greed."
In an effort to gain more sales (not that there is anything wrong with wanting to make more money), Nestle has cultivated a climate of greed and fear amongst its distributors. Don't hit the quotas and you're fired. Some partner. Poor working conditions then they sic a lawyer to get a poor distributor to sign a quit claim (under duress).
They were hoping that Manny Villar would win because a Nestle official is related to the guy who lies and swims in trash. We see an emerging pattern here. It's all about the money. Except that in this case, they played hard ball in hopes they find a favorable new administration. Too bad. Money Villar is off to Europe to lick his wounds. Oh one of the new president's nephews works for them. Mahiya naman kayo. You already went through the late President Cory Aquino who was given a slanted view of their lies now they hope they have a connection.
Except that everyone's watching. No corruption. Get with the program, Nestle. Fix your shit.
They don't want to get into mediation with DTI because it will open a can of worms about poor practices. Should have resolved this before and quietly. Now they have to pay the piper.
If they had resolved this quietly and fired the parties that compromised the distribution deal gone wrong then none of this would have blown up.
Nestle had the highest level of capital required and the lowest gross margin. That means they require heavy investments yet they have the lowest return per investment! Remember this distributor business requires return profits. It also requires a longer payback on returns. How does one make money when it’s constantly being eaten up by Nestle’s corporate greed? They require serfs not partners.
They also have the lowest trade support for promotional activities. And incredibly, they did not factor in bad debt, bad order allowance, taxes, and other costs that regularly eat into profit margins.
The threat of industrial action by thousands of workers at Nestlé’s operations in the UK is set to come a step closer, with union leaders expecting strong support for a strike ballot. Officials said yesterday there was a "very strong feeling" that a consultative ballot on action in protest at a pay freeze would receive huge backing.
The ballot of up to 3,000 workers at Nestlé sites across the UK would lead to a formal vote for strikes being held, raising the prospect of walkouts after the general election. Jennie Formby, national officer of Unite, said the company had blamed the state of the economy for the wage freeze, but described this as "complete nonsense". She said, "Confectionery is recession-resistant and Nestlé is doing extremely well. Its profits have increased substantially, but it is now attacking collective bargaining and exploiting its workers.
"We are clear there will be a very strong yes vote in the ballot. Nestlé is not an employer in trouble - the billions given to shareholders demonstrates they have the cash and our members deserve a pay increase."
Nestlé said in an internal bulletin that it faced "significant" challenges which showed no signs of decreasing, adding that the recession was "fundamentally changing" consumer behaviour. The company said it was not realistic for local pay negotiations this year, although it stressed it did not compromise its commitment to local pay bargaining.
The result of the consultative ballot is due by the end of the month.
LAUSANNE, Switzerland — Thirty activist 'orang-utans' greeted shareholders as they arrived for Nestle's Annual General Meeting today asking them to give Indonesia's rainforests a break and stop profiting from destroying rainforest, threatening biodiversity and accelerating climate change.
Inside the meeting itself Greenpeace activists dropped from the ceiling and unfurled two large banners directly over the heads of shareholders. We want shareholders to use their influence to change Nestle's policies and stop using palm oil and pulp and paper products from destroyed rainforests and carbon-rich peatlands.
Since the launch of our Kit Kat campaign (March 17th), 200,000 people have sent e-mails to Nestlé and hundreds have called them. Today hundreds more are addressing them and their shareholders online - we invited Nestle shareholders to receive messages during the AGM directly from online supporters of our campaign by visitinghttp://www.greenpeace.org/kitkat - where they will also be able to watch the Kit Kat video that launched the campaign and has now been viewed over 1.3 million times.
Our International Head of Forests Campaigns, Pat Vendetti, made a short address directly to shareholders. He urged them to ensure that Nestle stop purchasing products from rainforest destruction. The company is not only driving climate change and biodiversity loss if it continues, but it is also damaging its corporate reputation.
Earlier in the day German activists gathered at Nestle's headquarters in Frankfurt where they erected a 'Twitter wall' displaying tweets from online supporters at Nestle employees as they arrived for work.
Following the launch of the Kit Kat campaign, Nestle publicly announced that it would cancel its direct contracts with Indonesia's biggest palm oil supplier, Sinar Mas, because it has a long history of environmental abuse. These cancellations did not really give the rainforests a break, because Nestle continues to use Sinar Mas palm oil, as well as Sinar Mas pulp and paper products, via other suppliers like Cargill and Asia Pulp and Paper (APP), a subsidiary of Sinar Mas.
