View original document

The full text on this page is automatically extracted from the file linked above and may contain errors and inconsistencies.

1984
ANNUAL
REPORT

U.S. FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION
WASHINGTON, D.C.

Annual
Report
of the FEDERAL
TRADE
COMMISSION

For the Fiscal Year Ended
September 30, 1984

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office
Washington, D.C. 20402

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION

JAMES C. MILLER III, Chairman
MICHAEL PERTSCHUK, Commissioner
PATRICIA P. BAILEY, Commissioner
GEORGE W. DOUGLAS, Commissioner
TERRY CALVANI, Commissioner
EMILY H. ROCK, Secretary

ii

EXECUTIVE OFFICES OF THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION
Pennsylvania Avenue at Sixth Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20580
Regional Offices
Atlanta, Georgia
Room 1000
1718 Peachtree Street, N.W.
Zip Code: 30367

Denver, Colorado
Suite 2900
1405 Curtis Street
Zip Code: 80202

Boston, Massachusetts
Room 1301
150 Causeway Street
Zip Code: 02114

Los Angeles, California
Room 13209
11000 Wilshire Boulevard
Zip Code: 90024

Chicago, Illinois
Suite 1437
55 East Monroe Street
Zip Code: 60603

New York, New York
Room 2243-EB Federal Building
26 Federal Plaza
Zip Code: 10278

Cleveland, Ohio
Suite 500 - Mall Building
118 St. Clair Avenue
Zip Code: 44114

San Francisco, California
Room 12470 - Federal Building
450 Golden Gate Avenue
Zip Code: 94102

Dallas, Texas
8303 Elmbrook Drive
Zip Code: 75247

Seattle, Washington
Room 2840 - Federal Building
915 Second Avenue
Zip Code: 98174
Field Station

Honolulu, Hawaii
Room 6324
300 Ala Moana Blvd.
Zip Code: 96850
iii

LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL

March 19, 1986

The Honorable George Bush
President of the Senate
United States Senate
Washington, D.C. 20510
The Honorable Thomas P. O'Neill
The Speaker of the House of Representatives
House of Representatives
Washington, D.C. 20515
Dear Mr. President and Mr. Speaker:
It is a pleasure to transmit the seventieth Annual Report of the Federal Trade Commission covering its
accomplishments during the fiscal year ended September 30, 1984.
By direction of the Commission.

TERRY CALVANI
Acting Chairman

iv

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION
1984 ANNUAL REPORT
Table of Contents
Page
Summary.................................................................................................................................................1
Maintaining Competition Mission..........................................................................................................3
Summary of Enforcement Activities................................................................................................3
Mergers and Acquisitions.................................................................................................................4
Horizontal Restraints........................................................................................................................5
Vertical Restraints............................................................................................................................5
Monopolization................................................................................................................................6
Order Modifications.........................................................................................................................6
Competition Advocacy.....................................................................................................................6

Consumer Protection Mission.................................................................................................................8
Advertising Practices........................................................................................................................8
Marketing Practices........................................................................................................................10
Credit Practices...............................................................................................................................11
Service Industry Practices..............................................................................................................12
Enforcement....................................................................................................................................14
Policy and Evaluation.....................................................................................................................16
Office of Consumer and Business Education.................................................................................16
Economic Activities..............................................................................................................................17
The Regional Offices............................................................................................................................19
Executive Direction, Administration and Management.......................................................................19
Appendix
Part II (Investigative Stage) Consent Agreements Accepted and
Published for Public Comment
Competition Mission......................................................................................................................21
Consumer Protection Mission........................................................................................................22

Part II (Investigative Stage) Consent Agreements Issued in
Final Form
Competition Mission......................................................................................................................25
Consumer Protection Mission........................................................................................................28
v

Injunctions
Competition Mission......................................................................................................................33
Consumer Protection Mission........................................................................................................34
Civil Penalty Actions
Competition Mission......................................................................................................................39
Consumer Protection Mission........................................................................................................41
Administrative Complaints
Competition Mission......................................................................................................................45
Consumer Protection Mission........................................................................................................49
Part III (Adjudicative Stage) Consent Agreements Issued in
Final Form
Competition Mission......................................................................................................................51
Consumer Protection Mission........................................................................................................53
Initial Decisions
Competition Mission......................................................................................................................55
Final Commission Orders
Competition Mission......................................................................................................................57
Consumer Protection Mission........................................................................................................58
Order Modifications
Competition Mission......................................................................................................................61
Consumer Protection Mission........................................................................................................65
Appellate Court Review of Commission Orders..................................................................................69
Supreme Court Review of Commission Orders...................................................................................71
Economic Reports Completed..............................................................................................................73
Economic Working Papers...................................................................................................................75
Miscellaneous Economic Policy Papers...............................................................................................77
Intervention...........................................................................................................................................79

vi

SUMMARY

Fiscal 1984 was a year of continued progress toward assuring the Commission its proper role as an
effective and responsible agency.
While the Commission continued its commitment in carrying forward its statutory responsibilities, it also
pursued several major goals:
FOCUSING ON SPECIFIC MARKET FAILURES
In place of broad regulatory proceedings that waste Commission resources, the current FTC focuses on
specific market failures. In consumer protection, the FTC has devoted major resources to areas of fraud,
deceptive advertising, systematic breach of contract, illegal credit practices, and to a program that advocates
consumers' interests before other government bodies. In antitrust, the FTC has devoted major resources to
merger evaluation and to enforcement proceedings against cartel-like conduct - such as agreements by
competitors to restrict output, set prices, divide markets, or limit entry.
CLARIFYING THE RULES GOVERNING BUSINESS CONDUCT
The FTC has put major emphasis on informing businesses of the rules they must obey. The Commission
has issued a policy statement clarifying the definition of unlawful deceptive practices, drawn from the criteria
developed by the Commission and the courts over the last 40 years. The Commission has also adopted a
policy statement clarifying the Commission's advertising substantiation rules and has published for the first
time the guidelines it uses to assess mergers.
INFORMING CONSUMERS OF THEIR RIGHTS
Coupled with guidance to business, the Commission has expanded its program of consumer education.
Over the past three years, the FTC has developed and distributed nationally three television and two radio
public service announcements aimed at making consumers more aware of their rights. It has also produced
and distributed numerous consumer booklets and brochures.

1

2

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION

WORKING WITH BUSINESS TO OBTAIN COMPLIANCE
Although the FTC has made major efforts to provide guidance to both businesses and consumers,
businesses still fail at times to comply with legal requirements. Sometimes the violations are inadvertent.
In such cases, the FTC has attempted to obtain voluntary compliance without engaging in costly enforcement
proceedings. For example, the Commission's program to seek compliance with the Truth in Lending Act
among real estate advertisers raised compliance in 46 targeted cities from 13 percent to 86 percent.
PURSUING SOUND ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
The Commission has developed a vigorous, carefully-targeted enforcement program to safeguard
consumer welfare. In consumer protection the Commission has obtained injunctions halting investment
frauds that would have cost consumers millions of dollars if allowed to continue, pursued cases in which
companies systematically breached their contracts with consumers, and brought numerous enforcement
actions under the Equal Credit Opportunity Act.
In antitrust, the Commission has increased its attack on cartel-like conduct. While not ignoring
traditional "smokestack" industries, the Commission has focused on the fast-growing service sector of the
economy, increasing enforcement efforts against activities by professionals, trade associations, and
organizations that set industry and trade standards. It has also stopped anticompetitive mergers, while
permitting mergers that lower costs and hold substantial prospect for lower prices to consumers.
FILING COMMENTS BEFORE OTHER AGENCIES
Besides its more traditional law enforcement programs, the Commission has an advocacy program that
involves all three bureaus and identifies critical competition and consumer interests in federal and state
regulations and legislative proposals. Through the program, the Commission then advocates competition and
consumer interests in proceedings before government agencies, in the courts, and before Congress.
Central to the Commission's overall program has been increased coordination between the Bureau of
Economics and the two operating bureaus - Consumer Protection and Competition. The Bureau of
Economics' role has been expanded to provide direct economic evidence at early stages of investigations and
formal enforcement proceedings, rather that merely to critique cases after they have been fully developed
and presented to the Commission. Because of its early involvement, the Bureau of Economics is able to help
select targets for investigation, evaluate the consumer benefits of potential proceedings, assist in gathering
and evaluating evidence, and assist in preparing memoranda in support of litigation proceedings.

ANNUAL REPORT 1984

3

MAINTAINING COMPETITION MISSION
The mission of the Commission's Bureau of Competition is to enhance the welfare of consumers by
maintaining the competitive operation of our economic system of private enterprise. The Bureau carries out
its mission by enforcing the antitrust provisions of the Clayton Act and the Federal Trade Commission Act,
as well as by serving as a vigorous advocate of competition before Congress and other governmental bodies.
SUMMARY OF ENFORCEMENT ACTIVITIES
During fiscal 1984, the Commission initiated 203 initial phase and 50 full phase investigations. The
Commission issued 13 administrative complaints, accepted 17 consent agreements and voted to seek 4
preliminary injunctions relating to competition matters. Two other consent agreements were accepted subject
to public comment.
Civil penalty actions were filed by the Department of Justice on behalf of the FTC against RSR
Corporation and the Coastal Corporation. The case against Coastal marked the first time the Commission
enforced Section 7A(g)(1) of the Clayton Act for an alleged violation of the Hart-Scott-Rodino Antitrust
Improvements Act of 1976. Civil penalties were imposed against seven firms for failure to comply with
outstanding Commission consent orders.
In administrative proceedings, Administrative Law Judges issued three initial decisions which dismissed
charges involving merger cases: Weyerhaeuser Co., B.A.T. Industries Ltd., and Echlin Inc. In one other case,
Boise Cascade Corporation, the ALJ upheld the complaint which alleged that Boise knowingly received
illegal discriminatory discounts from suppliers of office products. The four initial decisions are awaiting
final Commission review.
Three final orders issued by the Commission upheld initial decisions. Charges that Champion Spark Plug
Co. lessened competition in the market for replacement windshield wipers and refills through its acquisition
of the Anderson Co. were dismissed on grounds that the market was already competitive due to low barriers
to entry and other companies' interest in expansion within the industry. In the General Foods Corporation
matter, the Commission dismissed charges that the company attempted to monopolize the coffee industry.
American Medical International Inc. was ordered to divest French Hospital after it was found that the 1979
acquisition could create a monopoly of general acute care health services in the city and county of San Luis
Obispo, California. The acquisition gave American Medical control of 3 of the 5 hospitals in the area.
Two other orders overturned rulings of Administrative Law Judges and dismissed complaints: General
Motors Corporation and ITT Continental

4

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION

Baking Co. One other matter, Schlumberger Limited was dismissed after Schlumberger voluntarily divested
Accutest Corporation.
In addition, the U.S. Court of Appeals overturned an FTC order on appeal by the Ethyl Corporation.
MERGERS AND ACQUISITIONS
Mergers and acquisitions represented the largest area of antitrust enforcement activity during fiscal 1984.
Under the review process of the Hart-Scott-Rodino Antitrust Improvements Act of 1976, businesses filed
2418 notifications to report 1340 proposed mergers and acquisitions during the fiscal year. The Commission
issued requests for additional Information in 36 of the reported transactions.
Four companies entered into consent agreements with the Commission to divest assets or share holdings
to settle antitrust concerns. Texaco Inc.'s acquisition of Getty Oil Co. resulted in a final consent agreement
requiring substantial divestiture of certain oil and gas assets to settle charges that the acquisition violated the
antitrust laws because it could lessen competition in various markets of the oil and gas industry. Consent
agreements requiring divestitures were also accepted with Pilkington Brothers P.L.C., Flowers Industries Inc.
and Jim Walter Corporation.
Under a final consent agreement, General Motors Corporation and Toyota Corporation agreed to limit
the number of subcompact cars to be produced by their California joint venture. The firms also agreed to
refrain from exchanging competitively sensitive technical information if unrelated to the production of cars
by the joint venture corporation.
Great Lakes Chemical Corp. agreed to license brominated flame retardants technology in settlement of
a complaint challenging the acquisition of one of its competitors, Velsicol Chemical Corp. In addition to
accepting the consent, the Commission accepted separate agreements dismissing its complaints against
Velsicol and its former parent, Northwest Industries Inc.
One merger resulted in acceptance of a consent agreement for public comment. Standard Oil Co. of
California's $13.2 billion acquisition of Gulf Oil Corporation. Under terms of the agreement, SOCAL agreed
to divest certain oil and gas assets to offset alleged anticompetitive effects resulting from the acquisition.
In addition, the Commission negotiated a hold separate agreement whereby SOCAL agreed to the
independent operation of all Gulf oil and gas assets until all antitrust concerns were satisfied.
The Commission's staff was authorized to seek preliminary injunctions in four merger cases. The district
courts granted injunctions in Bass Brothers Enterprises, S.A. and Columbian Enterprises, Inc. The Court of
Appeals for the Ninth Circuit reversed the district court's decision in Warner Communications, Inc. and
granted the Commission's application for a preliminary injunction. In the fourth case, involving Alcon
Laboratories

ANNUAL REPORT 1984

5

Inc.'s proposed acquisition of CooperVision Inc., the proposal was abandoned by the parties before the
Commission's application was filed in court.
HORIZONTAL RESTRAINTS
The Commission's antitrust enforcement activity continued to reflect an emphasis on prohibiting
anticompetitive agreements between competitors and resulted in the acceptance of six final consent orders
and the issuance of eight complaints during fiscal 1984.
Dillon Companies, Smitty's Super Markets Inc. and David Porter entered into settlements agreeing not
to interfere with the collection and publication of price surveys based on retail grocery items checked in their
stores.
In two other consent agreements, The Washington, D. C. Dermatological Society and Estes Park
Accommodations Association, Inc. agreed not to interfere with their respective members' truthful advertising
of fees and available services.
The Commission's complaint against The District of Columbia Superior Court Trial Lawyers Association
charged the group with conducting an illegal boycott to fix prices by encouraging its member attorneys to
withhold their legal services to indigent defendants under the Criminal Justice Act. The complaint further
alleged that the boycott forced the District of Columbia to increase the fee level under duress in order to
secure the administration of justice.
Three separate complaints were issued against Tristate Household Goods Tariff Conference, Middle
Atlantic Conference and the Motor Transport Association. The Commission charged that each of the motor
carrier tariff bureaus conspired illegally to fix the intrastate transportation rates for property shipped by
motor common carrier. The complaints alleged that the price fixing practices of the three bureaus deprived
consumers using intrastate carriers of the benefits of competition in the specified states.
After a comprehensive staff analysis of the antitrust problems in the taxi-for-hire industry, separate
complaints were filed against the municipal governments of Minneapolis and New Orleans charging both
cities with unfair competition through the use of restrictive regulations applicable to taxicab operators.
Monetary damages cannot be assessed in either case; however, if the Commission finds that the law has been
violated, it could order each city not to enter into or enforce any agreement or city code provision that
unreasonably restricts competition.
VERTICAL RESTRAINTS
The Commission reversed an Administrative Law Judge's decision and dismissed a complaint which
charged that General Motors Corporation violated the Robinson-Patman Act by granting advertising
allowances to

6

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION

a few large car rental and leasing firms while not offering the same allowances to smaller companies. The
Commission found no evidence that the challenged practice produced anticompetitive effects.
MONOPOLIZATION
In General Foods Corp., the Commission upheld an initial decision by an Administrative Law Judge
dismissing charges against the nation's largest coffee maker. The Commission found that General Foods did
not use unfair methods of competition or attempt to monopolize the coffee industry, but promoted healthy
competition between brands through the use of efficient marketing skills.
The Commission overturned an Administrative Law Judge's initial decision in ITT Continental Baking
Co. and dismissed the complaint. The Commission ruled that Continental's pricing policies were in response
to competitive conditions in the wholesale white bread baking market and were not an attempt to eliminate
competition or control prices.
ORDER MODIFICATIONS
The Commission modified 22 of its prior orders during fiscal 1984.
In keeping with the Commission's policy of allowing firms more freedom in establishing nondiscriminatory standards for product promotion, display and services with their dealers, nine orders were
modified.
The Commission relaxed the prior approval provisions of six orders restricting acquisitions and it deleted
from another order a provision which required the filing of special reports prior to the consummation of an
acquisition.
Two other orders were modified to delete provisions prohibiting reciprocal dealings.
The provisions prohibiting a firm from distributing its products through wholesalers were deleted from
an order.
One order was modified to allow a medical group to participate in discussions about new types of health
care financing.
In addition, one order was vacated due to a jurisdictional change and the last remaining provision of an
order in a merger case was set aside after the anticompetitive issue was removed through divestiture.
COMPETITION ADVOCACY
The Bureau of Competition works with the Bureau of Economics and the Bureau of Consumer Protection
to identify important consumer protection and competition issues found in government regulation. In
comments submitted to other agencies, Congress, and the courts, the bureaus

