1 / 18

Case Study : Price fixing and Market Allocation of Flour Mill Companies in Korea (2006)

Case Study : Price fixing and Market Allocation of Flour Mill Companies in Korea (2006). Hang-Lok, Oh E-mail : ohr@ftc.go.kr Deputy Director, Cartel Policy Team, KFTC. OECD Regional Workshop Jun. 27-29. Jeju island, Korea. Contents. 1. Introduction. 2. Case Overview.

eli
Télécharger la présentation

Case Study : Price fixing and Market Allocation of Flour Mill Companies in Korea (2006)

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Case Study :Price fixing and Market Allocationof Flour Mill Companies in Korea (2006) Hang-Lok, Oh E-mail : ohr@ftc.go.kr Deputy Director, Cartel Policy Team, KFTC OECD Regional Workshop Jun. 27-29. Jeju island, Korea

  2. Contents 1. Introduction 2. Case Overview 3. Investigation Process 4. Special Features & Implications

  3. Introduction Cartel regulation environment in Korea • Major Industries are oligopolistic • Many business associations • Traditional Confucian Paternalism  Economic and social environment is cartel – friendly. • Eradicating Cartels - a top priority

  4. Introduction Surcharges on cartels

  5. Introduction Detailed types of cartel cases

  6. Case Overview Korea’s flour market • Milling Industry : An industry that processes wheat and manufactures it into flour • Market Size : Annually 820 billion KRW(887 million USD) • 8 Flour Mills (7 in truth) • Market Share of Big 4: 75% • Market Share of Minor 4 : 25% • Cooperation among companies in importing wheat (by using the same shipping vessel)

  7. Case Overview Acts of violations • Market Allocation (Jan. 2000~ Dec. 2005) • 2000~2001 Adjustment of sales volume and sales proportion among 7 companies • 2002~2006 Adjustment of output and production proportion among 8 companies • Establishment of annual/monthly plans and confirmation of implementation at monthly sales executive/working level meetings • Price Fixing (Jan. 2000~ Feb. 2006) • Continuous price increases in 5 stages & price maintenance (Nov.2000, Feb.2001, Sep. 2002, Apr.2003, Mar. 2004)

  8. Case Overview Term of violations • 2 Companies : ~ Sep. 2005 • Leniency Application • Announcement to terminate the agreement, Adjustment to agreed price • 6 Companies : ~ Feb. 2006 (Commission Deliberation day) • No Termination of agreement, No changes to price

  9. Case Overview Impact of actions of violations • Cartel with significant competitiondamaging effects • A naked cartel, with no increase in efficiency • Market Share 99% (participated by all domestic flour mills) • Process industry (needs huge initial investment)  high entry barriers • Low price elasticity in demand • Confirm cartel activity by regular check-ups • Price hike of 40% during period of violation • Average price increase rate during the same period : 10%

  10. Case Overview Measures taken • Corrective Measures • Prohibition of cartels, prohibition of exchange of information, Order of newspaper announcements • Re-pricing order Decrease of about 5% • Surcharges • Total 43.5 billion KRW (47million USD) • Leniency Applicant : Reduction of Surcharges (1st : 75%, 2nd : 50%) • Prosecution : 6 Companies & 5 Representatives • Excluding Leniency Applicant & Representatives * In Korea, KFTC must file a complaint in order to institute public action

  11. Investigation Process Clues • Similar price increases during similar periods in early 2004 • Media reports of suspicious cartel activity • Similar price increase patterns repeated for over 5 years • Market share consistent for the past 3-4 years

  12. Investigation Process Dawn Raid (1) • Aug. 2004 • Mobilization of 20 people for two days • 7 Flour mills & business organization (excluding one small- sized local company) • Each investigation team composed of 3- 4 people • Failed to gather sufficient evidence • Media’s suspicions of a cartel  Companies were well-prepared • Unable to conduct simultaneous investigation of all participating companies

  13. Investigation Process Dawn Raid (2) • Attention to fixing of market share • Difficult to dispose of all related materials • Preparation for re-investigation • Contacted former executives and employees to gather information (core personnel) • Allow them to become negligent by not conducting supplementary investigation directly • 2nd Dawn Raid (Jul. 2005) • Include local small-sized companie & agencies • Conduct simultaneous investigations • Acquired partial evidence of a cartel

  14. Investigation Process Leniency Application • Leniency Application (2 Companies) : Sep. 2005 • Testimony of the entire scheme of violation • Submission of evidence • Unveiledthe whole scheme through voluntary report

  15. Special Features & Implications Powerful hardcore cartel • Typical hardcore cartel • Control of supply & price Build up market dominance • Investigation of competitors’ books to confirm the implementation of the cartel • Collective response against FTC investigation • Cooperation in the process of acquiring wheat developed into a hardcore cartel

  16. Special Features & Implications Market characteristics friendly to cartels • A market with less than 5 companies, or the Top 5’s market share is over 80% • A market with consistent market shares for over 5 years • A market where companies with smaller market share raises prices first, followed by companies with larger market share • A market where goods are similar in quality and standardized • A market with related business associations and meetings between companies • A market with high entrance barriers due to huge initial investments • A market where import of the good is difficult, creating little competition from foreign companies • A market with extraordinarily high profits • A market where price changes among companies are consistently similar and occurring at similar times • A market that has a record of cartel prosecution within the past 3 years

  17. Special Features & Implications Importance of initial investigation & overcoming failure • Success is determined by the first day of investigation • Simultaneous investigation of all related companies • Target investigation of core personnel • Overcoming the failure of the initial investigation • Build assumptions of an agreement through evidence of contact between companies and economic evidence • Conduct re-investigation after a certain period has passed • Cases where information on the investigation leaks prior to • the initiation • Cases where cartels continue even after the initiation of the • investigation

  18. Thank you

More Related