Monday, December 12, 2011
ANTI-TRUST CASE AGAINST NESTLE PHILIPPINES
Friday, November 4, 2011
NESTLÉ PHILIPPINES, Inc. officials have been accused of fixing wholesale prices.
Nestlé officials accused of price fixing
A CITY prosecutor’s office has found probable cause to charge Nestlé Philippines, Inc. officials with price fixing after distributors complained that the local arm of the food giant required their products to be sold for a dictated cost.
In a resolution issued Aug. 15, 2011, Quezon City First Assistant City Prosecutor Meynardo M. Bautista Jr. ruled there was weight behind complaints against six officials -- former Nestlé Philippines chairman and chief executive officer (CEO) Doreswamy Nandkishore, incumbent chairman and CEO John Martin Miller, Sales Director Shahab Bachani, Chief Finance Officer Peter Noszek, and sales officials Jose Ceballos and Maria Elisa Lupena -- accused of imposing predatory prices for goods, a violation of Article 186 of the Revised Penal Code.
Nestlé Philippines could not be immediately reached for comment.
FDI Forefront II Trading Corp. and its parent firm Service Edge Distributors Inc. (SEDI) took issue with the price bulletins Nestlé Philippines issues to middlemen dictating the cost at which Nestlé products should be sold to retailers. Distributors are told to follow the selling prices in the bulletins or face termination of the distributorship agreement.
The two firms -- which were formerly assigned to distribute Nestlé products in northwest Quezon City, Caloocan, Malabon, Navotas and Valenzuela -- claim that the price bulletins do not take into account several factors: the cost of financing for the goods, municipal business taxes, cost of bad debts for bad or poorly paying retailers, cost of discounts given to retailers and cost of bad goods.
Nestlé Philippines terminated its distributorship agreement with FDI in late 2007 and that with SEDI in September 2011.
The respondents countered, however, that the two distributors’ claims are baseless, saying that price fixing only occurs when multiple firms agree to set prices to restrain trade.
The city prosecutor’s office decided, however, that the case was worth pursuing.
“The act of Nestlé in fixing the resale price maintenance for its products… is illegal, a per se violation of paragraph 1 of Artice 186, Revised Penal Code, which means that price fixing is automatically illegal and there will be no valid justification to legitimate price fixing agreement,” the resolution read.
“Even if the agreement of Nestlé and the complainants is to be analyzed under the rule of reason, the act is also unlawful because of its harmful anticompetitive effects against consumers and complainants, with no competitive economic benefits,” the resolution read further.
“[This is] harmful to the consumers because Nestlé exercised monopoly power of price fixing the resale of its goods which means that consumers cannot buy the product at a lower price than that fixed by Nestlé,” it stated.
The Nestlé officials could be “criminally liable,” the resolution stated. -- N.R. Melican
Wednesday, October 5, 2011
Sunday, September 18, 2011
by Emil Jurado
MANILA STANDARD, To The Point, 06 September 2011
(Original article available here)
NESTLE PHILIPPINES: MONSTER MNC
by Ducky Paredes
MALAYA, Business Insight, 05 September 2011
(Original article available here)
Wednesday, June 29, 2011
Nestle execs in Manila
"Spiced, not iced tea?"
Thursday, May 26, 2011
PART 2 - BusinessWorld - ANTI-TRUST PROTECTION FOR SMEs
Wednesday, May 25, 2011
Wednesday, April 13, 2011
Malaya responds to Nestle
What drives Buffet who lives in an ordinary house, just like any of his neighbors? For several years now, he has been trying to give away his fortune to philanthropic causes. He travels all over the world, encouraging other billionaires to do the same. Buffett knows that "you can’t take it with you."
Now why exactly am I writing about Warren Buffett? For over a year now, I have written several items calling the public’s attention to the bullying behavior of Nestlé Philippines, Inc. (NPI). Specifically, the way it treats local distributors – in other words, Filipino small and medium enterprise owners – is nothing short of shameful.
A number of these distributors have sought the intervention of the Department of Trade and Industry (DTI), only to be inexplicably told that this is not within their jurisdiction. These ill-treated entrepreneurs have since found an ally in antitrust crusader and noted lawyer Lorna Kapunan, who has brought the matter to the attention of the Senate.
In looking for where to invest, Warren Buffett advises: "Don’t just invest in a company and its ability to turn in a profit. Find out how the company behaves, and the integrity of the people running it. Would you trust them with the keys to your house? The best ship in the world will get lost at sea, or even sink, if the captain and his crew are questionable".
Tomorrow, April 14 is the 44th Annual General Meeting for Nestlé shareholders in Lausanne, Switzerland. I wonder how many of these shareholders subscribe to Warren Buffett’s way of thinking, and are willing to apply it to Nestlé? Is the mother company aware of what’s happening here in the Philippines?
Probably. For instance, last October, the Children’s Food Campaign (CFC) in Britain blasted Nestle for misusing the British government’s Change4Life (C4L) anti-obesity campaign. The whole idea behind C4L was for people to cut down on fattening food, be more active and live longer.
Nestle used the CFC logo in its marketing campaign but Sustain, the alliance behind CFC, soon found out that 24 out of the 27 products included in the Nestle promotion were categorized as high in sugar by the British Food Standards Agency guidelines. CFC finally decided that no company that promotes unhealthy and junk food should be allowed to associate with a government health campaign.