ANNUAL REPORT 1984

7

advocate the consumers' interest in promoting a competitive marketplace. By using interventions to
complement its cases and investigations, the FTC can more effectively represent consumer interests than if
it relied solely upon either approach.
There were several filings on trade policy issues. For example, the FTC participated in International
Trade Commission proceedings involving domestic industries' (tuna, copper, and steel) petitions based on
the so-called "escape clause." The domestic producers have sought trade restrictions such as tariffs and
quotas against foreign competitors. At stake in these proceedings are literally billions of dollars. The FTC
has argued that, assuming a finding of damage to the domestic industry and the necessity for some form of
relief, the least restrictive available trade limitation should be imposed because restrictions of any kind harm
consumers. In addition, the Commission filed an amicus curiae brief before the Court of International Trade
in countervailing duty and antidumping cases involving nitrocellulose.
The Commission presented an oral argument in a case before the ITC, arguing that trademark protection
for product shape should not be granted to certain U.S. producers of vertical milling machines.
Several comments were filed in state regulatory and legislative matters. The Commission intervened as
an amicus curiae in an Illinois Supreme Court case involving real estate commission discounts. The
Commission argued that non-price discounts (through coupons redeemable at retail establishments) offered
by certain real estate brokers stimulate competition to the consumer's benefit. The FTC submitted an amicus
curiae brief in California in a case involving regulation of the sale of alcoholic beverages. The FTC argued
against restricting price competition by prohibiting cash rebates to retail purchasers of certain wines.
The Commission has played an active role in problems of airport access. The agency staff submitted
comments and testified before the FAA in a rulemaking involving the problem that some airports now have
because there are more applicants for landing slots than there are slots available. The comments recommend
creating a market mechanism that would allow carriers to buy and sell slots in order to solve this problem.
In related proceedings at the CAB and the FAA, the staff recommended this approach as an alternative to
granting antitrust immunity to airline scheduling committees.
The Commission staff also appeared before the other federal transportation agencies, the ICC and the
FMC, arguing in appropriate proceedings for the greatest possible latitude to be given market forces as
contrasted to government regulation. The emphasis again was on the interests of consumers.

8

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION
CONSUMER PROTECTION MISSION

The Consumer Protection Mission is charged with the elimination of unfair or deceptive acts or practices
in or affecting commerce, with emphasis on those practices that may unreasonably restrict or inhibit the free
exercise of consumer choice. The Mission emphasizes market-oriented remedies for law violations. Its
activities can be grouped into five program areas: Advertising Practices; Credit Practices; Service Industry
Practices; Marketing Practices; and Enforcement. In addition, the Mission has a Policy and Evaluation Unit,
and an Office of Consumer and Business Education.
ADVERTISING PRACTICES
During fiscal year 1984, the Commission devoted major resources to the elimination of false, deceptive,
and unfair advertising. Advertising monitoring activities and vigorous follow-up law enforcement actions
were undertaken.
The Commission issued a policy statement clarifying the standards the Commission uses to protect
consumers and businesses from deception. The Commission also reaffirmed its commitment to the
advertising substantiation program, which requires advertisers and advertising agencies to have a reasonable
basis for advertising claims before they are disseminated.
The Commission obtained several final consent agreements relating to advertising practices. Emergency
Devices, and Monte Proulx, former head of marketing and research for the company, and two corporate
officers agreed to stop advertising that the "Extra Margin Emergency Escape Mask" provides protection from
carbon monoxide gas; will permit a person to breathe normally or for an express period of time; or has been
endorsed by a government agency. Claims that the mask will protect a person from fire hazards must be
accompanied by the statement, "The mask does not filter carbon monoxide - a lethal gas associated with fire."
Estee Corporation, a leading manufacturer and marketer of health-related foods, agreed not to claim that any
of its products have been recommended for use by diabetics or hypoglycemics unless it discloses the identity
of the endorser and any qualifications placed on the endorsement. The company will also pay $25,000 in
consumer redress. Adria Laboratories agreed to stop making claims comparing the safety of "Efficin" pain
reliever, or any other over-the-counter analgesic containing magnesium salicylate, to aspirin, without also
disclosing that the product is similar to aspirin and may produce the same side effects as aspirin. California
Texas Oil Co. agreed not to make false or unsubstantiated claims about improved gas mileage or improved
emission control for its gasoline additive "AWECO Mileage Extender", or other products. Cynex
Manufacturing Corporation agreed not to make any energy-related performance claims for its "Watt Wizard"
power factor con-

ANNUAL REPORT 1984

9

troller unless it has adequate substantiation. It may not use the phrase "up to" in its energy savings claims
unless an appreciable number of consumers can achieve the stated maximum level of savings under
conditions normally encountered by consumers. Sovereign Chemical & Petroleum Products agreed to have
a reasonable basis for any quality-related or other representations about its motor oils and transmission fluids.
An additional three consent agreements were accepted and published for public comment. Thomas A.
Dardas, president of Acu-Form Weight Control Centers agreed not to claim that the "Acu-Form" plastic
earpiece or any other diet product is effective in helping consumers lose weight, without substantiation for
such claims. He also agreed not to misrepresent and to clearly disclose the terms of any guarantee in
connection with any weight loss program. Biopractic Group, Inc., maker of "Therapeutic Mineral Ice",
agreed not to make claims about the product's effectiveness and acceptance by the scientific community and
the news media, unless it has adequate substantiation. The product was marketed to reduce pain and
inflammation arising from muscle sprains, arthritis, rheumatism, and similar ailments. Commodore Business
Machines agreed not to advertise that its computers have certain equipment or capabilities unless the claim
is true at the time of sale.
In a consent agreement obtained by the Commission to settle an administrative proceeding, PharmTech
Research agreed not to misrepresent any scientific test results, research articles, or scientific opinions or data
in its advertising claims for the dietary supplement "Daily Greens." Pharmtech is also prohibited from
claiming that "Daily Greens" provides any health benefit or cancer-preventive properties unless it has reliable
scientific evidence.
The Commission issued several administrative complaints challenging instances of alleged false and
unsubstantiated advertising. The Commission charged that Associated Mills' "Pollenex Pure Air '99' Air
Cleaner/Deodorizer" does not remove most tobacco smoke, ragweed pollen, or dust from the air as
advertised. A complaint against P. Leiner Nutritional Products challenges the reasonable basis for its claims
that "Octacol 4" helps increase endurance, stamina, vigor and athletic performance. The Commission
challenged General Nutrition's advertisements claiming the diet supplement "Healthy Greens" reduces the
chances of cancer. The Commission charged that Weider Health and Fitness falsely represented that its
"Anabolic Mega-Pak" and "Dynamic Life Essence" nutrient supplements were effective substitutes for
anabolic steroids. A complaint against Jerome Milton, Inc. challenges the evidence substantiating claims
that "Shane" toothpaste cures gum disease or is superior to other toothpastes in reducing plaque.

10

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION

In a suit filed in U.S. District Court, the Commission obtained a permanent injunction that prohibits
Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corporation from claiming any specific milligram tar rating for "Barclay"
cigarettes, unless such rating is approved by the Commission or results from a test method approved by the
Commission.
The Over-The-Counter Antacid Advertising Rulemaking proceeding was terminated during fiscal year
1984. The Commission found that the record produced no credible evidence of express or implied claims
that antacids are safe for everyone or that antacid advertisements are deceptive or unfair. Related issues will
be handled on a case-by-case basis.
MARKETING PRACTICES
The Commission took law enforcement actions against companies allegedly failing to meet warranty
obligations or using unfair, deceptive, or fraudulent sales or marketing techniques.
Two final consent agreements were obtained in the warranty performance area. Three mobile home
manufacturers, Centurion International, Centurion Homes, and Centurion Homes of California agreed to
provide repair work or reimbursement to consumers who did not receive the warranty performance they were
entitled to. Peabody Barnes agreed not to misrepresent the length of warranty coverage for its sump and
sewage pumps, and to honor warranties on previously sold pumps for a full year. In addition, the company
must clearly disclose or instruct purchasers on how to determine the date a pump was manufactured, and may
tie warranties to the manufacture date only if the warranties last at least three years. In a consent agreement
accepted and published for public comment, Sun Refining and Marketing Co., an automobile battery seller,
agreed to honor lifetime warranties already issued and to so notify eligible customers.
A final adjudicated consent agreement with the General Motors Corporation was issued which requires
the corporation to establish a nationwide arbitration program for GM car owners with unsatisfied complaints
about engine or transmission failures. The corporation is also required to advertise the availability of and
to provide service bulletins which describe both current and potential problems and repair procedures.
Robert J. McDaniel, former president of Harbor Village Club and its developer company, was ordered
to pay $25,000 into a consumer redress fund to reimburse misled timeshare purchasers and was permanently
enjoined from employing deceptive practices in the sale of vacation timeshares. The Commission filed a
complaint in federal district court seeking a permanent injunction and consumer redress from Rita A. Walker
and Associates, Inc. The U.S. District Court issued a temporary injunction to stop alleged false and
deceptive practices in the company's offer of loans to help homeowners avoid foreclosure. The Commission
has charged that after the

ANNUAL REPORT 1984

11

company secures the deeds, it records them and claims ownership of the house, treating the consumers as
tenants.
The Commission issued an administrative complaint charging Orkin with unfairly raising annual renewal
fees for its termite control contracts with consumers whose agreements called for fixed annual fees.
Sentronic Controls Corp., in a consent agreement published for public comment, agreed not to claim that its
ultrasonic pest control product eliminates insects and rodents, or make any other efficacy or performance
claims, without competent and reliable scientific evidence for the claims.
The Commission obtained stipulated permanent injunctions against three health spa companies and their
presidents. David Meade and Tyler-Radcliffe Co., Inc.; Robyn Kliss and Thor Enterprises, Inc.; and Billy
DeVasher and Lady Venus Centers, Inc. all agreed to obtain performance bonds, disclose clearly the date
that services will be available, and have any specific additional services or facilities claimed in working order
before taking advance payments from consumers.
The Commission tentatively adopted a revised Used Car Rule, requiring dealers to give consumers
complete and clear information on who will pay for repairs after a sale. The rule will also require dealers
to make specified disclosures in a redesigned Buyers Guide placed in the side window of each used car
offered for sale.
CREDIT PRACTICES
The Commission took numerous actions to resolve problems in the consumer credit market.
The Commission obtained two consent agreements for alleged violations of Section 5 of the FTC Act.
Lomas & Nettleton, a mortgage bank, agreed to pay all obligations due and payable from homeowners'
escrow accounts in a timely manner. Avco Financial Services agreed to an order prohibiting it from a variety
of abusive debt collection practices.
The Commission also obtained three consent agreements for alleged violations of the Fair Credit Billing
Act (FCBA). The American Express Company agreed not to dun credit card customers for contested
amounts until the dispute is resolved. Macy's New York agreed to distribute $225,000 in consumer redress
among credit card customers who disputed their bills in 1977 and 1978. The corporation also agreed to
change its credit billing practices and to educate its credit-office employees on the FCBA requirements.
Emporium-Capwell, a major California retailer, agreed not to dun credit card customers for contested bills
if consumers follow the notification procedures required by the FCBA, to resolve disputes in a timely
manner, and not to collect finance charges on disputes resolved in the customer's favor.
Civil penalty judgments were obtained against alleged violators of the Equal Credit Opportunity Act.
Two related firms, Security Pacific Finance

12

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION

Corp., agreed to pay $140,000 in civil penalties in a consent decree settling charges that they failed to
consider applications from women who did not have jobs, ignored women's alimony and child support
payments, requested prohibited information, and failed to retain adequate records.
The Allied Stores Corp. agreed to pay a $122,000 civil penalty to settle charges that it violated the Equal
Credit Opportunity Act by failing to disclose the specific, principal reasons for turning down credit
applications. The judgment also settles charges that it violated the Fair Credit Reporting Act by failing to
disclose that it denied credit applications based on information obtained from a third party other than a
consumer reporting agency. Under a proposed consent order, the Hospital and Health Services Credit Union
has agreed to notify affected former credit applicants that they were denied credit on the basis of information
from a credit bureau or third party, and to provide the applicant with the name and address of the bureau, or
the nature of third party information, upon request.
First Federal Credit Control agreed to a $25,000 civil penalty consent judgment for allegedly violating
The Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, by failing to notify consumers of their right to dispute or obtain
verification of a debt, and the use of form letters containing false and deceptive representations.
The Commission approved the final Credit Practices Rule covering the remedies lenders and retail
installment sellers can include in consumer credit contracts for use if debtors become delinquent or default
on their loans. The rule further prohibits misrepresentations of cosigner liability and provides that potential
cosigners be furnished a "Notice of Cosigner" which explains in general terms their obligations and
liabilities.
SERVICE INDUSTRY PRACTICES
The Commission pursued legal solutions to instances where consumers were allegedly misled concerning
the availability, cost, and value of goods and services supplied by persons claiming to offer professional
services.
Spinal Health Services, the Laser Toning Center, and the two chiropractors who operate these companies,
agreed not to represent that their "laser face lift" will reduce or remove facial lines, or otherwise give a more
youthful facial appearance, or that the treatment will provide as long-lasting an improvement as that of a
surgical face lift, without competent and reliable scientific tests or evidence. Christian Services
International, a life-care home developer and operator, agreed not to misrepresent that its life care homes are
affiliated with any religious denomination or group that may also be morally or legally responsible for the
home; that there is little or no financial risk in entering into a life-care contract, and that increases in service
fees will never exceed corresponding social security increases. In a complaint filed in U.S. District Court,
the Commission charged that A & A

ANNUAL REPORT 1984

13

Laboratories, and the individuals who control the companies, made claims about hair analysis and their
testing services that are false and that such tests may therefore be worthless to consumers.
Two defendants in the Commission's case against the U.S. Oil and Gas Corp. have agreed to pay
$180,000 in consumer redress and have signed stipulated orders that prohibit them from making false claims
about their success in obtaining oil and gas leases for customers. In addition, a federal district court froze
$12 million in corporate assets and the personal assets of six officials connected with the company.
A civil action was filed by the Commission against four companies alleged to have induced consumers
into investing thousands of dollars each for valueless or non-existent rights to oil and gas leases on federal
land. The Commission's complaint names Trans-Alaska Energy Corp., Alaska Oil Development Corp.,
Federal Property Record Inc., and Federal Land Management Corp. A federal district court issued a
temporary restraining order and has frozen the assets of the companies and five individuals. The
Commission is also seeking a permanent injunction, and consumer redress. The Commission filed a
complaint in federal district court seeking civil penalties, consumer redress and permanent injunctions
against Alaska Land Leasing, four related companies, and six individuals. The U.S. District Court issued
a temporary restraining order freezing the assets of the companies and individuals. The companies are
charged with persuading customers to invest thousands of dollars each in Alaskan oil and gas leases of
negligible value. In a consent agreement accepted and published for public comment, Charles E. Weller, a
former officer of Alaska Land Leasing, agreed not to misrepresent the value or potential of oil and gas leases
or other investments. He will contribute $60,000 to a consumer redress fund, and agreed to disclose
information about the risks and potential of oil and gas leases. The Commission obtained a consent judgment
in federal district court settling charges that International Diamond Corp. and several defendants had falsely
claimed that its diamonds were risk-free investments and its prices were comparable with wholesale. The
settlement provides for $6.7 million in consumer redress to be distributed to former IDC customers. Four
IDC officials agreed to stipulated permanent injunctions and three of them are also required to pay a
combined sum of $90,000 in redress.
The American Society of Sanitary Engineering, which develops standards for plumbing equipment, in
a consent agreement accepted and published for public comment, agreed to change its policy of not granting
standards coverage to products that are patented or produced by one or a limited number of manufacturers,
and to consider products with innovative designs.
The Commission released a staff study entitled, "A Comparative Analysis of Cosmetic Contact Lens
Fitting by Opthamologists, Optometrists and Opticians." According to the study, there was little difference
in the quality of cosmetic contact lens fitting performed by opticians, opthamologists and