Each day that Nestle allows Sinar Mas products in it's supply chain, it links itself to the rampant destruction of Indonesia's rainforests and peatlands. Today we have published new satellite and photographic evidence showing that Sinar Mas continued to destroy peatlands and other conserved areas in Indonesia despite making a commitment in February to stop. Nestle is condoning this destruction by not acting immediately to remove all Sinar Mas products from its supply chains.
Deforestation is a major cause of climate change. It is so rampant in Indonesia that the country is the world's third largest greenhouse gas emitter. To avert catastrophic climate change we must end deforestation - to begin with we need an immediate moratorium on destroying Indonesia's rainforests and carbon-rich peatlands.
This is how they set up their channel system. Except that the quotas go up every time it's cascaded down. To make things worse, it breeds a dog-eat-dog system. Instead of following protocol, the different channels circumvent it and go elsewhere where it is cheaper.
In order to compete, the regional distributors lower their prices and order higher volumes. This is done under the threat of termination and unjust quotas while costs for operations and expenses increase.
This becomes their kill zone. They don't care. The bottom line is -- hit our quotas and we don't care how you do it. For the small guy, it's his life savings. The problem here is sustainability and quotas without buffers and protection without regard for mature market conditions for loyal distributors. The set up that Nestle likes means cut-throat competition and pricing, cross border selling, and price wars. Their solution? Make the quota or we will find someone to replace you.
Pa-mission statement, mission statement pa kayo eh puro kayo sinungaling.
The aggrieved distributor chose mediation under government.
Why different? Because of bad faith by the former.
And they do not want the government involved who will now more about Nestle and their operations.
It’s unfortunate that Nestle doesn’t want to participate. Their non-participation shouldn’t stop government from pursuing because there are real issues. FDI reserves the right to file the case because of MO #69. Because mediation is voluntary they cannot compel Nestle to participate.
MO #69 gives DTI jurisdiction.
The original complaint is pursued upon investigation develop a resolution a formulation of regulatory rules. That is prospective. The reason why it is filed as a predatory pricing case with DTI is because it is linked directly to what is happening.
Predatory pricing – an act of sacrifice to control the market and recoup benefits later -- carries a penal code. The dynamics of the second case are simply Distributors absorb losses on behalf.
They are afraid that if it goes to DTI and they lose that will open the floodgates to more aggrieved distributors taking them to court or whatever. But in their greed, they chose to bully and bully some more.
For nearly two weeks, environmental activists have been using social media to wage war against Nestlé over its purchases of palm oil for use in KitKat candy bars and other products, catching the Swiss food giant off guard.
Protesters have posted a negative video on YouTube, deluged Nestlé's Facebook page and peppered Twitter with claims that Nestlé is contributing to destruction of Indonesia's rain forest, potentially exacerbating global warming and endangering orangutans. The allegations stem from Nestlé's purchases of palm-oil from an Indonesian company that Greenpeace International says has cleared rain forest to establish palm plantations.
Outside Nestlé's local offices in Jakarta last week, Greenpeace activists protest its purchases of palm oil from a firm they say destroys rain forests.
Nestlé says it had already decided to stop dealing with the firm, which supplied just 1.25% of the palm oil Nestlé used last year. It says it bought only a tiny fraction of the firm's output, so any impact was negligible, and that it is working toward buying only environmentally sustainable palm oil. (Though Nestlé makes KitKats in other markets, Hershey, which isn't involved in the battle with Greenpeace, makes the brand in the U.S.)
"We, like Greenpeace and many others, abhor destruction of the rain forests, and will not source from companies where there is verifiable evidence of environmental damage," says Nestlé spokeswoman Nina Backes.
Greenpeace, which is coordinating the protest, says Nestlé hasn't done enough, and is continuing to buy the disputed firm's oil in blended batches sold by third-party suppliers.
Nestlé says it is pressuring its providers to scrutinize their supply chains to keep that from happening, but it has had trouble making itself heard above the din. The difficulty with social media, says Ms. Backes, is "to show that we are listening, which we obviously are, while not getting involved in a shouting match."
Activist groups have long used Web sites, grass-roots email campaigns and videos to publicize their causes. But the attack on Nestlé is part of a new wave of digitally savvy protests, marketing experts say.
"This is the place where major corporations are very vulnerable," says Daniel Kessler, press officer at Greenpeace.
