The problem, of course, is that today the courts make proof on an RPM
agreement very difficult to prove and, thus, very easy to circumvent.  This
is a Supreme Court than, whe it deals with antitust, views the Chicago
school as gospel.

John


At 11:49 AM 3/27/00 -0600, you wrote:
>My interpretation of the recent case is that it is no longer a per se
>violation when there is vertical maximum price setting.  I think that the
>facts of the case involved a maximum price set by the "manufacturer" and
>the court said that they will judge that by the "rule of reason" from now
>on.  Since the case did not involve a floor or a specific price, I tell my
>students that right now that still appears to be per se illegal.  I am
>guessing that the courts will continue to make specific price fixing per se
>illegal, and setting a "floor" will probably also continue to be per se
>illegal.  Anyway, in my opinion, the only thing that can be said with
>certainty is that setting a maximum price in a vertical situation is now
>judged by the rule of reason.
>
>
>
>At 10:04 AM 3/27/00 -0600, you wrote:
>>Colleagues,
>>
>>I would appreciate some direction on the legal dynamics of manufacturers
>>mandating price ceilings or floors to retailer-buyers.  A marketing teacher
>>here has had the issue arise in his class.    Would I be accurate to advise
>>him that while this practice is no longer considered per se vertical
>>price-fixing (or resale price maintenance) based on recent Supreme Court
>>decisions, one would for practical purposes have trouble conceiving of
>>situations where the practice is legal?  In other words, price agreements
>>between manufacturers and retailers are virtually always anticompetitive
>>for consumers and/or the retailers themselves?
>>
>>
>>Brad Sleeper
>>
>>--------------------------------------------------------------------------
---
>>Brad Sleeper                            Professor of Business Law
>>BB 307                                  email:  [log in to unmask]
>>St. Cloud State University              telephone:  (320) 255-4227
>>St. Cloud, MN  56301-4498               fax: (320) 255-4061
>>
>>To laugh often and much. To win the respect of intelligent people, and the
>>affection of children.
>>To earn the appreciation of honest critics and endure the betrayal of false
>>friends.  To appreciate beauty. To find the best in others. To leave the
>>world a bit better, whether by a healthy child, a garden patch, or a
>>redeemed social condition. To know even one life has breathed easier
>>because you have lived. This is to have succeeded.      - Ralph Waldo
Emerson
>>
>>----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>