14

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION

optometrists. There was, however, a wide range of costs. Staff concluded that state restrictions on the fitting
of contact lenses by opticians may result in higher prices, because consumers might have limited access to
the services at lower costs. The Commission also conducted a symposium entitled, "Advertising by Health
Care Professionals in the 1980's." The symposium featured presentations of papers on health care advertising
and regulation and discussions of those papers by panels of economists, trade regulation attorneys, and health
care professionals.
ENFORCEMENT
The Enforcement program monitors compliance with Commission orders for the Bureau of Consumer
Protection, handles order modifications for the Bureau, and is responsible for the implementation and
enforcement of most Commission rules. A number of actions related to rules and statutes were taken during
fiscal year 1984.
The Commission's Funeral Rule took effect on April 30, 1984. The rule allows consumers to obtain
comparative information about prices and services over the telephone and in writing before they select
funeral arrangements. Guidelines were published to aid industry compliance with the rule, and an
educational program for consumers was launched.
The Commission solicited comments on its Home Insulation (R-Value) Rule as part of its review under
the Regulatory Flexibility Act. Comments were requested on whether the rule has significant benefits or
costs for small businesses and, if so, whether the rule should be amended.
The Commission reviewed the Wool Products Labeling Act, the Fur Products Labeling Act, and the
Textile Fibers Products Identification Act and found no significant impact on small business. Therefore, the
Commission decided that no changes would be made in the rules issued under these acts. In the fur labeling
area, Lloyd's Furs agreed not to misrepresent the designer or manufacturer of the fur garments it sells.
Concerning wool labeling, Westwood, a fabric manufacturer and importer, agreed to pay $25,000 in civil
penalties and to disclose the correct fiber content percentage.
Several civil actions were filed in the enforcement area. In a complaint filed in federal court, the
Commission charged Royco Automobile Parts with violating the Franchise Rule by failing to provide
required documents, misrepresenting facts, and making false earning claims. The Commission is seeking
a permanent injunction, a freeze of assets, civil penalties, and consumer redress. The Commission also
charged Federal Energy Systems with violations of the Franchise Rule. The Commission asked the court to
order consumer redress and civil penalties and to grant a temporary restraining order, preliminary and
permanent injunctions, and an asset freeze.
Numerous civil penalty judgments were obtained. Horizon Corp. agreed to make a $167,200 payment
into a consumer redress fund, and to assess

ANNUAL REPORT 1984

15

$41,800 in civil penalties to settle charges that it had violated a 1981 FTC consent order by failing to make
its regular payment to a consumer redress fund. Philly Mignon International (PMI), a fast-food franchisor,
agreed to pay a fine of at least $80,006, and is prohibited from using a variety of deceptive practices to sell
its franchises. Ferrara Foods, a franchiser of snack food distributorships, agreed not to make inflated
earnings promises and to pay $40,000 in civil penalties. Under the consent judgment, the company is
prohibited from selling a franchise unless it discloses all information about the business fully and accurately.
Random Stationers, A & L Supply Co., Tri-Cor Supply, and Gary Supplies, four companies that sell office
supplies, and the seven people who own and operate them, have agreed to pay $36,000 to settle Commission
charges that they shipped unordered merchandise after being told that doing so violated prior Commission
determinations. Hosiery Corp. of America agreed to a $200,000 civil penalty consent decree to settle charges
that it sent consumers unordered merchandise, improperly tried to collect for that merchandise, sent dunning
letters implying threats of action it did not intend to take, and violated the Mail Order Rule. The Commission
filed a consent decree in federal district court with Claire Nelson, who was president and co-owner of
Hosiery Corp. of America until 1981. The consent prohibits Nelson from violating the Mail Order Rule.
The Commission issued three final orders upholding Administrative Law Judge decisions. Under a final
order, AMREP Corp. must have adequate substantiation supporting the claims it may make concerning the
investment potential of the land it sells. AMREP is also prevented from using sales tactics that inhibit
reasoned consideration or make the buyer more susceptible to deception. Contracts must be clearly labeled
and must offer buyers a seven-day right to cancel. The Commission found Cliffdale Associates performance
claims for its "Ball-Matic Gas Save Valve" false and deceptive. The company is prohibited from making the
claims, may not misrepresent survey evidence supporting energy-savings claims for any product, and must
disclose any relationship between itself and persons endorsing its products. The Commission issued a final
order prohibiting Rentacolor from omitting information regarding payment schedules and other terms in its
advertisements and contracts for color television sets and other video equipment.
The Commission modified several previously existing orders in fiscal year 1984. Orders against Benton
& Bowles, Procter and Gamble, G.R.I. Corporation, American Home Products Corp., General Motors,
Campbell-Ewald, Mattell, Inc., and Carson-Roberts were modified due to changed conditions in fact or law
or the public interest.

16

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION

POLICY AND EVALUATION
In addition to its cases, rulemakings, and other activates to remedy problems in the market, the
Commission has traditionally been active in providing analytical support and expert opinion to other
government agencies. Commission fiscal 1984 filings and testimony, in which the Bureau of Consumer
Protection played a major role, are represented below.
Staff comments were submitted to the Department of Housing and Urban Development concerning
required warnings on manufactured housing to disclose formaldehyde-related health information.
In a letter to the Department of Health and Human Services, the Commission commented on proposed
regulations involving the requirements that certain health care providers, (such as Health Maintenance
Organizations), must meet to qualify for Medicare reimbursement.
Chairman Miller testified before the Subcommittee on Aviation of the Senate Committee on Commerce,
Science and Transportation on the relative merits of transferring consumer protection authority for airline
passengers from the Civil Aeronautics Board (CAB) to either the FTC or the Department of Transportation.
Comments were filed with the Colorado Department of Regulatory Agencies regarding state law
restrictions on commercial practices by physicians, chiropractors, podiatrists and optometrists in Colorado.
The Commission continued to assess the economic effects of its activities through various studies
coordinated and monitored by the Impact Evaluation Unit staff. Among the studies completed was a
Warranties Rule follow-up impact study of consumers concerning over 12,600 products, a study of the impact
of the Franchise Rule on potential investors and franchisees, and a survey of firms engaged in mail order
sales to determine the impact of the Mail Order Rule.
OFFICE OF CONSUMER AND BUSINESS EDUCATION
The Office of Consumer and Business Education coordinates an education program aimed at providing
information to consumers and industry on major Commission decisions, programs, statutes, and rules. This
allows informed choices and competitive business practices to function freely in the marketplace. Thus, the
consumer and business education program is a cost-effective way of obtaining compliance with the law.
In fiscal year 1984, television public service campaigns on the Commission's funeral and care label rules
were aired. These campaigns informed consumers about the new funeral rule and care labeling amendments
and the availability of brochures on these topics. In response, over $2,000 copies of the "Consumer Guide
to the FTC's Funeral Rule" and over 30,000 copies of "What's New About Care Labels" were distributed in
fiscal 1984. In ad-

ANNUAL REPORT 1984

17

dition, 15,000 copies of an industry guide entitled, "Writing a Care Label" were distributed. A radio
campaign developed in conjunction with the American Society of Travel Agents was released. The campaign
advised consumers to learn about cancellation policies, nationally advertised specials, and to get all promises
in writing. A print campaign on mortgage advertisements was produced, and 30,000 copies of the consumer
brochure, "Using Ads to Shop for Home Financing," were distributed.
In addition, several updates of print materials were developed and distributed. These materials include
such topics as Franchise and Business Opportunity; Buying a Used Car (Spanish); Holiday Shopping by
Phone or Mail; Laser Facelifts; Gold Jewelry; and Income Tax Preparation Services. In total, over two
million pieces of print materials were distributed.
ECONOMIC ACTIVITIES
The FTC's Bureau of Economics has three main responsibilities: to provide economic support to the
agency's antitrust and consumer protection activities; to advise the Commission about the impact of
government regulation on the functioning of markets; and to gather and analyze information on the American
economy.
The primary mission of the FTC is to enforce the antitrust and consumer protection laws. In 1984, the
Bureau of Economics continued to provide guidance and support to those activities. As has been the case
in the past, the bulk of Bureau of Economics resources was committed to support for and analysis of
investigations, litigation, and rulemaking. In the antitrust area, economists developed investigation plans,
carried out investigations, collected data and evidence, and offered advice on the economic merits of
potential antitrust actions. The primary objective was to distinguish situations where the marketplace
performed reasonably well from situations where consumer welfare might be augmented by Commission
action, and to advise on appropriate actions. Commission antitrust economists devoted considerable effort
to increasing the availability and use of economic evidence at all levels of antitrust enforcement activities.
When enforcement actions were initiated, economists worked to integrate economic analysis into the
proceeding and to devise remedies that would facilitate competition. Staff economists also testified in cases.
Finally, economists who were not involved in the investigation or prosecution of cases also provided advice
to the Commissioners in matters at the adjudication stage.
In the consumer protection area, economists provided estimates of the benefits and costs of alternative
policy approaches. Potential consumer protection actions were evaluated not only for their immediate
impact, but also for their longer run effects on price, product quality and product variety. Bureau economists
provided internal advice on the competitive impact

18

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION

of various regulations and proposed trade rules. Using expertise derived from studies of various industries
and trade practices, economists helped to evaluate cases in credit practices, advertising, product defects,
warranties, and a wide variety of other consumer protection issues. Working with the staff of the impact
evaluation group, economists helped design and carry out survey research aimed at determining the effects
of various FTC initiatives and policies, and also at learning about consumer perceptions in various markets.
An increasingly important contribution of economists was in computing optimal penalties, and the results
were applied to many cases. Also, economists in the industry analysis division organized an academic
conference on the economics of consumer protection. Economists within the consumer protection division
prepared for a conference to be held in February at the Continuing Legal Education Center of Georgetown
University aimed at informing practicing attorneys of the role of economics in consumer protection matters.
Finally, economists analyzed and contributed to proposed policy protocols in several areas, including product
defects.
Although the FTC is primarily a law enforcement agency, it also collects, analyzes, and publishes
information about the nation's business firms. Much of this work is undertaken by the Bureau of Economics.
In 1984, economists conducted a number of studies on a broad array of topics in antitrust, consumer
protection, and regulation.
In the antitrust area, economists completed work on the application of structure-conduct-performance
theory to oligopolistic markets, the use of efficiency defenses in litigation, incentives for oligopolistic
behavior in the steel industry, and various kinds of vertical restraints including retail price maintenance and
exclusive dealing. In addition, economists continued work on for-profit hospitals, the effects of antitrust
remedies in experimental markets, geographic market definitions, facilitating practices, labor union
exemptions, resale price maintenance, sealed bid markets, failing firm defenses, and sophisticated pricefixing. Finally, numerous research projects using the Commissions Line of Business data were initiated, and
a large number of papers were released.
In the consumer protection area, work was essentially completed on the impact of advertising restrictions
on the prices of legal services and on the effects of information security in experimental markets, and work
continued on studies of the effects of state drug substitution laws, consumer opinions of automobile
reliability, the effects of the FTC's Franchise Rule on advertising, and the role of information in the markets
for auto insurance and life insurance.
In the regulation area, economists continued to participate in a program of commenting on the
competitive and consumer protection effects of various regulatory activities. Three studies examining
regulatory limitations on markets were completed during the year, one on the Alaskan crude oil export ban,
another on Interior Department regulations restricting joint ven-

ANNUAL REPORT 1984

19

tures in bidding on outer continental shelf oil leases, and the third on textile import quotas. Another study
examining the costs and benefits of a wider range of trade restrictions was begun and largely completed. In
addition, drawing on the expertise gained in preparing a 1983 study on the costs imposed on air travelers by
the FAA policy of allocating airport landing rights administratively rather than through a market, comments
were filed with the FAA and testimony given at a public hearing held by the FAA explaining the benefits that
would follow from permitting sales of landing rights. In the international trade area, comments were filed
with the International Trade Commission as part of several investigations into claims that domestic industries
had been injured by imports. The Commission's comments proposed an economic approach to determining
whether imports were the cause of injury and estimated the costs that would result from granting the
proposed relief. Industries involved included steel, copper and canned tuna.
Several ongoing study projects in the Bureau cut across the various FTC missions. Current research
includes topics such as antitrust analysis of research and development joint ventures, regulations that restrict
the adoption of certain inventory valuation methods, the effects of retail milk price regulation by states,
securities regulation, building codes and innovation, certificate-of-need regulation, economic analysis of the
"sports market", and price discrimination.
THE REGIONAL OFFICES
During fiscal 1984 restructuring of the regional offices was completed. The more efficient size of the
offices enables them, as well as the Commission, to more efficiently utilize available resources and to carry
out those law enforcement activities best suited to the economic conditions of their areas.
The regional offices made significant contributions to the Commission's law enforcement efforts. They
were responsible for handling some of the more significant litigation and for achieving some of the more
important settlements during this fiscal year. In addition, the regional offices handled thousands of inquiries
and complaints from consumers, businesses, and members of Congress. These offices provided important
law enforcement guidance and education to members of the public, small business, and local groups of
numerous types.
EXECUTIVE DIRECTION,
ADMINISTRATION AND MANAGEMENT
The Office of the Executive Director is the central management and administrative organization of the
Federal Trade Commission. The Executive Director is responsible for providing essential services and
advisory func-

20

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION

tions including those related to personnel, budget and finance, automated systems, library, etc. The
Executive Director is also responsible for providing management direction to the Commission's ten regional
offices and field station and works in conjunction with bureau and office heads to ensure optimal resource
use and integration with Headquarters activities.
Fiscal 1984 marked the continued shifting of resources within the Office of the Executive Director to
accomplish priority projects and functions with reduced workyears and dollars. Major management
initiatives were directed toward maintaining service levels, while OED resources declined and organizational
realignments were effected. Emphasis was on finding economies in each functional area; these included
increased operating efficiencies through staffing changes and capital improvements, enhanced use of
contractor services, and elimination of redundant or unnecessary procedures.
A reorganization of the procurement and administrative services organizations was completed which
resulted in a consolidated organization designed to function with fewer staff resources and with increased
efficiency. The telecommunications and word processing functions were separated from the administrative
services area and combined in a new office systems organization. This change created a central office for
telecommunications and word processing and placed the office in the main organization responsible for
automated systems. An automated asset management system was designed and implemented to provide
greater control and accounting of selected inventory and property.
The agency used approximately 1238 workyears and spent $64.1 million, full amount appropriated for
the fiscal year. The workyears used were 5.4 percent less than fiscal 1983. Careful control of funding levels
and workyears were necessary to accomplish objectives with decreased resources. A hiring limitation
remained in effect for most offices in the Commission.
Regional offices continued to operate at levels established through the previous year reorganization.
Regional emphasis was on new case generation, outreach and closer integration with Headquarters legal and
economic activities. An automated consumer complaint system was instituted to facilitate handling and
tracking of complaint responses.
Progress was made on the consolidation of Headquarters offices. Critical relocation decisions were made
by senior management and task plans were developed. The consolidation was a major project for the Office
of the Executive Director and required the coordinated efforts of administrative and operational organizations
agency wide.
A number of human resource management initiatives were completed, including the development of a
new management training program. Contract negotiations were also completed with the Headquarters union,
and efforts continued to control average grade increases.