Indeed, some companies have already seen their images tarnished by digital media. Last year, two employees of Domino's Pizza posted a Web video of themselves blowing their noses on pizzas. The company responded within 24 hours with a statement on its Web site telling consumers it knew about the video and had found the pranksters.
The next day, J. Patrick Doyle, then the company's president and now its chief executive, made a video to apologize and say the employees had been fired and were facing criminal charges.
"We were honest. We were honest in our anger; we were honest in our approach. And I think people could sense that," says Tim McIntyre, Domino's vice president for communications. Mr. McIntyre says the company is now more vigilant in monitoring how consumers talk about its brand on social media, tries to be quicker in its response and has instituted a social-media code of conduct for employees.
For Nestlé, the trouble began March 17 when Greenpeace released a report on the company's palm-oil use. On the report's cover was an altered version of the KitKat logo, with the brand's name changed to "Killer."
The same day, Greenpeace protested outside the company's corporate headquarters in Switzerland and posted a mock KitKat commercial on the Web showing an office worker opening the candy's wrapper and snacking on a bloody orangutan finger.
Thousands of protesters swarmed onto Facebook and Twitter and shared the video across the Web. Some Facebook users replaced their profile pictures with the "Killer" logo and posted negative comments about Nestlé on its Facebook fan page. The postings continue, with many of them encouraging a boycott of Nestlé products, but the number peaked last week, according to Nielsen Co.
In the protest's first days, Nestlé asked Google's YouTube video site to remove the mock commercial, citing copyright infringement, Ms. Backes says. YouTube pulled the video, but it continued to spread on the Web.
Nestlé also told Facebook users it would delete their comments from its Facebook page if they included the altered logo. Social-media experts say that only incited the protesters. Nestlé's fan base on Facebook, now mostly protesters, swelled to more than 95,000.
Late last week, Ms. Backes says, Nestlé resumed posting information on Facebook to tell consumers about its palm-oil sourcing practices. She says it is too soon to judge whether sales of KitKats or other Nestlé products have been affected by the protests.
"Like all companies, we are learning about how best to use social media, particularly with such complex issues," Ms. Backes says. "What we take out of this is that you have to engage."
Marketing experts are split as to whether the company should simply shut down its Facebook page. Jeremiah Owyang, an analyst at Altimeter Group, a digital-media consulting firm, says that would close off all lines of communication. Ian Schafer, CEO of digital-marketing firm Deep Focus, sees it differently. "The damage has been so done, it might not be a bad idea to shut down the page and start over," Mr. Schafer says. "It is tough to turn that negativity around."
Workers who do find jobs in the Philippines find that they face another big hurdle after being hired: contractualization.
Big businesses, whether foreign or local, have long mastered the fine art of labor flexibilization in employment, assisted no end by a President and a government that is thoroughly sold out on the scheme. Based on the 2003 admission of Donald Dee, President of Employers Confederation of the Philippines(ECOP), 7 out 10 firms in the country practice contractualization. Some of the worst “contractualizers” among companies are also among the biggest, such as Eduardo “Danding” Cojuangco’s San Miguel Corporation (SMC) conglomerate (1,100 regulars out of its 26,000 total workforce); Henry Sy’s SM Shoemart (1,300 regulars of 20,000); and Manny Pangilinan’s Philippine Long Distance Telephone Company (4,100 of 10,000). Such widespread destruction of tenurial security in labor has had a profound impact on Philippine workers’ freedom to exercise their trade union and other democratic rights. Most of all, massive contactualization has greatly reduced the variable capital for wages, with the monopoly capitalists seeking ever-increasing superprofits in the face of the current world capitalist crisis of overproduction.
Through informal channels and the encouraging results of the meeting with Shahab last December 2008, the Nestle distributor got the impression that Nestle is ready, able and willing to abide by its credo and “do the right thing” based on its Core Values of Honesty, Integrity and Fairness.The renewal on 9 February 2009 for another year of the distributor contract in spite of various identified sales, marketing and operating improvement needs continued the feeling of good will and high hopes for the amicable resolution of the FDI issues.
But in a meeting last 24 February 2009, instead of allowing the Finance and Risk Management guys to meet and “re-look” at the Forensics Audit findings and conclusions, as initially agreed to, Shahab merely restated that for NPI, “FDI is a closed case.”
