Jules Posted March 18, 2009 Posted March 18, 2009 IMHO ...and now they can go' date=' merge into one company called Soeper Saaikling SA, raise the prices with 100%, and there will be no anti competitiveness. Like others in this 'so called' open economy has done. And when poor little me start a shop, and want to import, they bribe the importer not to supply me... and I sink, and then they offer me a nice couple of Rands to merge with them ...? my 1c worth. And there will be crazy competition in the cycling economy.[/quote'] I think that's a bit of a naive way of looking at it. Firstly, the competition authorities would put a stop to such a giant merger. Secondly, if it happened, and prices were raised to ridiculous levels, people would start buying from Chain Reaction. Manufacturers would start to get annoyed with the SA distributors because sales would drop. They would question if another distributor could do a better job. Do you really think that wholesalers overseas are open to bribery from a big cartel in a small pond such as SA? Under the situation you describe, somebody could actually set up a shop using Chain Reaction as a supplier. Even under the current system, I have heard of CRC prices being lower than the local wholesale price.
Johan Bornman Posted March 18, 2009 Posted March 18, 2009 Thanks Jules, that's an impressive list.I see we even have two Cape-based distributors there. Did any of these guys fly up for the meeting? It will be interesting to list some brand names against these people. I'll kill for a list of people who said "no thank you".
GoLefty!! Posted March 18, 2009 Posted March 18, 2009 Toyota does NOT own Subaru. Subaru is a subsidriary of Fuji Heavy Industries' date=' a competitor to Toyota.Fuji in fact makes components for Toyota and welding machines for their production lines.[/quote']I guess that's why Toyota bought 20% of Fuji Heavy Industries 3 years ago...Free show for popcorn toyota bought 20% of FHI because it was for sale by GM. they wanted FHI 4x4 technology. It's not a controlling share. it's an interest which provides access to technology. this happens in many industries. In Aerospace it started out with Lockheed buying a stake in Martin aerospace for their astronautical engineering and then aquired it outright years later. You have to differentiate between the technology and marketing. the products are still marketed separately and priced into different areas of the market.
GoLefty!! Posted March 18, 2009 Posted March 18, 2009 Lefty' date='dont you work for a petro company of sorts,your coments are very rich coming from you,being involved in most probaly the most corrupt and price fixing industry in this country. Secondly Andrew was invited to the meeting,he did not call for it,onse again get your facts right and put your names on it.[/quote'] an amateurish attempt at diffusion Chucky and your hand bag is clearly not heavy enough. You assume I work for a corporation implicated in the latest collusion actvity. It was long shot and you are off the mark. I am in the petrochemicals industry and because my company has spent a lot of money training my colleagues and I in identifying anti competitive behaviour and how to respond to it I have competancy in this area. Note I said competency, not expertise. Allegations of corruption you will have to take up with the respective companies as I don't know what you are talking about. You will have to be more specific like provide some minutes of a meeting held between Oil co's which are later deemed to be inaccurate even though a letter verifying it's authenticity is in circulation. try harder
Johan Bornman Posted March 18, 2009 Posted March 18, 2009 An alphabetical list of brands indirectly represented at the meeting looks like this: * *If you feel that I have unfairly left your brand out, please feel free to PM me and I'll gladly add it. Johan Bornman2009-03-27 00:21:58
fandacious Posted March 18, 2009 Posted March 18, 2009 I'll kill for a list of people who said "no thank you". you might get into more trouble for that than what FP is in
scotty Posted March 18, 2009 Posted March 18, 2009 I like the no Cajees and Westdene. It's proberbly with them the rest have a problem with. . Or Solomons, other than Cyclelab none of my LBS are there.
Johan Bornman Posted March 18, 2009 Posted March 18, 2009 Conspiciously absent from this meeting was (and please help me add to the list) J&J Cycling - Campag, Assos, Bianchi, Fulcrum, ITM, Laser, Northwave, (Apparently represented by Hot Spot Cycles)Dragons Mavic, Giant, Santa Cruz, AvalancheBicycle Power Trading - PowerTap, CycleopsSupersport Cycles - DRC, Selle Italia, Topeak, Hutchins, SAPIM Johan Bornman2009-03-18 09:08:10
markStockton Posted March 18, 2009 Posted March 18, 2009 Schwinn Sigma SilverbackSinz.Snafu Sun Ringleonname> *If you feel that I have unfairly left your brand out' date=' please feel free to PM me and I'll gladly add it. [/quote'] You need to add Shimano, Mr Meltzer from Coolheat was there.
Mutt Posted March 18, 2009 Posted March 18, 2009 Attendance at the meeting does not indicate agreement with the agenda / minutes. From what we are told and form reading those minutes it appears that some of those people were opposed to the measures being proposed.
Sammajoor Posted March 18, 2009 Posted March 18, 2009 Conspiciously absent from this meeting was (and please help me add to the list)J&J Cycling - Campag' date=' Assos, Bianchi, Fulcrum, ITM, Laser, Northwave, etc.Dragons Mavic, Giant, Santa Cruz, AvalancheBicycle Power Trading - PowerTap, CycleopsSupersport Cycles - DRC, Selle Italia, Topeak, Hutchins, SAPIM [/quote'] Sorry Johan remove J&J Cycling..........They own Hot Spot Cycles................ J&J = Hot spot.... Hot Spot = J&J. That is why Campy is so expensive in SA..... J&J need to finance the expensive lifestyles
scotty Posted March 18, 2009 Posted March 18, 2009 An alphabetical list of brands indirectly represented at the meeting looks like this: * *If you feel that I have unfairly left your brand out' date=' please feel free to PM me and I'll gladly add it. [/quote'] Cytek = Merida Le Peleton = Specialized 2 of my bikes scotty2009-03-18 06:54:04
Thug Posted March 18, 2009 Posted March 18, 2009 Here is the attendance register. Apparently it is also "inaccurate" ..... Maverick Cycles Mike Bradley Interesting....... So the Director of MTB who sits on the Board of Cycling SA attended as well !! Surely that makes his position on the board of CSA untenable !! I would love to hear Greg Till and Groot Lem's comments on Mike Bradley coming up all the way from KZN to attend a meeting where price fixing was discussed !!
Danger Dassie Posted March 18, 2009 Posted March 18, 2009 Here is the attendance register. Apparently it is also "inaccurate" .....Maverick Cycles Mike Bradley Interesting.......So the Director of MTB who sits on the Board of Cycling SA attended as well !!Surely that makes his position on the board of CSA untenable !!I would love to hear Greg Till and Groot Lem's comments on Mike Bradley coming up all the way from KZN to attend a meeting where price fixing was discussed !! I've known Mike a number of years before he moved to KZN, he is someone I've always known to have a strong sense of integrity! As Summit already stated "Who is to say that anyone and all who were at the meeting, agreed with what was discussed. Who is to say that EVERY bike shop owner walked away from that meeting and implemented an increase. Assumption is the mother of all cock ups I dare say."
Shebeen Posted March 18, 2009 Posted March 18, 2009 I wonder if AM and FP will log in again and defend themselves here. Seems like they've changed their tune already just reading the press releases their marketing companies sent out.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now