CONSUMER NEWS RECALLS COMPLAINT FORM SCAM ALERTS

Small Claims Guide \| Class Actions \| Lemon Law \| FAQ \| Resources \| Newsletters \| Spanish
Automotive Education Electronics Family Finance Health Homeowners Shopping Travel

Department Stores Tried to Restrict Competition in Tableware

Bloomingdale's, Macy's, Lord & Taylor Tried to Block Bed Bath & Beyond

August 10, 2004
Two leading department store chains and two prominent manufacturers of tableware have agreed to settle charges that they conspired to restrict competition and drive up prices.

Tablegate
• Federated's Ex-CEO Indicted
• Department Stores Tried to Restrict Competition in Tableware

New York Attorney General Eliot Spitzer says that under the terms of the settlements, Federated Department Stores, May Department Stores, Lenox, Inc., and Waterford Wedgwood, U.S.A. will pay $2.9 million in civil penalties to the State of New York.

The companies were accused of conspiring to restrict competition in the sale of Lenox and Waterford products from a national retailer, Bed, Bath & Beyond.

"Companies are not allowed to enter agreements that prevent competitors from offering choices to consumers," Spitzer said. "My office will continue aggressively to pursue unlawful conduct that denies consumers the benefits of greater choice and lower prices, brought about by vigorous competition."

• General Complaints
• Furniture Complaints
• Bridal Registry
---
News
• Macy's Customers Get New Citicards--Like It Or Not
• Macy's to Stop Ethnic Profiling
• Former Federated Department Store CEO Indicted
• Department Stores Tried to Restrict Competition in Tableware

Spitzer's office found evidence that the department store chains engineered a scheme to prevent Bed, Bath & Beyond from expanding into their lucrative tableware market.

In 2001, Bed, Bath & Beyond planned to introduce Lenox and Waterford products as "anchors" for the company's new tableware department, beginning with a test store roll-out in Elmsford, New York and in several other locations across the country. The investigation revealed that Federated and May pressured Lenox and Waterford to pull out of the Bed, Bath & Beyond roll-out. As a result, Bed, Bath & Beyond was unable to offer to consumers tableware supplied by Lenox and Waterford, as it had planned.

The effect of the unlawful arrangement to boycott Bed, Bath & Beyond was to eliminate and suppress competition in the sale of products to consumers in New York and elsewhere. Under the Donnelly Act, the state's antitrust law, civil penalties of up to $1 million may be imposed against corporations, and up to $100,000 against individuals, for anti-competitive activity.

Under the settlement, Federated will pay civil penalties of $900,000 and May will pay $800,000. The manufacturers, Lenox, Inc. and Waterford will pay $700,000 and $500,000, respectively. In addition to the civil monetary penalties, the companies have agreed to prospective relief that will prevent this situation from re-occurring.

Federated owns and operates more than 450 department stores throughout the United States, including their flagship stores, Bloomingdale's and Macy's, located in New York City. May owns and operates more than 430 department stores, including their flagship store Lord & Taylor, located in New York City, and has an additional 680 stores in its bridal group.

Lenox is one of the nation's oldest manufacturers of china and is particularly well-known for its upscale china. Waterford, one of the nation's leading tableware companies, specializes in crystal. Although Lenox and Waterford have individual product areas of strength, the two compete across a range of tableware generally. -30-

July 6 2008

Print, mail, etc.

FREE CONSUMER NEWSLETTERS

The Daily Consumer
Afternoons M-F
Sign up now!

Consumer News & Alerts
Every Sunday
Sign up now!

Knowledge is free.
Knowledge is power.

Back to the top |

Terms of Use Your use of this site constitutes acceptance of the Terms of Use

Advertisements on this site are placed and controlled by outside advertising networks. ConsumerAffairs.com does not evaluate or endorse the products and services advertised. See the FAQ for more information.

Company Response Welcome If complaints about your company appear on our site, we welcome your response. Please see the Response Form for more information.

For more information, see the FAQ and privacy policy. The information on this Web site is general in nature and is not intended as a substitute for competent legal advice. ConsumerAffairs.com Inc. makes no representation as to the accuracy of the information herein provided and assumes no liability for any damages or loss arising from the use thereof.