APPENDIX

Part II (Investigative Stage)
CONSENT AGREEMENTS ACCEPTED
AND PUBLISHED FOR PUBLIC COMMENT
COMPETITION MISSION
Standard Oil Co. of California
Under a consent agreement, Standard Oil Co. of California (SOCAL), the nation's fourth largest oil
company agreed to divest certain oil and gas assets to offset alleged anticompetitive effects of SOCAL's
$13.2 billion acquisition of Gulf Oil Corporation. Under an accompanying hold separate agreement,
SOCAL agreed to the independent operation of all Gulf's oil and gas assets until the divestitures comply
with the requirements of the consent agreement and until the Commission determines that no additional
divestitures are necessary to cure antitrust concerns. The merger is the largest in corporate history. The
complaint accompanying the consent agreement charged that SOCAL's acquisition of Gulf could lessen
competition in four relevant lines of commerce: the transportation of refined light petroleum products,
such as gasoline, kerosene and jet fuel from refineries into the consuming areas of the southeastern U.S.;
the refining and distribution of gasoline in specified areas; the transportation of crude oil from producing
fields in western Texas and eastern New Mexico to refineries; and the manufacture and distribution of
kerosene jet fuel in the East Coast and Gulf Coast areas of the U.S. SOCAL and Gulf, the complaint
alleged, are direct competitors in each of the relevant lines of commerce. The agreement requires
SOCAL to divest Gulf's interest in 30 wholesale gasoline terminals and several thousand Gulf-owned
gas stations served by those terminals located in the southeast U.S. In addition, SOCAL is required to
divest Gulf's interest in either the refinery located in Port Arthur, Texas or the refinery located in
Alliance, Louisiana. Depending upon which refinery is sold, SOCAL must divest Gulfs interest in either
the West Texas Gulf Pipeline Company, the Mesa Pipeline, and connecting pipelines or only Gulf's
interest in the West Texas Gulf Pipeline Company. SOCAL must also divest Gulf's interest in the
Colonial Pipeline. The agreement requires SOCAL to divest the specified assets, within six months, to
acquirors approved by the Commission. For a period of ten years, SOCAL must obtain prior FTC
approval before
21

22

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION
acquiring any company engaged directly or indirectly in the refining and distribution of petroleum and
pipeline transportation in, the geographic areas specified in the consent agreement.

Multiple Listing Service of the Greater Michigan City Area Inc.
The Multiple Listing Service of the Greater Michigan City Area Inc. of Michigan City, Indiana, agreed
not to interfere with its members' participation in any comparative advertising or practice that would promote competition among residential real estate brokers in LaPorte County, Indiana. The Multiple Listing
Service is a clearinghouse through which member real estate brokerage firms regularly exchange
information on listings of real estate property located in LaPorte County. To comply with the order, the
Multiple Listing Service is prohibited from establishing fixed commission rates or interfering with its
members' truthful advertising of commission fees lower than the current market rate. In addition, the
service must not deny membership to a firm because of size or volume of business, or restrict any
member's participation in a venture that competes with the Multiple Listing Service.
CONSUMER PROTECTION MISSION
Sentronic Controls Corporation, et al.
Sentronic Controls Corporation agreed not to claim its "Pest Sentry" ultrasonic pest control product
eliminates insects and rodents, or make any other efficacy or performance claims, unless it has competent
and reliable scientific evidence which substantiates the claims. The complaint, alleges that the ultrasonic
product is ineffective in controlling insects and rodents, does not prevent pests from entering an area,
and does not effectively cover the square footage the company claims.
Thomas A. Dardas, Individually and as an Officer of Acu-Form Weight Control Centers, Inc.
Thomas A. Dardas, president of Acu-Form Weight Control Centers, Inc., agreed not to claim that the
"Acu-Form" plastic molded earpiece or any other product is effective in helping consumers lose weight,
without reliable and competent evidence to substantiate the claim. Dardas also agreed not to
misrepresent the terms of any guarantee in connection with a weight loss or control product or service,
and to clearly disclose the conditions of such a guarantee.

ANNUAL REPORT 1984

23

Charles E. Weller, as Former Officer of Alaska Land Leasing, Inc., et al.
Charles E. Weller agreed not to misrepresent the present value or potential for increased value of oil and
gas leases or other investments, and will contribute $60,000 to a consumer redress fund. Weller also
agreed to disclose information about the risks and potential of oil and gas leases in sales brochures and
contracts, stating on the contracts that they are not valid or complete unless the customer signs a
declaration of understanding regarding the required disclosures.
Sun Refining and Marketing Co.
Sun Refining and Marketing Co. agreed to honor lifetime warranty obligations for automobile batteries
it sold with such a warranty. The company also agreed to contact eligible consumers and make them
aware of the reinstatement of the lifetime warranty.
American Society of Sanitary Engineering
The American Society of Sanitary Engineering, which develops standards for plumbing equipment,
agreed to change certain policies which may bar consideration of new products. The society agreed to
change its policy of not granting standards coverage to products that are patented or produced by one or
a limited number of manufacturers, and to consider products with innovative designs.
Commodore Business Machines, Inc.
Commodore Business Machines, Inc. agreed not to advertise that its computers have equipment or
capabilities, such as running certain popular software programs, unless the claim is true at the time it is
made. The company is also prohibited from representing that a product will have a particular capability
or will be available in the future unless it has a reasonable basis at the time the claim is made.
Hospital and Health Services Credit Union
Hospital and Health Services Credit Union agreed to tell rejected loan applicants if information from
third parties, such as credit bureaus or employers, led to denial of their requests for credit. The credit
union agreed to send notices required by the Fair Credit Reporting Act informing consumers of the
source of information leading to denial and their right to learn the nature of such information upon
written request.

24

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION

Biopractic Group, Inc.
Biopractic Group, Inc., maker of Therapeutic Mineral Ice, agreed not to make claims about the product's
effectiveness and acceptance by the scientific community and the news media, unless it has adequate
substantiation. Therapeutic Mineral Ice is a product marketed to reduce pain and inflammation arising
from muscle sprains, arthritis, rheumatism, and similar ailments.

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION

25

Part II (Investigative Stage)
CONSENT AGREEMENTS ISSUED IN FINAL FORM
COMPETITION MISSION
The Washington, D.C. Dermatological Society
The Washington, D.C. Dermatological Society, a professional organization of dermatologic physicians
located in the greater Washington Metropolitan Area, agreed not to interfere with its members' truthful
advertising of their fees and services. The Commissions complaint alleges that the Society prohibited
its members from engaging in truthful advertising and threatened to deny membership to any physicians
associated with a health care delivery organization that advertised the identity, fees or services of an
affiliated doctor. Under the agreement, the Society is prohibited from restricting or advising its members
against truthful advertising of fees, services or facilities, but is permitted to adopt and enforce reasonable
ethical guidelines governing false and deceptive advertising. In addition, for a period of five years, the
Society is required to provide each new member with a copy of. the order.
Dillon Companies, Inc.
Dillon Companies, Inc. agreed not to interfere with the collection and publication of comparative price
surveys based on items checked in the Dillon grocery stores. The complaint issued as part of the consent
alleges that Dillon, a Kansas based grocery retailer, agreed with other grocers in the Springfield,
Missouri area to bar a survey firm's price checkers from their stores. The complaint charged that the
alleged group boycott suppressed price competition among grocers in the area and deprived consumers
of the advantages of comparative price information. Under the order, Dillon is prohibited from
restricting the collection or dissemination of comparative grocery price information and must take steps
to restore competition by using price surveys in the Springfield area.
Great Dane Distributors Council
Great Dane Trailers Inc.
Great Dane Distributors Council, an association composed of dealers of Great Dane Trailers Inc. agreed
not to impose territorial or customer restrictions among its members. Under a separate agreement, Great
Dane Trailers Inc., a major manufacturer and distributor of truck trailers, is prohibited from supporting
the dealers charged with restrain-

26

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION
ing competition among themselves. The Commission charged that the Distributors Council and its
members agreed to restrict sales of new truck trailers to designated areas of primary responsibility or to
assigned dealers. Under a separate count, Great Dane was charged with assisting the Distributors
Council to discourage dealers from making sales outside their assigned areas.

General Motors Corporation/Toyota Corporation
General Motors Corporation and Toyota Corporation agreed to limit the number of subcompact cars to
be manufactured jointly in General Motors' Fremont, California plant. The equally-owned venture, New
United Motor Manufacturing Inc., will manufacture a front-wheel drive car, derived from Toyota's
Japanese distributed Sprinter. The car, Model TVX, will be sold under the Chevrolet nameplate by GM
dealers. The complaint, issued with the consent, alleged that the joint venture could lessen competition
in the manufacture and sale of subcompact, compact and intermediate cars in the United States and
Canada unless consent order restrictions were placed on the venture's production and expansion
capabilities. Under the terms of the order, production is limited to approximately 250,000 vehicles per
year for 12 years from the date the first automobile is manufactured. The order prohibits GM, Toyota,
and the venture from exchanging competitively sensitive technical information except when required for
the legitimate development of the joint venture. In addition, for a period of six years the companies are
required to maintain records for FTC review. Further expansion of the joint venture would require prior
Commission approval.
National Association of School Music Dealers, Inc.
The National Association of School Music Dealers, Inc., an association comprised of retail dealers who
sell and service musical instruments to individual customers and school systems on a local scale, agreed
not to interfere with the distribution practices of manufacturers of musical instruments. According to
the Commission's complaint, the association threatened to boycott any manufacturer who shipped its
musical instruments directly from the factory to customers of mail-order or discount dealers. Under the
order, the association is prohibited from taking any action, on behalf of its members, to influence the
decision of a musical instrument manufacturer concerning how its products are distributed. In addition,
the association is required to mail each member who received a copy of the boycott resolution, a copy
of the order and its attached explanatory letter.

ANNUAL REPORT 1984

27

Pilkington Brothers P. L. C.
Pilkington Brothers P.L.C. agreed to reduce and limit its affiliations with two manufacturers and
producers of float glass located in Canada and Mexico so as to reduce its North American position in
the float glass industry. Float glass is used in car and truck windshields and specialty applications such
as sliding doors and shower enclosures. Pilkington, the world's largest manufacturer of float glass, owns
a 49 percent interest in Ford Glass Ltd., a Canadian firm, a 35 percent interest in Vitro Plan S.A., a
Mexican company, and in 1982 purchased 30 percent of the voting securities of Libby-Owens-Ford Co.,
the second largest producer of float glass in North America. According to the complaint, the ownership
of the Libby-Owens-Ford shares together with Pilkington's interests in the Canadian and Mexican float
glass firms may have reduced competition among the four firms and could increase the already high
levels of concentration in the market. Under the terms of the consent, Pilkington a reed to divest its
shares in Ford Glass, limit its voting privileges and participation in the business decisions of Vitro Plan,
while maintaining its present share interest. In addition, for a 10 year period, the consent prohibits
Pilkington from acquiring any firm engaged in the manufacture of float glass in North America without
prior Commission approval.
Texaco Inc.
Texaco Inc. agreed to divest, within one year, oil and gas assets in excess of $100 million to acquirors
approved by the FTC to settle antitrust charges. The Commission charged that Texaco's $10 billion
acquisition of Getty Oil Co., the nation's fourteenth largest oil company, violated the antitrust laws
because it could lessen competition in the refining and transportation of refined products in the Northeast
and decrease competition in the transportation of refined light products to Colorado. The complaint also
charged that the acquisition could harm competition by imposing restrictions on independent refiners'
access to crude oil and pipeline transportation in California. The consent provides that Texaco can
choose to either divest its forty percent interest in the Wyco Pipeline which runs from Wyoming into
Colorado or divest its interest in the Chase Pipeline, which runs from Kansas into Colorado, along with
other selected Getty assets in fifteen states. The consent also requires Texaco to divest its Eagle Point
Refinery in Westville, N.J. and a related terminal in Salisbury, Md., in addition to certain Getty
wholesale gasoline terminals and associated gas stations in the Northeast. Under additional terms of the
consent, for a period of five years, Texaco must offer independent West Coast refiners and other

28

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION
Getty customers the opportunity to purchase stated amounts of California crude oil. Finally, Texaco
agreed to favorably vote on any proposals to increase the capacity of Colonial Pipeline, the major
petroleum products pipeline serving the Gulf Coast to the Northeast. Texaco must obtain prior FTC
approval before acquiring any share of a company engaged in refining or wholesale distribution of
gasoline in specified areas and any petroleum product pipeline transportation system in or into Colorado
for a period of ten years.

Estes Park Accommodations Association, Inc.
Under the terms of a consent agreement, Estes Park Accommodations Association, Inc. agreed not to
impose restrictions on its members from soliciting business through the use of truthful advertisement of
room prices or facilities. According to the complaint, the 80-member association representing the
interests of operators of motels, hotels, campgrounds and other lodging facilities for travelers in the area
of Estes Park, Colorado restrained trade by prohibiting its members from posting or distributing
information on room rates and, under the threat of dismissal, coerced individual members into
abandoning their efforts to advertise their prices to the public. The consent agreement prohibits the
association from imposing any restrictions on members' efforts to truthfully advertise prices or facilities.
In addition, the association must send each current member and provide each new member with a copy
of the order.
CONSUMER PROTECTION MISSION
Spinal Health Services, Inc., et al.
Two Florida chiropractors, and the two companies which they operate, agreed not to represent that their
"laser face lift" or "biostimulation face lift" will reduce, smooth out, or remove facial lines, depressions,
and wrinkles or otherwise give the recipient a more youthful facial appearance; or that their cosmetic
treatment will provide as long-lasting an improvement as that of a surgical face lift, without competent
and reliable scientific tests or evidence.
Emergency Devices, Inc., et al.
Emergency Devices, Inc. and two corporate officers agreed to stop advertising that the "Extra Margin
Emergency Escape Mask" provides protection from carbon monoxide gas, will permit a person to breathe
normally for 20 minutes, or has been endorsed or approved by a govern-

ANNUAL REPORT 1984

29

ment agency. Any representation that the mask will protect a person from fire hazards must be
accompanied by the statement: "The mask does not filter carbon monoxide, a lethal gas associated with
fire."
Monte Proulx
Monte Proulx, former head of marketing and research for Emergency Devices, Inc., agreed not to make
false representations in advertisements for the "Extra Margin Emergency Escape Mask." The prohibited
representations are identical to those in the consent with Emergency Devices, Inc.
Lomas & Nettleton Financial Corp., et al.
Lomas & Nettleton, a mortgage bank, agreed to establish and maintain procedures to ensure that it will
pay all obligations due and payable from homeowners' escrow accounts in a timely manner. The
corporation must also maintain procedures to identify and correct any injury caused by its failure to pay
such obligations when due. The order further prohibits misrepresentations concerning funds withdrawn
from escrow or the nature of any fee or obligation imposed upon a homeowner's escrow account.
Estee Corporation
Estee Corporation, a leading manufacturer and marketer of health-related foods, agreed not to claim that
any of its products have been accepted or recommended for use by diabetics or hypoglycemics unless
it discloses the identity of the endorser and the material qualifications or limitations placed on the
endorsement. Claims and representations about its foods must be substantiated as required by the terms
of the order. The company will also pay $25,000 in consumer redress in the form of research grants to
the American Diabetes Association or the Juvenile Diabetes Foundation.
Christian Services International, Inc.
Christian Services International, Inc., a life-care home developer, marketer, and operator, agreed not to
represent that its life care homes are affiliated with any religious denomination or group who may also
be morally or legally responsible for the home; that there is little or no financial risk in entering into a
life care contract; and that increases in service fees will never exceed corresponding social security
increases, unless such is the case. The company also agreed not to misrepresent

30

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION
its financial status and stability. Under the terms of the order, the company must provide each
prospective resident with required disclosures and financial information at least five days prior to the
execution of a life care contract.

