TOBACCO PRICES

Greymouth Evening Star, 28 August 1929, Page 8

TOBACCO PRICES

COMPETITION RESENTED.

(Special to ‘‘Star.’’) WELLINGTON, August 27. Unfair competition in the sale of tobacco and cigarettes was alleged in a petition presented to the House, today, on behalf of E. W. Humphrey and Samuel Sigall, of Wellington. The petitioners-stated that they had been authorised to speak for the tobacconists throughout the Dominion. The business of retail tobacconists was being rapidly destroyed Uy the action .of certain other retail traders, whose business consisted very largely of trade in commodities other than tobacco and cigarettes at prices so low as would leaVe tobacconists, whose business consisted entirely of the sale of tobacco and cigarettes and smokers’ requisites, no margin of profit. Those traders, it was urged, were not in any sense dependent upon their sales of tobacco, but depended entirely upon other lines of trade for their profit. They sold tobacco at cut rates, because tobacco was commodity widely used, and so formed an attractive decoy line. The public knew the standard prices of tobacco, and when they saw these standard prices prices being' cut, they were apt to draw two inferences: (1) that the standard prices were too high and could be cut by tobacconists, and (2) that the trader cutting tobacco prices was selling other good cheaply. Both inferences were entirely wrong, but the object of pricecutters, it was alleged, was to cause the public to draw those wrong inferences. That they ruined honest and fair dealing tobacconists, while misleading the public in that way apparently caused them no concern. The petitioners asked that Parliament should cause the matter to be investiagted with a view to amending the law so as to protect tobacconists against unfair competition.