• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Coke sued 68 mill in antimonopoly suit

"I told them, 'You can't refuse to sell to me. That's unconstitutional'," Chavez told The Associated Press. "I didn't really know if it was unconstitutional, but I said it anyway."

Um, yea, about that. You have a right not to sell their product, they have a right not to sell it to you.

Except for when black-mail occurs.
 
The major soda compaines are ultra competitive, this is no secret.

They might be able to push the smaller accounts around but their reps will just about set themselves on fire if asked to land the big guns (major sports leagues, concert venues, fast food, theatre chains, etc...).
 
Originally posted by: yankeesfan
I did. If she doesn't want to sell Coke, she doesn't have to. Simple as that.
First of all, she does want to sell Coke. There's a difference between wanting to have your cake and eat it and having Coke tell you that you can't sell another product or they'll pull the rug out from underneath you.

My interpretation of the situation, in any event.
 
What an absurd ruling.

Coke has every right to refuse to sell wholesale to anyone. She had every right to comply, not sell Coke, or buy retail and resell Coke.

Because that's the gist of it, here. She had a retail contract with Coke to purchase and resell Coke at wholesale prices. Coke reserves the right to set the terms and she reseves the right to accept, or reject those terms.

Again, this ruling is absurd and a gross violation of Coke's rights.
 
Sounds like the Intel and AMD situation, where Intel is Coca Cola and AMD is Big Coke. Intel threatens suppliers such as Dell and Fujitsu to cut-off their deals if they sell AMD.
 
Originally posted by: yankeesfan
Originally posted by: Sqube
Read the article, yankeesfan.

That's quality.

I did. If she doesn't want to sell Coke, she doesn't have to. Simple as that.

Did you read the article? The issue was about her selling a competitor's soda. Coke refused to sell to her if she didn't stop selling Big Cola.
 
Originally posted by: yankeesfan
Why not just sell it?

They figured she would have eventually agreed to stop selling a competitor's product. In the long run, they thought Coca Cola would sell more to make up for the short term loss.
 
Originally posted by: mercanucaribe
Originally posted by: yankeesfan
Originally posted by: Sqube
Read the article, yankeesfan.

That's quality.

I did. If she doesn't want to sell Coke, she doesn't have to. Simple as that.

Did you read the article? The issue was about her selling a competitor's soda. Coke refused to sell to her if she didn't stop selling Big Cola.

Fine. Coke doesn't need to sell it to her. She can sell Big Cola. I believe that a company reserves the right to not sell it to her.
 
Originally posted by: yankeesfan
Originally posted by: mercanucaribe
Originally posted by: yankeesfan
Originally posted by: Sqube
Read the article, yankeesfan.

That's quality.

I did. If she doesn't want to sell Coke, she doesn't have to. Simple as that.

Did you read the article? The issue was about her selling a competitor's soda. Coke refused to sell to her if she didn't stop selling Big Cola.

Fine. Coke doesn't need to sell it to her. She can sell Big Cola. I believe that a company reserves the right to not sell it to her.

Are you illiterate? Seriously?
 
Originally posted by: Syringer
Originally posted by: yankeesfan
Originally posted by: mercanucaribe
Originally posted by: yankeesfan
Originally posted by: Sqube
Read the article, yankeesfan.

That's quality.

I did. If she doesn't want to sell Coke, she doesn't have to. Simple as that.

Did you read the article? The issue was about her selling a competitor's soda. Coke refused to sell to her if she didn't stop selling Big Cola.

Fine. Coke doesn't need to sell it to her. She can sell Big Cola. I believe that a company reserves the right to not sell it to her.

Are you illiterate? Seriously?

He's a Yankees fan, what do you expect? 😛
 
Originally posted by: Amused
What an absurd ruling.

Coke has every right to refuse to sell wholesale to anyone. She had every right to comply, not sell Coke, or buy retail and resell Coke.

Because that's the gist of it, here. She had a retail contract with Coke to purchase and resell Coke at wholesale prices. Coke reserves the right to set the terms and she reseves the right to accept, or reject those terms.

Again, this ruling is absurd and a gross violation of Coke's rights.

You realize this happened in Mexico, not USA right?😉 Anyway, I'm sure it's within the legalities of Mexican Law and I for one agree with the decision.
 
Originally posted by: Syringer
Originally posted by: yankeesfan
Originally posted by: mercanucaribe
Originally posted by: yankeesfan
Originally posted by: Sqube
Read the article, yankeesfan.

That's quality.

I did. If she doesn't want to sell Coke, she doesn't have to. Simple as that.

Did you read the article? The issue was about her selling a competitor's soda. Coke refused to sell to her if she didn't stop selling Big Cola.

Fine. Coke doesn't need to sell it to her. She can sell Big Cola. I believe that a company reserves the right to not sell it to her.

Are you illiterate? Seriously?

I believe that he and others sprouted their mouth with out read the article. The ruling is fair because that is unfair trading practice. Here in Canada a store can chose to sell any product that they like, however they are not allow to put a competitor product inside Coke, Pepsi, etc? machine.
 
I for one agree with the decision.

Right on, comrade! :thumbsup:


...Here in Canada a store can chose to sell any product that they like, however they are not allow to put a competitor product inside Coke, Pepsi, etc?

Does Coke have the "right" to refuse to sell wholesale, to competitor's merchants?
 
Originally posted by: Amused
What an absurd ruling.

Coke has every right to refuse to sell wholesale to anyone. She had every right to comply, not sell Coke, or buy retail and resell Coke.

Because that's the gist of it, here. She had a retail contract with Coke to purchase and resell Coke at wholesale prices. Coke reserves the right to set the terms and she reseves the right to accept, or reject those terms.

Again, this ruling is absurd and a gross violation of Coke's rights.

Take econ.
The anti trust laws are there for a reason, to stimulate competition.
Have fun paying high prices when the big guy uses all these tactics to squeeze the little guys out, then gouge up the prices.
That's market failure in capitalism.
 
Back
Top