Instead of acknowledging that some NPI managers might have acted unfairly and unethically and kept key information from senior management, Shahab merely pointed out the distributor's mistakes. He said his key learnings from his reading of the Audit Report were: FDI did not follow procedures defined in the extensive Distributor Agreement, failed to communicate and use the appropriate forum for grievances, delegated authority to employees without “check and balance” thus allowing the fraud and mismanagement to continue. Bill Borbe added that as key learning FDI should have done their “numbers crunching” and if the numbers did not make sense, then FDI should have resisted the “pressure” from the NPI managers. After patiently waiting for several months to find an amicable resolution to the FDI issues while the distributor kept on hold other options. The tough-luck distributor felt betrayed and manipulated when Shahab said that NPI cannot do anything about FDI because the case is already in the lawyers’ hands.
The Department of Trade and Industry has stepped into the picture of anti-trust perpetuated by the bullying Nestle and FDI, its much-maligned distributor.
Nestle wants to go to court for one simple reason – the courts of Makati are in their pockets! Yes, them judges from the financial capital are all corrupt. Why else do you think they’re rich? They can all be bought out. But the thing is - the distributor has not gone to court so how can it be a legal matter?
The other option for the Swiss cheats is to wait until the government of PGMA steps down then the DTI’s current head, Peter Favila, who believes that this is a case of anti-trust, moves elsewhere.
That is not in good faith, brothers. Fuck the mission statement, Jerry Maguire. It was just a mission statement.
DTI stepped in because they believe that it is something that is dangerous – all this corporate bullying. Nestle fears this because is they pony up the damages, every wronged distributor will declare open season on the Swiss. And hey! What war have these fuckers won? That’s why they are neutral. They are faggots. They try to buy out people with their money and Hershey’s bars, And Swedish porn. Oh wrong country.
But there is one rule that does make this a perfect reason for DTI to step in – M.O. No. 69 on the Unfair Trade Practices covered by the Revised Penal Code.
Marcee Tidwell (shouting to Jerry Maguire) What do you stand for?
Dorothy Boyd: How about a little piece of integrity in this world that is so full of greed and a lack of honorability that I don't know what to tell my son! Except, "Here. Have a look at a guy who isn't yelling 'Show me the money." Did you know he's broke? He is broke and working for you for free! Broke. Broke, broke, broke. I'm sorry I'm just not as good at the insults as she is.
Marcee Tidwell: No, that was pretty good.
The problem between Nestle and FDI is the multinational:
- Imposed unreasonable quotas under constant threat of termination
- Pulled out of its products from the market in an unreasonable and non-transparent manner
- Instigated and fueled a price war
- Condons tax evasion
- deliberately delayed just claims for reimbursement. Something that is highly oppressive and is done in total and abject bad faith
Jerry Maguire: I'm still sort of moved by your "My word is stronger than oak" thing.
After FDI complained about the illicit affair of Nestle’s employee affected their business, instead of helping out, Nestle’s Boy Ceballos, the Regional Sales Manager, informed its aggrieved distributor that the company was severing ties with them.
Is this the way Nestle treats its partners who they allegedly deal with in a fair manner? Or is affair matters the more accurate term?
Jerry Maguire: I'm still sort of moved by your "My word is stronger than oak" thing.
The oak is corporate drivel. You know – people like the sound of platitudes. Makes them sound true, human, reasonable, responsible, and most especially, like real corporate bullshit.
Whenever a distributor is forced to max-out its bank credit lines, any further delay in collections of trade receivables is disastrous.
But NESTLE progressively imposes stretched sales volumes, it leaves the distributor with a choice of two evils: 1) to ignore the sales results imposed by NESTLE, and 2) to grant substantial discounts to customer.
The first option leaves to the termination of the distributorship contract while the second sinks the distributor deeper in debt.
So it is not a win situation for the distributor. Only NESTLE.
The Philippines lacks anti-trust laws to protect small businessmen. But what is an anti-trust law?
The definition of an ANTI-TRUST LAW:
Legislation enacted by the federal and various state governments to regulate trade and commerce by preventing unlawful restraints, price-fixing, and monopolies, to promote competition, and to encourage the production of quality goods and services at the lowest prices, with the primary goal of safeguarding public welfare by ensuring that consumer demands will be met by the manufacture and sale of goods at reasonable prices.
Antitrust law seeks to make businesses compete fairly. It has had a serious effect on business practices and the organization of U.S. industry. Premised on the belief that free trade benefits the economy, businesses, and consumers alike, the law forbids several types of restraint of trade and monopolization. These fall into four main areas: agreements between competitors, contractual arrangements between sellers and buyers, the pursuit or maintenance of monopoly power, and mergers.