Lloyd's Furs, Inc.
Lloyd's Furs, Inc. agreed not to misrepresent the designer or manufacturer of the fur garments it sells.
Under the consent order, Lloyd's will not represent a garment as the product of a particular designer or
manufacturer, unless such is the case and Lloyd's has complied with all written labeling instructions from
the manufacturer or designer. The order also requires records be kept documenting from whom a
garment was received and to whom it was sold, as well as records documenting compliance with the Fur
Products Labeling Act.
American Express Company
The American Express Company agreed not to dun credit card customers for contested amounts until
the dispute is resolved, as required by the Fair Credit Billing Act (FCBA). American Express also
agreed to resolve alleged billing errors involving foreign purchases within a specified time period;
establish procedures ensuring the forfeiture of disputed amounts up to $50 if it does not follow FCBA
billing procedures; and retain records pertaining to billing errors for two years. This is the Commission's
first FCBA enforcement action against a third party creditor.
Macy's New York, Inc.
Macy's agreed to distribute $225,000 in consumer redress among credit card customers who disputed
their bills in 1977 and 1978. The corporation also agreed to change its credit billing practices and to set
up a program to educate its employees who either establish credit billing procedures or handle
notification of billing errors. This is the first case the Commission has brought under the Fair Credit
Billing Act involving a department store.
Centurion International, Inc., et al.
Three mobile home manufacturers, Centurion International, Inc., Centurion Homes Corp., Inc., and
Centurion Homes of California, Inc., agreed to provide repair work or reimbursement for past expenses
to consumers who were entitled to, but allegedly did not receive, perfor-

ANNUAL REPORT 1984

31

mance under all the companies' warranties or service contracts, or warranties implied by state law. The
companies also must try to locate every person who purchased a new mobile home which they
manufactured and notify the purchasers of their right to redress.
Emporium-Capwell
Emporium-Capwell, a division of Carter Hawley Hale Stores Inc., a major California retailer, agreed not
to dun credit card customers for contested bills if consumers follow notification procedures required by
the Fair Credit Billing Act (FCBA). Under the consent, the company agreed not to try to collect amounts
contested by consumers following FCBA procedures until the dispute is settled; to resolve disputes in
a timely manner; to retain records documenting FCBA compliance; and not to collect finance charges
on billing errors resolved in the customer's favor.
Adria Laboratories, Inc.
Adria Laboratories, Inc. agreed not to make claims comparing the safety of "Efficin" pain reliever to any
product containing aspirin without also disclosing that the drug may produce side effects similar to those
associated with aspirin. The agreement covers any analgesic made of magnesium salicylate, a chemical
similar to aspirin, which has been associated with most of the same side effects and contraindications
as aspirin.
California Texas Oil Co., et al.
California Texas Oil Co., et al. agreed not to make false or unsubstantiated claims about the fuel
economy or emission control value of its gasoline additive, "AWECO Mileage Extender," or other
products. Under the agreement, Cal-Tex must have adequate substantiation for future claims; may not
say the additive claims are based on scientific tests if that is not the case; may not misrepresent the
conclusions of any tests conducted; and may not use the phrase "up to" unless an appreciable number
of consumers tan reasonably expect to achieve the maximum stated performance level under normal
driving conditions.
Cynex Manufacturing Corp.
Cynex Manufacturing Corp. agreed not to make energy-related or performance claims for any power
factor controller without reliable and competent evidence to substantiate the claims. The company also
agreed

32

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION
not to make any energy-related claims containing the phrase "up to" or a similar phrase, unless an
appreciable number of consumers can achieve the maximum stated level of savings under reasonably
expected conditions or the conditions necessary for maximum savings are disclosed. In addition, the
company agreed not to misrepresent any tests it uses to support its energy-related or performance claims.

Sovereign Chemical and Petroleum Products, Inc.
Sovereign Chemical and Petroleum Products, Inc. agreed not to make claims about the viscosity, or
thickness, of its motor oils and transmission fluids unless the representations are true and the company
has a reasonable basis for them. The complaint charged Sovereign with selling motor oils that did not
measure up to the quality claimed on the can. The company agreed to retain representative samples of
each production run, and the Commission may have an independent laboratory test the oil and
transmission fluid samples at Sovereign's expense.
Avco Financial Services, Inc.
Avco Financial Services, Inc. agreed to an order prohibiting it from a variety of abusive debt collection
practices in violation of Section 5 of the FTC Act. Under the agreement, Avco may not engage in the
following acts: use or threaten the use of violence; use obscene language; repeated or continuous
telephone calls to the debtor at times or places known to be inconvenient; disclosure of the debt to third
parties, including employers; and making false, misleading, or deceptive representations, including
threats to take legal action not lawful or intended. It also agreed to inform consumers of their rights to
prevent harassment and of applicable complaint procedures.
Peabody Barnes, Inc.
Peabody Barnes, Inc. agreed not to misrepresent the length or terms of warranties for its sump and
sewage pumps, and must honor warranties on previously sold pumps for a full year from their installation
date. In addition, the company must clearly disclose or instruct purchasers on how to find the date a
pump was manufactured, and may tie warranties to that date only if the warranties last at least three
years.

ANNUAL REPORT 1984

33

INJUNCTIONS
COMPETITION MISSION
Warner Communications Inc.
The Commission authorized its staff to seek a preliminary injunction to prohibit the proposed joint
venture between the record unit of Warner Communications Inc. and Polygram Records Inc. charging
that the venture would substantially lessen competition in the record and tape segment of the music
business. If the parties consummate the venture, the new firm would become the largest prerecorded
music distributor in the United States and the world. The Commission issued an administrative
complaint and the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit reversed a District Court's denial of a
preliminary injunction and granted its own injunction.
Columbian Enterprises, Inc.
The Commission sought a preliminary injunction to prohibit Columbian Enterprises, Inc.'s proposed
takeover of Continental Carbon Company, a subsidiary of Conoco, Inc. A preliminary injunction was
issued by the Federal District Court in Cleveland to block the consummation of the merger until the
Commission completes its administrative litigation challenging the merger. According to the complaint,
the proposed merger would substantially eliminate competition between the two companies by creating
the second largest producer of carbon black in the industry. Columbian Enterprises is a subsidiary of
Consolidated Mining & Industries, S.A., a Panamanian corporation.
Bass Brothers Enterprises Inc.
The Commission sought a preliminary injunction against Bass Brothers Enterprises Inc.'s proposed
acquisition of Ashland Oil Inc.'s Carbon Black Division on grounds that the acquisition could
substantially increase concentration in the carbon black industry. If the acquisition were allowed, Bass
Brothers, through its Sid Richardson Carbon and Gasoline Co. Inc. subsidiary, would become the third
largest producer and distributor of carbon black in the United States. The Commission obtained a
preliminary injunction from the Federal District Court in Cleveland.

34

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION

Alcon Laboratories Inc.
The Commission authorized its staff to seek a preliminary injunction barring Alcon Laboratories Inc.’s
proposed acquisition of CooperVision Inc. The complaint charged that the acquisition would violate the
federal antitrust laws by eliminating competition in the ophthalmic therapeutic pharmaceutical market
where CooperVision and Alcon are the only two competitors. If the acquisition was allowed to be consummated, the new firm would be the second largest manufacturer of soft contact lens and, in addition,
would be the largest producer in a number of other eye care markets. Before court papers were filed, the
parties abandoned their planned merger.
CONSUMER PROTECTION MISSION
Rita A. Walker and Associates, Inc.
The Commission filed a complaint in federal district court seeking a permanent injunction and consumer
redress from R.A. Walker and Associates. A federal district court issued a temporary injunction in
October, 1983. The complaint alleges that the company's offer of loans to help Washington, D.C. area
homeowners avoid foreclosure is false and deceptive. The Commission charges that after securing deeds
to the houses, the company records them and claims ownership, treating the original homeowner as a
tenant. Given the misleading circumstances surrounding these transactions, the Commission charges that
the failure to treat the transactions as loans is unfair and deceptive. In addition to injunctive relief, the
Commission is requesting an order requiring Walker to cancel the contracts and make refunds to
homeowners.
Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corporation
The Commission filed a complaint seeking injunctive relief to prevent continued misrepresentation that
Barclay is a 1 mg-tar cigarette. A federal district court subsequently permanently enjoined Brown &
Williamson from making any claim of specific milligram tar rating, unless such rating was approved by
the Commission or derived from a test method approved by the Commission.
U.S. Oil and Gas Corp.
In fiscal 1984, a federal district court froze $12 million in assets of U.S. Oil and Gas Corp. and two of
its jointly controlled oil and gas leasing companies. A preliminary injunction was also issued prohibiting
the

ANNUAL REPORT 1984

35

companies from making false claims about their ability to obtain oil and gas leases for customers. The
court subsequently appointed a receiver to manage the affairs of the three companies and froze the personal assets of six officials of the companies. In addition, Marc Douglas (also known as Marc Simpson),
a former salesman, agreed to a permanent injunction and to pay $65,000 in consumer redress to
customers who may have been injured in connection with the sale of filing services to obtain mineral
rights. Irving Sands, another defendant in the proceeding, agreed to pay $115,000 in consumer redress
and signed a stipulated order prohibiting him from making false claims about his success in obtaining
oil and gas leases for customers.
Paradise Palms Vacation Club, et al.
The Commission obtained a settlement as to defendant Syed Sarmad, former associate of the marketer
of Paradise Palms and Harbor Village Club, which permanently enjoins Sarmad from employing
deceptive practices in the sale of vacation timeshares. In addition, the Commission obtained a settlement
as to defendant Robert J. McDaniel, former president of Harbor Village Club and its developer company,
which orders a $25,000 payment to a consumer redress fund to reimburse timeshare purchasers who were
misled. McDaniel is also permanently enjoined from employing deceptive practices in the sale of
vacation timeshares.
Royco Automobile Parts, Inc.
The Commission filed a complaint in federal district court against Royco Automobile Parts, seeking a
permanent injunction, a freeze of assets, civil penalties, and consumer redress. A preliminary injunction
was granted in February, 1984. The Commission charged the auto parts franchise company with making
false promises of high profits from risk-free investments. The complaint alleges that Royco violated the
FTC's Franchise Rule by failing to provide required documents, misrepresenting facts, and making false
earning claims.
David Meade & Tyler-Radcliffe Co., Inc.
Robyn Kliss & Thor Enterprises, Inc.
Billy DeVasher & Lady Venus Centers, Inc.
The Commission obtained three stipulated permanent injunctions requiring these three companies and
their presidents to keep promises made to health spa members. The three owner/operators of health spas
agreed to obtain performance bonds, disclose dearly the date that services will be available, and have any
specific advertised services or

36

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION
facilities in working order before taking advance payments from consumers. The bonds will ensure that
spa members will be able to receive refunds if the spa closes or fails to open. The complaints filed by
the Commission charged the respondents with various violations of the FTC Act in connection with the
advertising and operation of health spas in Iowa, Illinois, Delaware, and Louisiana.

Trans-Alaska Energy Corp., et al.
The Commission filed a complaint in federal district court seeking permanent injunctions and consumer
redress against Trans-Alaska, three related companies, and the individuals who operated the firms. A
federal district court issued a preliminary injunction in May, 1984, freezing the assets of the companies
and five individuals. The complaint charges the companies with allegedly inducing consumers into
investing thousands of dollars each for valueless or non-existent rights to oil and gas leases on federal
lands. In September, 1984, the Commission named three additional individuals as defendants, and the
Court issued a temporary restraining order and asset freeze against them.
Federal Energy Systems, Inc.
The Commission filed a complaint in federal district court seeking a temporary restraining order,
preliminary and permanent injunctions, a freeze of assets, civil penalties, and consumer redress against
Federal Energy Systems. The company sells franchises for the sale and installation of FES-trademarked
equipment that automatically controls heating and air-conditioning energy use in small to medium-sized
commercial buildings. The complaint charges the company with violations of the FTC Act and the
Commission's Franchise Rule by failing to provide required information to its prospective franchise
buyers and misrepresenting the earning potential of those franchises.
International Diamond Corp., et al.
In 1982, the Commission filed a complaint in federal district court charging International Diamond Corp.
(IDC) and several defendants with falsely claiming that diamonds bought through the company were a
risk-free investment, and that IDC's prices compared with wholesale prices. In July, 1984, a settlement
reached with IDC in May, 1984, became final. The settlement provides approximately $6.7 million to
a consumer redress fund to be distributed to former IDC customers. In addition, four IDC officials
named as defendants, agreed to stipulated permanent injunctions. Three of these defendants are also
required to pay a combined sum of $90,000 in redress.

ANNUAL REPORT 1984

37

Alaska Land Leasing, Inc., et al.
The Commission filed a complaint in federal district court seeking civil penalties, consumer redress, and
permanent injunctions against Alaska Land Leasing, four related companies, and six individuals. A
federal district court issued a preliminary injunction and froze the assets of the companies and
individuals. The complaint charges that the companies persuaded consumers to invest thousands of
dollars in Alaskan oil and gas leases of negligible value, using false representations of the value and
potential of the leases.
A & A Laboratories, Inc.
The Commission filed a complaint in federal district court seeking preliminary and permanent
injunctions, and a freeze of assets against A & A Laboratories, several divisions of A & A, and the
individuals who control the companies. The defendants sell hair analysis services and vitamins,
minerals, and other dietary supplements. The complaint charges that, contrary to the defendants' claims,
hair analysis tests are grossly inaccurate, and that recommendations for dietary supplements based on
the analyses may be potentially harmful to consumers' health.
Hosiery Corp. of America, Inc., et al.
The Commission filed a consent decree in federal district court with Claire Nelson, president and coowner of Hosiery Corp. of America until early 1981. The consent prohibits Nelson from violating the
Mail Order Rule or from misrepresenting that consumers' names will be given to a credit reporting
agency. The complaint charged HCA with sending consumers unordered merchandise and improperly
trying to collect for that merchandise.
Landmark Financial Services, Inc.
The Commission filed a complaint in federal district court seeking civil penalties from Landmark
Financial Services, Inc. for allegedly violating equal credit opportunity laws. The complaint charges that
Landmark gives loans to elderly applicants on less favorable terms than to similarly qualified but
younger applicants.

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK BY FTC

38

ANNUAL REPORT 1984

39

CIVIL PENALTY ACTIONS
COMPETITION MISSION
RSR Corp.
RSR Corp. agreed in a consent judgment to pay $175,000 civil penalties for failure to divest two leadrecycling plants. In 1983, the Commission accepted a modified settlement for other alleged past
violations of the order. As part of that settlement, the order was modified to provide for the appointment
of an FTC approved trustee to divest the plants. The Commission's complaint alleged that the company
violated the 1976 order by failing to divest its Dallas, Texas and Seattle, Washington plants on or before
the date specified in the order.
McKesson Corp.
McKesson Corp., formerly Foremost-McKesson, agreed to pay $300,000 civil penalties to settle charges
that it accepted some form of payment or discount, not made available to competing firms, for the
promotion of suppliers' products. Through its annual trade shows, McKesson promotes and sells the
products of suppliers to retail drug firms. The judgment settles charges that McKesson collected
compensation from several suppliers whose products were displayed and sold at the McKesson trade
shows. In addition to the civil penalties, the judgment enjoins McKesson from accepting any valuables,
which the company knows are not available to its competitors, for the promotion and sale of a supplier's
product.
Louisiana-Pacific Corporation
A U.S. District Court Judge ordered Louisiana-Pacific Corporation to pay $4 million in civil penalties
for failure to comply with an FTC order requiring the divestiture of its Rocklin, California plant within
two years. The 1979 order required Louisiana-Pacific to divest the Fiberboard Corp. plant to settle
charges that the 1978 acquisition of Fiberboard Corp. could lessen competition in the production and sale
of medium density fiberboard and particle board. In January, 1984, Louisiana-Pacific posted bond
securing payment of the civil penalties and filed an appeal with the Court of Appeals for the Ninth
Circuit from the judgment.