Locally, while the Nestle ad on TV and print featuring Kris Aquino and her son uses the tagline "more milk, less sugar" probably referring to a miniscule difference in sugar content compared to a competing product’s sugar content, isn’t Nestle, in reality, a major sugar pusher with its ice cream, chocolates, iced tea and practically everything that Nestle produces? Is there anything that Nestle produces that is not heavy with sugar?
Clearly, Nestle is not run by anyone close to being a Warren Buffet who cares about what his company represents.
Imagine that one of the highest-ranking officials of the Nestle Company is Nandu Nandkishore, who used to be the Chief Executive Officer of NPI until he got promoted to Nestlé’s Executive Board as Head of Nutrition. That’s a giant leap for someone who actually faces charges of perjury in Makati and Quezon City courts. How many global companies have a person facing criminal charges on their Executive Board?
In the Australian Senate, Senator Gavin Marshall of the Labor Party last March 2, 2011 talked about the unresolved case of the Nestle factory workers in Cabuyao, Laguna. The senator said that these workers have been on strike for over ten years and that over 500 workers have been dismissed for simply trying to exercise their right to have retirement benefits included in their collective bargaining agreement (CBC).
According to Senator Marshall, Nestle has also defied a decision by the Supreme Court to allow a decent retirement plan to be included in the CBA for the factory workers and that Nestle also refuses to reinstate the striking workers and negotiated in good faith on the CBA.
Finally, if you talk about integrity, how can Nestlé in Switzerland tolerate the predatory pricing and vertical price restraint operations of Nestlé Philippines, when these are patently against the laws set forth even in Switzerland itself by the Swiss Competition Council?
Friday, April 8, 2011
Nestle Antitrust cases - Soprole
Chile Soprole, Nestle To Step Away From Planned Joint Venture
First Published Tuesday, 5 April 2011 05:41 pm - © 2011 Dow Jones
ANTIAGO -(Dow Jones)- Following opposition from Chile's antitrust office, Swiss food and beverage giant Nestle SA (NESN.VX, NSRGY) and local dairy products maker Soprole SA will step away from their planned joint venture, the companies said Tuesday.
The Chilean antitrust office, known locally as the FNE, said in March that it opposed the planned joint venture, which would have included the manufacture, retail and distribution of various dairy products under the DPA Chile moniker.
"The conditions needed to proceed with the merger process are missing," the companies said in a joint statement, adding that they won't be pursuing the matter further with Chilean authorities.
Chile's antitrust court was set to rule on the venture later this year.
Last month, the FNE rejected the joint venture in spite of measures established by the companies to offset any negative market effects.
The FNE said the operation will restrict free competition among dairy producers and increase consumer prices. Additionally, the FNE found the proposed mitigation measures inefficient and difficult to implement.
Nestle and Soprole announced the venture in November.
Fonterra Dairy Co-operative Group Ltd. has a 99.8% stake in Soprole, Chile's leading consumer dairy business, with around one-third of the total market.
-By Anthony Esposito, Dow Jones Newswires; 56-2-715-8929;anthony.esposito@dowjones.com
Elsewhere in the globe - Nestle anti-trust cases - Soprole
Chile's Antitrust Office Opposes Nestle, Soprole Joint Venture
First Published Wednesday, 9 March 2011 01:07 pm - © 2011 Dow Jones
ANTIAGO -(Dow Jones)- Following opposition from Chile's antitrust office, Swiss food and beverage giant Nestle SA (NESN.VX, NSRGY) and local dairy products maker Soprole SA will step away from their planned joint venture, the companies said Tuesday.
The Chilean antitrust office, known locally as the FNE, said in March that it opposed the planned joint venture, which would have included the manufacture, retail and distribution of various dairy products under the DPA Chile moniker.
"The conditions needed to proceed with the merger process are missing," the companies said in a joint statement, adding that they won't be pursuing the matter further with Chilean authorities.
Chile's antitrust court was set to rule on the venture later this year.
Last month, the FNE rejected the joint venture in spite of measures established by the companies to offset any negative market effects.
The FNE said the operation will restrict free competition among dairy producers and increase consumer prices. Additionally, the FNE found the proposed mitigation measures inefficient and difficult to implement.
Nestle and Soprole announced the venture in November.
Fonterra Dairy Co-operative Group Ltd. has a 99.8% stake in Soprole, Chile's leading consumer dairy business, with around one-third of the total market.
-By Anthony Esposito, Dow Jones Newswires; 56-2-715-8929;anthony.esposito@dowjones.com
Elsewhere in the globe - Nestle anti-trust cases - Garoto
Nestle Approaches Brazil to Settle Garoto Antitrust Court Case
by Arnold Galvao - Oct. 5, 2010
Available online in Bloomberg here.
-- With assistance from Clementine Fletcher in London. Editors: Robin Stringer, Laura Price.
To contact the reporter on this story: Arnaldo Galvao in Brasilia at agalvao1@bloomberg.net
Monday, March 14, 2011
The most controversial company in the Philippines?
Originally published in the EQ Post on 11 March 2011 here.
"John Miller, Nestle Philippines CEO, is a spin doctor. He spins in unusual directions. He tells his employees in Nestle Philippines that it's in their best interest to communicate honestly. He persuades them to listen more, to tell the truth, to take responsibility for their actions, and to treat customers with respect.
But John Miller does not practice what he preaches.
He does not tell Nestle Vevey the awful truths that he covers up.
1)TRADE BULLY OF THE PHILIPPINES
2) COVER-UP
There has been no report on this tragedy in mainstream media!"
Full article with images available here.