Why aren’t there any anti-trust laws in the Philippines?
To date, the Philippines do not have a comprehensive and developed legislation relating to anti-trust and monopoly activities. However, there are several anti-trust bills pending before the Twelfth Philippine Congress. They are as follows:
1.Senate Bill (“S.B.”) No. 175 - An Act creating the Fair Trade Commission, prescribing its powers and functions in regulating trade competition, and monopolies and for other purposes;
2.S.B. No. 1361 - An Act providing for more effective implementation of the Constitutional mandate against monopolies, combination and restraint of trade and unfair competition by redefining and strengthening existing laws, processes and structure regulating the same, and for other purposes;
3.S.B. No. 1600 - An Act prohibiting monopolies, attempt to monopolize industry or line of commerce, manipulation of prices of commodities, asset acquisition and interlocking membership in the board of directors of competing corporate bodies and price discrimination among customers, providing penalties therefore, and for other purposes;
4.House Bill (“H.B.”) 1906 - An Act declaring unfair trade practices as acts of economic sabotage. HB 1906 declares the following acts as economic sabotage and provides criminal sanctions for the same: (i) smuggling; (ii) technical smuggling; (iii) misclassification of importation; (iv) dumping, and (v) other forms of unfair trade practices.
5.H.B. No. 198 - An Act creating a special body that shall regulate and exercise authority over monopolistic practices, combination in restraint of trade and unfair competition and appropriating funds therefore; and
6.H.B. No. 2439 - An Act penalizing unfair trade practices and combinations in restraint of trade, creating the Fair Trade Commission, appropriating funds therefore, and for other purposes.
The most significant of these bills is S.B. No. 175, proposing the passage of the “Fair Trade Act” or an Act Creating the Fair Trade Commission, Prescribing Its Powers and Functions in Regulating Trade Competition and Monopolies and For Other Purposes. This bill consolidates all anti-trust laws into one law and establishes a Fair Trade Commission (“Commission”), an executive body that will enforce the Fair Trade Act. Generally, the bill seeks to prohibit monopolies and cartels and other practices which diminish, impair or prevent competition and free trade. It defines absolute monopolies, relative monopolies and trusts which may constitute prima facie violations of the law.
Anti-trust is defined as a merger, acquisition of control or any act whereby companies, partnerships, shares, equity, trusts or assets are concentrated among competitors, suppliers, customers or any other business entity. Under enumerated circumstances, the bill, if passed into law would require prior notification to the Commission before trusts are formed.
There are also laws of general application that are relevant to the regulation of anti-trust and monopoly activities.
The Philippine Constitution outlines the state policy of regulating or prohibiting monopolies when the public interest so requires. No combinations in restraint of trade or unfair competition are to be allowed.
In relation to this policy, the Revised Penal Code of the Philippines penalizes parties entering into any contract or agreement or taking part in any conspiracy or combination in the form of a trust or otherwise, in restraint of trade or commerce, as well as penalizes those who prevent, by artificial means, free competition in the market. It also imposes penalties on parties who monopolize any merchandise or object of trade or commerce, or who combine with any other persons to monopolize said merchandise or object in order to alter the prices thereof or who spread false rumors or make use of any other artifice to restrain free competition in the market.
The Civil Code allows the recovery of damages in cases of unfair competition in agricultural, commercial or industrial enterprises. There are also other laws on unfair competition pertaining to the protection of intellectual property rights.
Consolidated Amalgamated -- In the science fiction movie Outland that starred a young Sean Connery, his character, Marshall William O’Neil, investigates illicit practices that are known to many including Consolidated Amalgamated, the corporation behind the scenes. The company is the inspiration behind our crusade to expose similar corporations that threaten our very livelihood.
Why we fight the good fight.
Small and medium scale enterprises are the lifeblood of many corporations both local and multi-national. These SMEs distribute goods and services in various locales and also serve as the eyes, ears, and mouth for these corporations as they know the pulse of the consumers. In an ideal world, it’s a harmonious situation. But unknown to the general public, many of these distributors are at the mercy of these giants with their multi-layered and deceptive practices that choke the precious money and even the lives of these people many who plunk in their life’s savings into the business. These corporations are oppressive bullies who are anti-Filipino and anti-SME. These are true and current stories. You can even verify them. We dare you. You have been warned.
