subject: Does P & G Price Increases Hit Triple Anti-monopoly Law? - Procter & Gamble, Shampoo - [print this page] "P & G sales continue to decline in fact a variety of factors, above all, the United States and around the world caused by the subprime crisis decline in aggregate demand; Second, after years of rapid growth, P & G's base is so huge, slower growth is also reasonable. "Day, a foreign enterprise who told reporters to observe the slow sales of P & G does not make sense, its earnings growth rate relative to sales growth is still speed up, indicating the impact of P & G limited by rising costs.
"On the P & G, the raw material cost of the total cost is not high, mainly market, operating costs, such as advertising and marketing costs. For the cost pressure, Procter & Gamble, a company of this size, can through sales growth, and optimal management approach to the assessment. But sales growth slowed the past two years, relying on growth to share the way the cost pressure being put to the test. "The source further said that this year, Unilever, Procter & Gamble dug through from who, in the light of P & G marketing, to the P & G greater pressure. Never go to the supermarket to buy display of Procter & Gamble, have begun to pay for this part of the cost increase but more direct.
The person that, in fact, just like Procter & Gamble profit through price increases to ensure rapid growth. Debate
market position Fact, in many sub-areas, P & G had certain dominant market position.
Although the industry is a full day of competition in the industry, but according to the data, P & G's market share currently occupied half of the country. Meanwhile, in the completion of the integration of Geely, will treasure and Crest Oral further into the 23 market and a series of big moves, the P & G oral care industry, increase market share.
Based on "anti-monopoly law," Article XIV, a single operator holds a market share of more than 50% can be considered a dominant position in the industry. In addition to the present P & G cleaning products, skin care cosmetics market share of sub-standard, other categories have been estimated to occupy the leading position of product.
This, Li Xuan said: "Do you have a monopoly or be determined by market share, but it is not certain of the market means its market share dominance, the two are not mutually necessary and sufficient conditions . "
He also noted that the survey data on market share will not be very accurate, the parties are not the same data given to law enforcement investigation resulted in considerable difficulty. Therefore the data alone to determine its Internet monopoly is unscientific and is not comprehensive. Monopoly law in the case is not complete, even if the relevant departments are also required investigation through a very complicated and long process, to be judge.
"In the field of shampoo, P & G's market dominance is indisputable." On the foreign enterprise who is on the news that P & G's oral care, and skin care industry has a very strong right to speak. But the reporter learned that, due to introduction of the "anti-monopoly law," different from other similar laws, with "only anti-monopoly act, not anti-monopoly" characteristics, so even if P & G has been demonstrated to have a monopoly of the market without affecting the normal competition and consumer interests of monopoly, would not be significantly affected.
Li Xuan pointed out that multinational companies such as Procter & Gamble deal in abroad, "Antimonopoly Law" experience, while in the domestic market are bound by the law and regulation in China's own behavior and businesses will have some self-restraint role, taking into account the legal risks of multinational corporations will not easily take monopolistic behavior, the M & A and other important matters will be carefully considered.
by: gaga
welcome to Insurances.net (https://www.insurances.net)