40

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION

Phelps Dodge Industries, Inc.
G-K Technologies, Inc.
Phelps Dodge Industries, Inc., successor to Phelps Dodge Copper Products Corporation, and G-K
Technologies, Inc., formerly General Cable Corporation, agreed to consent judgments providing for the
payment of monetary penalties to settle charges that the companies violated a Commission order by
engaging in a conspiracy with others to fix prices of impregnated paper cable. The complaint alleged
that Phelps Dodge and G-K violated a 1936 consent order by circulating paper cable price lists to their
competitors, which in effect raised or stabilized prices. Phelps and G-K agreed to pay civil penalties of
$517,500 and $552,000, respectively. In 1979 and 1982, final judgments were assessed against two other
firms named in the order for cooperating with competitors to restrain prices in the paper cable industry.
Owens-Corning Fiberglass Corp.
A federal court ordered Owens-Corning Fiberglass Corp. to pay an $800,000 civil penalty to settle
charges that it violated a 1981 Commission divestiture order requiring the company to sell four
residential roofing plants by April 8, 1983. The plants, located in California, Oregon and Washington
were acquired in 1977 from the Lloyd A. Fry Roofing Co. Owens-Coming was ordered to divest the
plants to settle charges that the acquisition reduced competition in the asphalt roofing products market
in seven western states. In addition to the civil penalty, the judgment provides for the appointment of
a trustee to sell the roofing plants, individually or in any combination, within nine months to an FTC approved acquiror.
Coastal Corporation
The Coastal Corporation, a Texas oil and gas company, agreed to pay a $230,000 civil penalty to settle
charges that the company violated the reporting and waiting period requirements of the Hart-ScottRodino Antitrust Improvements Act of 1976. According to the complaint accompanying the settlement,
Coastal, which already owned stock of Houston Natural Gas Corporation in excess of $15 million,
purchased an additional 75,000 shares prior to filing notification and observing the waiting period
required by the HSR Act. Under the HSR Act, companies contemplating certain mergers or acquisitions
must file notice of a proposed transaction prior to consummation with the FTC and Department of
Justice. The filing and waiting period requirements allow both agencies time to review the proposed
transaction to determine if

ANNUAL REPORT 1984

41

it may violate the antitrust laws. In addition to the civil penalty, Coastal divested the 75,000 shares under
an agreement with the Commission's Bureau of Competition. This marked the first time the Commission
invoked Section 7A(g)(1) of the Clayton Act for an alleged violation of the HSR Act. The consent
judgment was filed in District Court on behalf of the FTC by the Justice Department.
CONSUMER PROTECTION MISSION
First Federal Credit Control, Inc.
First Federal Credit Control, Inc., agreed to a $25,000 civil penalty consent judgment for allegedly
violating the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. The alleged violations included failure to notify
consumers of their right to dispute or obtain verification of a debt, and use of form letters containing
false and deceptive representations.
Security Pacific Financial Corp., et al.
Two related firms, Security Pacific Finance System, Inc. and Security Pacific Financial Corp. agreed to
a $140,000 civil penalty consent decree to settle charges of violating the Equal Credit Opportunity Act.
The alleged violations included: failure to consider applications from women who did not have jobs and
ignoring women's alimony and child support payments; requesting prohibited information; and failure
to retain records. This consent decree represents the first action the Commission has brought under the
Act that resulted from use of a law enforcement approach in which testers posed as credit applicants.
Philly Mignon International
Philly Mignon International (PMI) agreed to a $80,000 civil penalty consent decree to settle charges of
violating the Franchise Rule. The alleged violations included: failure to give complete information to
potential franchisees; failure to give copies of the standard franchise agreement to purchasers within the
required time span; failure to give potential franchisees lists of other franchises; and making potential
sales and profits representations without a reasonable basis for them.
Allied Stores Corporation, et al.
Allied Stores Corp. agreed to a $122,000 civil penalty to settle charges it violated the Equal Credit
Opportunity Act (ECOA) and the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA). The company will also send
corrective notices

42

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION
to customers who allegedly did not receive sufficient information about why they were denied credit.

Ferrara Foods, Inc., et al.
Ferrara Foods, Inc. agreed to a $40,000 civil penalty consent decree to settle charges of violating the
Franchise Rule. The company also agreed not to make inflated earnings promises, and not to sell a franchise unless it discloses all material information about the business fully and accurately.
Westwood, Inc.
Westwood, Inc. agreed to a $25,000 civil penalty consent decree to settle charges the company sold
fabrics with mislabeled wool contents. The alleged violations included overstatement of the amount of
wool in the fabrics, and continued importation of misbranded wool products for sale in the U.S. after the
FTC had informed the company that it was illegal to do so. Under the agreement, Westwood will have
an independent laboratory test products it imports to determine the percentage of each type of fiber,
relabeling as necessary.
Gary Supplies, et al.
Gary Supplies, Random Stationers, Inc., A & L Supply Co., Tri-Cor Supply, and the individuals who
own and operate them agreed to a $36,000 civil penalty consent decree to settle charges that they shipped
unordered merchandise after being told it was illegal to do so. The agreement prohibits the companies
and individuals from sending unordered merchandise and instituting collection activity for orders that
are not bona fide.
Hosiery Corp. of America, et al.
Hosiery Corp. of America, et al. agreed to a $200,000 civil penalty consent decree to settle charges that
it sent consumers unordered merchandise, improperly tried to collect for that merchandise, and violated
the Mail Order Rule. The complaint charged that the company allegedly violated provisions of the Postal
Reorganization Act which prohibit sending unordered merchandise through the mail without the
recipient's prior approval. In addition, the company allegedly sent dunning letters implying threats of
action HCA did not intend to take against consumers who did not pay for the unordered hosiery.

ANNUAL REPORT 1984

43

Horizon Corporation
Horizon Corporation agreed to a $41,800 civil penalty consent decree to settle charges that it had
violated a 1981 FTC consent order by failing to make its regular payment to a consumer redress fund.
In addition, Horizon was required to pay $167,200 in redress to the fund. The 1981 FTC order requires
Horizon, formerly a major seller of undeveloped Southwest real estate, to pay a total of $14.5 million
to a fund to partially reimburse purchasers who bought land on the strength of the company's claims.

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK BY FTC

44

ANNUAL REPORT 1984

45

ADMINISTRATIVE COMPLAINTS
COMPETITION MISSION
The New England Motor Rate Bureau, Inc.
The Commission charged that The New England Motor Rate Bureau Inc. illegally conspired to establish
and maintain collective rates which unlawfully fixed prices for intrastate freight transportation. The Rate
Bureau publishes and issues tariffs stating the intrastate rates for the transportation of property on behalf
of its member carriers engaged in the transportation of properties within the states of Massachusetts,
New Hampshire, Rhode Island and Vermont. According to the complaint, the Rate Bureau prepared and
filed collective fixed rate tariffs with state public utility commissions on behalf of its members. The
complaint charged that the participation in and filing of collective rates suppressed competition among
intrastate carriers and deprived shippers and consumers of the benefits of free and open competition in
the transportation of properties in the four states. If the Commission finds that the Rate Bureau violated
the law, it may require the group to cancel all tariffs filed with the four state utility commissions and may
also prohibit the group from entering into any agreement to collectively fix prices for the transportation
of intrastate property.
District of Columbia Superior Court Trial Lawyers Association
The Commission's complaint alleged that the District of Columbia Superior Court Trial Lawyers
Association illegally conspired to conduct a work stoppage boycott when some of the associations
members and other area attorneys declined to accept new criminal case assignments in order to demand
higher legal fees. The association is a group of private attorneys on assignment from the Superior Court
of the District of Columbia who primarily handle criminal cases involving indigent defendants under the
Criminal Justice Act. According to the complaint, the association's members withheld their services
from the indigent defendant program for 15 days in order to coerce higher payments from the city
government. The complaint further alleged that the association's conspiracy to fix prices and make its
member lawyers unavailable to accept new case appointments restrained competition among the group's
members and between other attorneys. In addition, the Commission alleged that the boycott forced the
District of Columbia to increase the fee level under duress in order to secure the administration of
justice.

46

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION

Smitty's Super Markets, Inc.
David Porter
The Commission's complaint alleged that three Springfield, Missouri grocery retailers conspired to
prevent a grocery survey firm from collecting and selling price data based on grocery items in their
stores. According to the complaint, Smitty's Super Markets Inc., Roswil Inc., owner of Ramey Super
Markets and David Porter, owner of Porter's So-Lo Markets, agreed to obstruct the price checking efforts
of Victor Enterprises, Inc. in its collection of comparative price data at several Springfield grocery chains
for sale to a cable television operator for broadcast to its Springfield subscribers. The complaint further
alleges that as a result of the conspiracy, Victor was able to check the grocery items in only one store
causing the cable telecast to be canceled. The conspiracy, as charged in the complaint, restrained price
competition among Springfield grocery retailers and deprived the city's consumers of comparative price
information.
Warner Communications Inc.
The Commission charged that the proposed joint venture between Warner Communications Inc. and
Polygram Records Inc. could lessen competition in the record and tape division of the music industry
by eliminating Polygram as a substantial competitor. The complaint alleged that the joint venture to be
formed by Warner's Warner Bros. Record unit, the second largest United States record company, and
Polygram, the nation's sixth largest record company, would create the world's largest record distributor,
controlling 26 percent of the U.S. market. According to the complaint, the merger would reduce the
number of U.S. distributors of prerecorded music to five and result in the four major firms controlling
the recorded music industry.
Columbian Enterprises, Inc.
The Commission's complaint alleged that the acquisition by Columbian Enterprises, Inc., a subsidiary
of Consolidated Mining & Industries, S.A., of the Continental Carbon Co. could lessen competition by
creating the nation's second largest producer of carbon black. Columbian Enterprises, with domestic
carbon black sales in excess of $100 million, is believed to be the largest producer of carbon black in the
United States. Manufactured from a petroleum feedstock, carbon black is used to strengthen rubber
products such as tires, inner tubes, belts and other automotive rubber products. If the Commission
concludes that Columbian Enterprises violated the law, it may order the divestiture

ANNUAL REPORT 1984

47

of Continental Carbon and for a period of ten years prohibit Columbian Enterprises' acquisition of any
company engaged in the production or distribution of carbon black without prior Commission approval.
Consolidated Mining is owned by The Hochschill Trust, a Panamanian corporation; Continental Carbon
is owned by Conoco Inc.
Bass Brothers Enterprises, Inc.
The Commission charged that Bass Brothers Enterprises, Inc.'s acquisition of the United States assets
of Ashland Oil Inc.'s Carbon Black Division could lessen competition and increase concentration in the
production of carbon black, a strengthening agent manufactured from petroleum feedstock. Ashland's
Carbon Black Division, believed to be the third largest domestic producer and seller of carbon black, had
U.S. sales of approximately $80 million. The acquired assets would be integrated with a Bass Brothers'
subsidiary, Sid Richardson Carbon and Gasoline Co. Inc., the seventh largest seller and sixth largest
producer of carbon black in the United States. The complaint alleged that the acquisition would
eliminate Ashland as a substantial competitor and, in addition, could reduce actual competition among
other companies that produce and distribute carbon black.
The City of New Orleans
The City of Minneapolis
Separate complaints were issued against two municipal governments alleging that each city's restrictive
regulations imposed on taxicab companies could create a monopoly and restrain competition in the taxicab industry in each municipality. The City of New Orleans and the City of Minneapolis were both
charged with entering into agreements with taxicab firms in their respective cities to increase fares and
adopt uniform fares, at the request of some operators, to be imposed upon all taxicab operators; to limit
the number of taxicab licenses or operators; and to prohibit competition from operators licensed outside
New Orleans or Minneapolis. According to the complaints, these unfair practices eliminated
competition, strengthened the market power of taxicab companies currently authorized to operate in
Minneapolis or New Orleans, and raised or fixed taxicab rates. These complaints were issued by the
Commission under Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act to seek injunctive and remedial relief
designed to benefit consumers by promoting competition in the taxicab industry to provide more
available taxis at a lower cost. If the Commission finds that the law has been violated, it could issue
orders prohibiting the municipal governments from entering into or enforcing any agreement or city code
provision designed to be anticompetitive.

48

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION

Rhode Island Board of Accountancy
The Rhode Island Board of Accountancy has allegedly restrained competition by prohibiting professional
accountants in the state of Rhode Island from soliciting business through advertising. The board, appointed by the Governor, administers examinations and permits to practice to qualified certified public
accountants and public accountants. All practicing accountants in Rhode Island are required by state law
to hold a permit to practice issued solely by the board. The Commission's complaint alleges that the five
member board restricted competition by restricting licensed accountants from advertising and from
soliciting the public or clients of other CPA's or PA's. The complaint charged that because Rhode Island
state law does not require the advertising restrictions written into the board's code of professional
conduct, the ban on advertising is a violation of the federal antitrust laws.
The Electrical Bid Registration Service of Memphis, Inc.
The Commission's complaint charged that the Memphis Chapter of The National Electrical Contractors
Association, The Electrical Bid Registration Service of Memphis, Inc., prevented price competition and
raised the cost of electrical subcontracting work by establishing a bid registry that obstructed price
negotiations between the electrical subcontractors and general contractors in the greater Memphis area.
In most instances, general contractors developing proposals to seek prime construction projects contact
various subcontractors to get estimates on specialty work not performed by the general contractor. The
winning general contractor then enters into negotiations with any interested subcontractor to obtain subbids offering the most favorable prices for the specialty work involved in the project. During this period,
subcontractors allegedly often lower their initial job estimate in an attempt to win the sub-bid. The
registry, which regularly notifies electrical subcontractors of upcoming large subcontracting jobs in a
23 county area of Tennessee, Arkansas and Mississippi, collects sealed sub-bids, which cannot be
changed, for distribution to general contractors preparing bids on prime contracts. Under the rules of
the registry, any general contractor who uses the registered bids in development of a winning contract
proposal must select one of the registry's bidders without negotiating a lower price. According to the
complaint, the registry restrained competition by imposing regulations prohibiting subcontractors from
changing their bids and hampered general contractors from conducting competitive negotiations with
subcontractors to obtain the most desirable price for specialty work by restricting their choice of
subcontractors.

ANNUAL REPORT 1984

49

Tristate Household Goods Tariff Conference
Middle Atlantic Conference
Motor Transport Association
The Commission issued separate complaints against three motor carrier tariff bureaus for allegedly fixing
the intrastate transportation prices for property shipped by motor common carriers. The tariff bureaus
act as agents on behalf of their member carriers that provide intrastate transportation of household goods
and general commodities. The complaints allege that each tariff bureau, Tristate Household Goods
Tariff Conference of Lester, Pennsylvania, Middle Atlantic Conference, based in Riverdale, Maryland
and Motor Transport Association of Hartford, Connecticut, conspired with its respective members to
illegally set and collectively file rates of intrastate motor carrier transportation in Pennsylvania and
Connecticut which deprived consumers using intrastate carriers in the two states of the benefits of
competition. If the Commission concludes that any of the associations violated the law, it may prohibit
the association from entering into any agreement to fix prices carriers charge for the intrastate
transportation of property or related services.
CONSUMER PROTECTION MISSION
Associated Mills, Inc.
The Commission's complaint alleges that the company's product, Pollenex Pure Air "99" Air
Cleaner/Deodorizer, does not eliminate or remove most tobacco smoke, ragweed pollen, or dust, as
advertised. The complaint also charges that Associated Mills represented it had a reasonable basis for
these claims, when in fact, it did not conduct appropriate tests or use generally accepted procedures to
apply test results to advertised room conditions.
P. Leiner Nutritional Products Corp.
The Commission's complaint alleges that advertisements for the dietary supplement "Octacol 4" contain
claims that are false and unsubstantiated. "Octacol 4" consists of cold-processed wheat germ oil in capsule form. The advertisements for the product claim that the product helps increase endurance, stamina,
vigor, and athletic performance. In addition, the company allegedly represents that long term university
studies and related research support the performance claims. The complaint charges the company did
not have a reasonable basis for these claims.

50

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION

General Nutrition, Inc.
The Commission's complaint alleges that the company deceptively represents that its dietary supplement
"Healthy Greens" is associated with a reduction in the incidence of cancer in humans, and that a 1982
National Academy of Sciences' National Research Council report supports that claim. "Healthy Greens"
are pills containing dehydrated vegetables and some vitamins and minerals. According to the complaint,
General Nutrition also falsely represents that Vitamin E plays an important role in reducing the risk of
cancer.
Orkin Exterminating Co., Inc.
The Commission's complaint alleges that Orkin Exterminating Co., Inc. unfairly raised the annual
renewal fees for its termite control contracts calling for fixed annual fees. According to the complaint,
Orkin agreed in its contracts and guarantees entered into before September, 1974, to provide annual
reinspection for the life of the house if the consumer paid a specified, fixed annual renewal fee. Orkin
also agreed to re-treat and, in certain cases, repair any termite damage if consumers paid those fees.
However, the complaint alleges that the company attempted to raise or raised the agreed-upon annual
renewal fee.
Weider Health & Fitness, Inc., et al.
The Commission's complaint alleges that advertisements for "Anabolic Mega-Pak" and "Dynamic Life
Essence" nutrient supplements falsely claim they are effective substitutes for anabolic steroids.
Advertisements for the products claim that they increase muscularity and strength similar to steroids, but
without the dangerous side effects. The complaint alleges that the company lacked substantiation for
these claims, and that these representations mislead consumers and induced them to purchase the nutrient
supplements.
Jerome Milton, Inc., et al.
The Commission's complaint alleges that Jerome Milton, Inc. and Jerome Milton Schulman, an officer
of the company, made deceptive claims in advertising Shane toothpaste. The complaint charges that
there is inadequate evidence substantiating claims that Shane toothpaste cures gum disease, is superior
to other toothpaste in reducing plaque, or lessens the sensitivity of the teeth to hot and cold substances.

ANNUAL REPORT 1984

51

PART III (Adjudicative Stage)
CONSENT AGREEMENT ISSUED IN FINAL FORM
COMPETITION MISSION
Gillette Company
The Gillette Company agreed to provide advertising and promotional program opportunities on a
proportionally equal basis to both large and small retailers who sell its products. According to the
complaint, Gillette offered advertising allowances only to large retailers who had provided promotional
services on behalf of Gillette's products. The order required Gillette to offer alternate plans for retailers
who did not regularly advertise in newspapers or distribute large numbers of advertising circulars.
Flowers Industries, Inc.
Flowers Industries, Inc., a Georgia based bread producer, was ordered to divest, to a Commission
approved buyer, its bakery plants in High Point, North Carolina and Gadsen, Alabama to settle charges
that its bakery acquisitions in the southeastern U.S. reduced competition. According to the complaint,
acquisitions made by Flowers between 1973 and 1980 eliminated competition and increased
concentration in the bread industry in various southeastern areas. The order also requires Flowers to
transfer certain trade names and trademarks associated with the two plants. In addition, Flowers is
prohibited from acquiring or holding any bakery concern without prior Commission approval for a period
of 10 years.
Ford Motor Company
The Ford Motor Company was prohibited from extending advertising allowances to large car rental
companies unless proportional allowances were also made available to competing small car firms. The
complaint included with the consent agreement charged Ford with discriminating against small rental
companies by not offering advertising allowances proportionally equal to those given to larger
customers. Under the order, Ford was required to offer small car rental companies payment of part of
the cost of certain types of Yellow Pages display advertisements. The restrictive standards imposed by
this order was contingent on the Commission's ruling in the General Motors Corporation matter, Docket
No. 9114, summarized in this report under Final Commission Orders. A provision in the Ford order
allowed the firm

52

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION
to benefit from the Commission's decision, if less restrictive obligations were imposed against GM. On
June 27, 1984, the Commission dismissed its compliant challenging GM's method of granting advertising
allowances. Due to that decision, Ford is no longer bound by the November 16, 1983 consent order.

Jim Walter Corporation
Jim Walter Corporation and its subsidiary, Celotex Corporation, agreed to divest four asphalt roofing
materials plants to settle antitrust charges that the 1972 acquisition of Panacon Corp. could substantially
lessen competition in the manufacture and sale of asphalt roofing products. Under the order, within 24
months Jim Walter and Celotex must divest the roofing plants in three states to an acquiror approved by
the Commission. The order further provided that a Commission appointed trustee would be appointed
to divest any plants not sold within 15 months. Also, for a period of ten years, Jim Walter and Celotex
are prohibited from acquiring any interest in an asphalt roofing plant within the defined geographic
markets without prior Commission approval.
Hughes Tool Company
The Commission accepted consent agreements from Hughes Tool Company and Big Three Industries,
Inc. to settle charges made in a 1980 complaint that the two companies shared a common director, Ben
F. Love. Under the antitrust laws, a person may not serve simultaneously on the boards of two or more
competing corporations if either firm has assets of more than $1 million. The complaint alleged that both
Hughes and Big Three manufactured and serviced products for the oil field equipment industry. Under
the order, Hughes and Big Three agreed not to have a director who sits on the board of a competing firm
for a period of ten years. The complaint against Hughes and Big Three was removed from adjudication
in 1982 in consideration of consent agreement negotiations. The Commission dismissed charges against
Ben F. Love who resigned from the board of Big Three before the complaint was issued.
Great Lakes Chemical Corp.
Under a consent agreement, Great Lakes Chemical Corp. agreed to license its brominated flame retardant
technology to settle charges that the company's 1981 acquisition of Northwest Industries Inc.'s Velsicol
Chemical Corp. lessened competition by eliminating one of its competitors. Great Lakes became the
fifth largest firm in the production

ANNUAL REPORT 1984

53

and sale of bromine through its acquisition of Velsicol's bromine related assets and patents. The order
requires Great Lakes to take steps to restore competition in the elemental bromine market by licensing
technology it acquired from Velsicol to PPG Industries Inc., enabling the company to become established
as a viable competitor in the production and sale of brominated flame retardants. The consent agreement
with Great Lakes settles the complaint issued in 1981. Through additional agreements, the Commission
dismissed the complaints against Northwest and Velsicol.
Smitty's Super Markets Inc.
David Porter
Smitty's Super Markets Inc. and David Porter, owner of Porter's SoLo Markets, are prohibited from
taking any action that would prevent price checking or price publication of retail grocery items surveyed
in their stores. The orders settle charges that Smitty's and two other Springfield, Missouri grocers, David
Porter and Roswil Inc. conspired illegally to restrict Victor Enterprises Inc., a price checking company,
from collecting comparative grocery price information for public broadcast. Under the orders, Smitty's
and David Porter are required to grant price checkers the same access to their supermarkets as they give
to customers. In addition, the two grocers must take steps to restore competition in the Springfield area
by encouraging the use of price surveys for publications. The case against the third grocer, Roswil Inc.,
remains in adjudication.
CONSUMER PROTECTION MISSION
General Motors Corporation
The agreement requires the corporation to provide all interested persons with service bulletins (Product
Service Publications) and indexes which describe both current and potential problems and updated repair
procedures. GM is also required to advertise the existence, availability, and benefits of the publications
in national magazines and through direct-mail notices. In addition, GM is required to establish a
nationwide arbitration program for car owners with unsatisfied complaints about engine or transmission
failures.
PharmTech Research, Inc.
The agreement prohibits PharmTech from claiming that its dietary supplement "Daily Greens" provides
any health benefit unless it has reliable

54

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION
and competent scientific evidence substantiating the claim. The company also agreed not to misrepresent
the results of any scientific test, research article, or other scientific opinion or data in its advertising
claims for "Daily Greens." In July, 1983, the Commission issued an administrative complaint charging
the company with falsely and deceptively basing its ad claims on a 1982 National Academy of Sciences'
report, "Diet, Nutrition, and Cancer." In November, 1983, the Commission obtained a preliminary
injunction in federal district court banning those claims pending the outcome of the administrative
proceeding. The company agreed to the consent order to settle the administrative proceeding.

ANNUAL REPORT 1984

55

INITIAL DECISIONS
COMPETITION MISSION
Weyerhaeuser Co.
An Administrative Law Judge dismissed a 1981 complaint against Weyerhaeuser Co. The Commission's
complaint charged that Weyerhaeuser Co.'s acquisition of Menasha Corp.'s North Bend, Oregon medium
mill would lessen competition in the eleven state market west of the Rocky Mountains. The companies
are direct competitors in the production of corrugating medium, a product used in the production of
corrugated box and containers. In defining the market in this acquisition as national in scope, the Judge
found that the acquisition would not decrease competition in an industry with low barriers to entry and
where excess production of corrugated medium in other parts of the country has a significant competitive
effect on west coast medium.
B.A.T. Industries, Ltd.
An Administrative Law judge dismissed a complaint against B.A.T. Industries, Ltd., ruling that the
company's 1978 acquisition of the Appleton Papers Division of NCR Corp. did not violate the federal
antitrust laws. The 1980 complaint charged that the acquisition eliminated the potential for competition
between the two firms, both engaged in the manufacture and sale of chemical carbonless paper.
Chemical carbonless paper allows a writer to make several copies, without the use of carbon paper, by
applying pressure to the top sheet and is primarily used to make business forms. Prior to the acquisition,
B.A.T., which did not market paper in the United States, was the largest producer of chemical carbonless
paper in the United Kingdom and Europe, and was second to Appleton worldwide. The Judge ruled that
B.A.T.'s entry into the production and sale of the paper in the United States could only have been
accomplished through the acquisition of Appleton due to a technological entry barrier.
Boise Cascade Corporation
In an initial decision, the Administrative Law Judge found that Boise Cascade Corporation knowingly
received discriminatory price discounts from six manufacturers of office products. The Judge upheld
a 1980 complaint which alleged that Boise, a forest products company which purchases office supplies
from manufacturers for resale to both retail

56

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION
dealers and to large commercial users, illegally received discounts not available to competing retail
dealers on goods purchased for resale to commercial users. The Judge found that Boise violated the
Robinson-Patman Act when the company knowingly accepted discriminatory prices or discounts,
unavailable to competing buyers, on products furnished by common suppliers.

Echlin Inc.
An Administrative Law Judge issued a decision that found Echlin Inc.'s (formerly Echlin Manufacturing
Co.) acquisition of Borg-Warner Corp.'s automotive-aftermarket operations did not create an antitrust
violation. The Commission's complaint charged that the acquisition could substantially lessen
competition by forming a firm controlling half the market for the assembly and sale of carburetor kits
in the United States. Carburetor kits are prepackaged sets of most frequently used parts needed to repair
carburetors that do not require replacement. The Judge dismissed the complaint finding that the industry
would remain substantially competitive based on the industry's past performance. The Judge ruled that
such non-market share factors as low barriers to entry and rapid technological advances must be
considered, along with market share data, in assessing whether a merger's impact on an industry will
probably produce anticompetitive effects.

ANNUAL REPORT 1984

57

FINAL COMMISSION ORDERS
COMPETITION MISSION
Schlumberger Limited
The Commission dismissed a complaint challenging Schlumberger Limited's acquisition of Accutest
Corporation. The principal relief sought by the complaint was accomplished when Schlumberger
divested Accutest to four individuals.
General Foods Corp.
The Commission upheld a 1982 Administrative Law judge's initial decision that dismissed charges
against General Foods Corp., the nation's largest coffee maker. The 1976 complaint charged that General
Foods, through its Maxwell House Division, used its dominant market position to frustrate the growth
of small competitors by limiting their entry into General Foods' markets and attempted to monopolize
the coffee industry. The complaint covered all types of coffee except instant products and products sold
to institutions such as offices and hospitals. The Commission found that competition in the relevant
market was sound enough to withstand any threats by any one firm. The Commission concluded that
General Foods' efficient marketing practices were not an attempt to use unfair methods of competition
or to monopolize, but, instead, promoted healthy competition between Proctor & Gamble's Folger brand
and Maxwell House, resulting in reduced consumer prices.
Champion Spark Plug Co.
The Commission upheld an Administrative Law Judge's decision which dismissed charges challenging
Champion Spark Plug Co.'s acquisition of the Anderson Co., the nation's largest manufacturer of
replacement windshield wipers. The complaint charged that competition was lessened when Champion,
the nation's largest manufacturer of replacement spark plugs, was eliminated as a future potential entrant
in the replacement windshield wiper market. The Commission affirmed dismissal on grounds that the
market for replacement wiper blades and refills was already competitive due to low barriers to entry and
other companies' interest in expansion within the industry.

58

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION

General Motors Corporation
The Commission dismissed a complaint which charged that General Motors Corporation violated the
Robinson-Patman Act by granting advertising allowances to a few large car rental and leasing firms
while not offering the same allowances to smaller companies. The Commission held that the challenged
practices did not come within the jurisdiction of the Robinson-Patman Act and, moreover, that the FTC
Act should not be used to extend the reach of the former Act to hold the challenged practices illegal.
American Medical International, Inc.
The Commission upheld the 1983 decision of an Administrative Law judge which found that American
Medical International, Inc.'s 1979 acquisition of French Hospital in San Luis Obispo, California,
restricted both price and non-price competition between French and two other area hospitals owned by
American Medical. The Commission found the hospital acquisition gave American Medical control of
three of the five hospitals in the area and could substantially lessen competition in the provision of
general acute care health services in the city and county of San Luis Obispo, The order requires
American Medical to divest French Hospital in one year to an FTC approved acquiror and to notify the
Commission of the company's intention to acquire any hospital meeting specified conditions in a 13 state
area.
ITT Continental Baking Co.
The Commission overturned an Administrative Law Judge's decision that found ITT Continental Baking
Co., the world's largest baker, attempted to monopolize the wholesale white bread baking market by
engaging in price discrimination and predatory pricing in five geographic areas. In dismissing the
complaint, the Commission ruled that Continental's pricing policies were not an attempt to eliminate
competitors or control prices, but were in response to competitive conditions in the market.
CONSUMER PROTECTION MISSION
AMREP Corporation
The Commission upheld in part a 1979 Administrative Law judge's decision that AMREP Corp.
misrepresented the investment value of land it sold in developments in New Mexico, Florida, and
Missouri; used

ANNUAL REPORT 1984

59

unfair and deceptive marketing practices to sell this land; and included an unfair forfeiture clause in its
contracts. Under the order, AMREP may make only limited claims about the investment potential of the
land it sells, and at the time the claim is made, must have adequate substantiation to support the claim.
AMREP is also prohibited from engaging in sales practices that prevent reasoned consideration and make
the buyer more susceptible to deceptive statements and practices. In addition, contracts must be clearly
labeled and must offer buyers a seven-day right to cancel the transaction.
Cliffdale Associates, Inc., et al.
The Commission upheld a 1982 Administrative Law Judge's decision that Cliffdale made false
performance claims and did not have a reasonable basis for other claims in its promotional materials for
the "Ball-Matic Gas Save Valve." Cliffdale advertised the Ball-Matic as a significant and unique new
invention which would give the typical driver gas savings of at least 20 percent. The Commission found
these claims false and deceptive, and prohibited Cliffdale from making them. In addition, Cliffdale may
not misrepresent survey evidence supporting energy-savings claims for any product, and must disclose
relationships, if any, between Cliffdale and persons endorsing its products.
Rentacolor, Inc., et al.
The Commission upheld a 1983 Administrative Law Judge's decision that Rentacolor violated consumer
leasing laws by failing to provide complete disclosures in its advertisements and lease contracts. The
Commission issued an order prohibiting the company from omitting information on payment schedules
and other terms in its ads and contracts for color television sets and other video equipment. The
Commission dismissed charges against Rentacolor's president. This is the first FTC action brought under
the Consumer Leasing Act since it became effective in 1977.

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK BY FTC

ANNUAL REPORT 1984

61

ORDER MODIFICATIONS
COMPETITION MISSION
ITT Continental Baking Company, Inc., et al.
The Commission modified a 1974 order with ITT Continental Baking Company, Inc., et al. to eliminate
the provision requiring the filing of special reports 60 days before the acquisition of any firm engaged
in the baking industry. The order required the divestiture of certain baking companies and prohibited
Continental from acquiring companies engaged in the production and sale of bread and bread-type rolls
for a period of 10 years without prior Commission approval. The order provision was set aside because
the reporting requirements under the Hart-Scott-Rodino Antitrust Improvements Act of 1976 would
monitor any of Continental's acquisitions that might raise anticompetitive concerns.
Coffee, Sugar and Cocoa Exchange
The Commission vacated a 1955 consent order at the request of the Coffee, Sugar and Cocoa Exchange,
formerly known as the New York Coffee and Sugar Exchange, Inc., et al. The order settled charges that
the organization used certain restrictive contracts to manipulate the supply of coffee. The order was
terminated because the Exchange's conduct and activities are now the exclusive jurisdiction of the
Commodity Futures Trading Commission.
The Southland Corporation
The Commission modified a 1974 consent order with The Southland Corporation to eliminate provisions
requiring recordkeeping monitoring reciprocal dealing and to terminate the remaining provisions of the
order. The original order settled charges that Southland used reciprocal dealing to gain an unfair
competitive advantage over its competitors.
Damon Corporation
Damon Corporation petitioned the Commission to delete the entire prior-approval provision in a 1978
order restricting Damon's acquisitions. The Commission denied that request and voted to modify the
order by easing the company's acquisition restrictions. Under the modified order, Damon may acquire
independent medical laboratories of a specified size in 12 areas of the U.S. without obtaining FTC prior
approval.

62

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION

Endicott-Johnson Corporation
The Commission modified its order with Endicott-Johnson Corporation eliminating an acquisition
restriction three years before it would have terminated. The 1965 consent order prohibited the shoe
manufacturer from acquiring any company in the shoe industry for a period of 20 years.
Teac Corp. of America
The 1975 consent agreement with Teac Corp. of America was modified to permit the company to
establish non-discriminatory standards for product promotion, display and service for its dealers. The
order modification was consistent with last year's Commission actions involving four other firms.
Consolidated Foods Corporation
The Commission deleted the prior-approval provisions of an order against Consolidated Foods
Corporation, at the request of the company. In modifying the 1965 order, the Commission removed the
requirement that Consolidated obtain FTC approval before acquiring any grocery or dairy store. The
provision applied in perpetuity.
Bulova Watch Company, Inc.
The Bulova Watch Company, Inc. petitioned the Commission to vacate or suspend a 1971 consent order
which prohibited the company from engaging in resale price fixing and preventing transshipping of its
products by its dealers. The Commission modified the order by deleting two provisions that prevented
Bulova from enforcing policies against transshipping. Bulova's request to set aside or vacate the price
fixing provisions was denied.
Sonotone Corporation
Radioear Corporation
The Commission modified 1973 consent orders against Sonotone Corporation and Radioear Corporation,
manufacturers of hearing aids, that prohibited non-price vertical restraints and resale price maintenance.
The provisions in the two orders restricting each company from engaging in exclusive sales arrangements
with its dealers were deleted. The ban on resale price maintenance was not affected.

ANNUAL REPORT 1984

63

Maico Co., Inc.
The Commission modified a 1955 consent order against Maico Co., Inc. permitting the hearing aid
manufacturer to enter into exclusive sales arrangements for the marketing of its products. The order now
allows Maico more freedom in determining which customers their dealers could sell to and which
territories their dealers could service.
Beltone Hearing Aid Co.
The Commission modified a 1956 consent order against Beltone Hearing Aid Co. The provisions
prohibiting exclusive sales arrangements and customer and territorial restrictions were deleted.
Maico Hearing Instruments Inc.
The Commission modified a 1976 consent order against Maico Hearing Instruments Inc., a hearing aid
manufacturer. Under the modified order, the company is allowed more independence in suggesting
prices, customers and territories to its dealers.
Dictograph Products Inc.
The Commission modified a 1953 consent order against Dictograph Products Inc., a manufacturer of
hearing aids, by deleting all provisions that prohibited exclusive sales arrangements.
Georgia-Pacific Corporation
At the request of Georgia-Pacific Corporation, the Commission terminated a 1973 consent order
prohibiting Georgia Pacific from entering into sale agreements with firms which reciprocated by entering
into sale agreements with Georgia-Pacific.
Genstar Ltd.
The Commission modified a 1980 consent order with Genstar Ltd., formerly Genstar Corp., at the request
of the company. The two provisions requiring Genstar to obtain prior Commission approval before
shipping its Canadian produced cement to the company's own facilities in Washington, Oregon, Nevada
and California and to obtain prior FTC approval before acquiring active cement terminals in those states
were deleted.

64

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION

Brown Shoe Co.
Brown Shoe Co.'s petition to vacate a 1966 consent order prohibiting exclusive dealing arrangements
with shoe retailers was granted by the Commission. The modified order will allow Brown to distribute
its products through practices available to its competitors.
Diamond Crystal Salt Co.
The Commission modified a 1960 consent order against Diamond Crystal Salt Co. The order required
Diamond to notify the Commission 90 days prior to its planned acquisition of a salt producer or salt
distributor. Diamond petitioned the Commission for a one-time waiver of the 90 day notice to acquire
the American Salt Co. and the Commission granted this request.
Nash-Finch Co.
The Commission dismissed a show cause order involving a Minneapolis based grocery retailer and
wholesaler, the Nash-Finch Co. The show cause order was issued after the Commission denied Nash's
petition to vacate a 1943 order prohibiting the firm from accepting brokerage fees or any other type of
compensation from brokerage dealers. Nash, unwilling to provide sufficient evidence in support of the
show cause order, requested a dismissal.
American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists
The Commission modified a 1976 consent order with the American College of Obstetricians and
Gynecologists, a medical group representing 90 percent of the nation's obstetricians and gynecologists.
The original order settled charges that the group had influenced doctors' fees through the formulation
and circulation of relative value studies. Relative value studies are lists of medical procedures and
services with associated valuations expressed in non-monetary units, which doctors could convert to fee
schedules by using a monetary multiplier. The order directed the group to refrain from formulating or
disseminating a relative value scale. In addition, the order restricted the group from entering into
discussions with governmental entities relating to the use of relative value studies in health care matters
pertaining to reimbursement by third party payers, such as insurance companies. The Commission
modified the provision to allow the group to participate in discussions about new types of health care
financing. The group, however, remains under order prohibiting its development or circulation of a
relative value study.

ANNUAL REPORT 1984

65

William H. Rorer Inc.
The Commission modified a 1967 order with William H. Rorer Inc. by deleting certain restrictions
involving Rorer's ability to offer price discounts to retailers. Rorer's petition requested that the order be
vacated entirely; however, the Commission retained a provision that prohibits the company from
charging competing customers different prices for its products because Rorer had not presented evidence
that compliance with the unchanged provision would cause injury to the company.
Armstrong World Industries, Inc.
Armstrong World Industries, Inc., formerly Armstrong Cork Co., petitioned the FTC to modify a 1965
consent agreement which settled charges that Armstrong conspired with its wholesalers to reduce
competition in the floor covering market by fixing the resale prices and conditions of sale of its products
to retail dealers and flooring contractors. The Commission deleted provisions prohibiting the
distribution, through wholesalers, of Armstrong's Floor Fashion Center products, but denied the
company's petition to limit restrictions on resale price maintenance and to delete provisions prohibiting
price discrimination between competing purchasers.
McKesson Corp.
At the request of McKesson Corp., successor to Foremost Dairies Inc., the Commission set aside the only
remaining provision in a 1967 consent order. The provision, which required McKesson to make
available crude lactose used in the production of pharmaceutical grades of lactose to other producers and
consumers, was no longer a competitive issue since McKesson's U.S. lactose-producing facilities had
been sold.
CONSUMER PROTECTION MISSION
Benton & Bowles, Inc.
The 1971 order concerning certain advertisements for Vanquish, a nonprescription internal analgesic
product manufactured by Sterling Drug, Inc., was vacated. The Commission noted it dismissed charges
in Sterling Drug, Docket No. 8919 (July 5, 1983), that were based on advertisements almost identical
to those that were subject of the complaint against Benton and Bowles, Sterling's advertising agency.

66

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION

Procter and Gamble Co.
The 1971 order requiring disclosure of certain facts in "Sweepstakes" advertisements was modified to
make the disclosure requirements consistent with the Games of Chance Rule.
G.R.I. Corporation
The 1972 consent order required G.R.I., a direct mail company selling cosmetics and household products,
to disclose "dearly and conspicuously" and in dose proximity all conditions of any "free offers" in its
advertisements. The order was modified to require disclosure that there are other conditions that a
consumer assumes upon accepting the "free offer" and also allows the company to "clearly and
conspicuously" disclose the details of the offer anywhere in the advertisement.
American Home Products Corp.
The order was modified so that its basic provisions are in parity with the Commission's order in BristolMyers Company (D. 8917) and Sterling Drug, Inc. (D. 8919). Under the modified order AHP must have
a reasonable basis, consisting of reliable scientific evidence, for all therapeutic performance or safety
claims.
General Motors Corp. and Campbell-Ewald Co.
The original consent orders concerned the claim that the 1971 Chevrolet Vega was "the best handling
passenger car ever built in the U.S." The companies argued that the orders effectively prevented any
claims of superior vehicle handling, even claims that were true. The modifications allow specific claims
of superior handling as long as those claims are substantiated by a scientific test(s). Campbell-Ewald
is the advertising agency for GM's Chevrolet Division.
Mattel, Inc.
The 1971 consent order concerning advertising of toys directed to children was modified to clarify
restrictions on the use of certain camera techniques. The Commission modified the order by adding a
provision allowing use of certain camera techniques if the results of competent and reliable tests
demonstrate that use of the techniques, in the context of the ad as a whole, is not deceptive to children.

ANNUAL REPORT 1984

67

Carson-Roberts, Inc.
The 1971 consent order with the advertising agency, Ogilvy & Mather U.S., a division of Ogilvy &
Mather International, Inc. (successor corporation to Carson-Roberts, Inc.), was modified in accordance
with the Mattel, Inc. order described above.

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK BY FTC

68

ANNUAL REPORT 1984

69

APPELLATE COURT REVIEW
OF COMMISSION ORDERS
AND TRADE REGULATION RULES
Bristol-Myers Co.
On June 25, 1984, the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit affirmed and enforced the
Commission's order against Bristol-Myers Company, prohibiting deceptive practices in connection with
the advertising of over-the-counter analgesics.
E.I. dupont de Nemours & Co. and Ethyl Corp.
On February 23, 1984, the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit set aside the
Commission's decision that price competition in lead-based antiknock gasoline additives had been
substantially lessened by certain practices unilaterally adopted by four firms in the industry. The court
held that the Commission's findings were not supported by substantial evidence and that the Commission
had applied an erroneous legal standard in defining unfair methods of competition under Section 5 of
the FTC Act.
Harry & Bryant Co.
On January 12, 1984, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit upheld the Commission's
Trade Regulation Rule on Funeral Industry Practices.
Sterling Drug, Inc.
On August 28, 1984, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirmed and enforced the
Commission's order against Sterling Drug, Inc., prohibiting deceptive practices in connection with the
advertising of over-the-counter analgesics.

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK BY FTC

70

ANNUAL REPORT 1984

71

SUPREME COURT REVIEW
Grolier, Inc.
On October 11, 1983, the Supreme Court denied Grolier's petition for a writ of certiorari, thereby letting
stand the decision of the Ninth Circuit affirming and enforcing the Commission's order prohibiting
various deceptive practices in the sale of encyclopedias.

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK BY FTC

72

ANNUAL REPORT 1984

73

ECONOMIC REPORTS COMPLETED
"Impact Evaluations of the FTC's Vertical Restraint Cases," edited by Ronald N. Lafferty, Robert H. Lande,
and John B. Kirkwood. Sept., 1984.
A collection of several analyses by outside scholars of past FTC vertical restraint cases; the studies found
that FTC action sometimes benefitted and sometimes harmed consumer welfare.
"Exclusive Dealing and Vertical Integration: The Efficiency of Contracts in the Tuna Industry," by Edward
C. Gallick. Sept., 1984.
An analysis of widespread contractual arrangements between buyers and sellers in the tuna industry;
finds that such agreements, including contracts for exclusive dealing, may enhance efficiency.
"Resale Price Maintenance: Economic Theories and Empirical Evidence," by Thomas Overstreet, April,
1984.
Comprehensive review of the theoretical and empirical literature on the effects of retail price
maintenance; concludes that retail price maintenance can either enhance ' or decrease consumer welfare,
depending on the circumstances in which it is used.
"An Economic Analysis of Taxicab Regulation," by Mark Frankena and Paul Pautler, May, 1984.
A comprehensive survey of the economic consequences of taxicab regulation.
"The Benefits of Eliminating the Alaskan Crude Oil Export Ban, " by Calvin T. Roush, Jr., Sept., 1984.
Estimates the costs to the U.S. economy and to various groups of restrictions on the sale of Alaskan oil.
"Import Quotas and Textiles: The Welfare Effects of U. S. Restrictions, " by Morris E. Morkre, Sept., 1984.
Estimates the costs to the U.S. economy and to U.S. consumers of restrictions on the importation of
apparel from Hong Kong.

74

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION

"The Ban on Intramajor Joint Bids in Federal Offshore Lease Sales: An Evaluation," by Joseph P.
Mullholland, Sept., 1984.
Evaluates the effects of the existing ban on joint bidding by major petroleum firms for federal offshore
oil leases.
"Consumers' Experiences with Real Estate Brokers: A Report on A Consumer Survey of the Federal Trade
Commission's Residential Real Estate Brokerage Investigation," by Gerard R. Butters, Nov., 1983.
Presents and analyzes a survey of 350 buyers and 350 sellers of houses. Respondents were asked about
experience with real estate brokers, including selection of a broker, services provided by brokers, and
commission rates charged.
"Firm Size and Regulatory Compliance Costs; The Case of LIFO Regulations, " by John C. Hilke, Sept.,
1984.
Finds that small firms have disproportionately high costs in complying with LIFO regulations, and these
higher costs are associated with lower rates of LIFO utilization among small firms.
"Experiments Concerning Antitrust Issues: Sunk Costs and Entry, and Predatory Behavior, " by R. Mark
Issac and Vernon L. Smith, intro. by Dan Alger, Sept., 1984
Two papers by FTC consultants, one paper on the effects of sunk costs on the behavior or potential
entrants and the other on predatory pricing, with an introduction by an FTC staff economist.

ANNUAL REPORT 1984

75

ECONOMIC WORKING PAPERS
Multi-Market Strategies in a Dominant Firm Industry, Steven C. Salop and David T. Scheffman, April 1984
Advertising Sunk Costs and Barriers to Entry, Ioannis N. Kessides, November 1983
The Measurement of Conjectural Variations in an Oligopoly Industry, Robert P. Rogers, November 1983
A Note on the Equilibrium Auction for Contract Bidding, David M. Barton, November 1983
Tobin's Ratio and Industrial Organization: Further Results, Carl R. Schwinn, December :1983
A General Theory of Hedonic Pricing of Capital as a Factor of Production, Christopher C. Klein, December
1983
Uncertainty and the Value of Information: An Application of the Le Chatelier Principle, Mark L. Plummer,
July 1984
Does Collusion Pay ... Does Antitrust Work? David F. Lean, Jonathan D. Ogur and Robert P. Rogers, June
1984
Unobservable Transactions Price and the Measurement of a Supply and Demand Model for the American
Steel Industry, Robert P. Rogers, January 1984
A Model of Non-Competitive Interdependence and Antitrust Laws, Earl A. Thompson and Roger L. Faith,
January 1984
A Stochastic Theory of Price Supports, Frederick I. Johnson, April 1984
Early Mandatory Disclosure Regulations, John C. Hilke, June 1984
Mergers for Monopoly: Problems of Expectations and Commitments, Robert J. Mackay, July 1984
Growth By Diversification: Entrepreneurial Behavior in Large-Scale United States Enterprises, F. M. Scherer
and David J. Ravenscraft, September 1984

76

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION

A Bidding Analysis of Special Interest Regulation: Raising Rivals' Costs in a Rent Seeking Society, Steven
C. Salop, David T. Scheffman and Warren Schwartz, September 1984
Did Antitrust Policy Cause the Great Merger Wave? George Bittlingmayer, September 1984
Process Analysis, Capital Utilization, and the Existence of Dual Cost and Production Functions Christopher
C. Klein, May 1984
The Growing Supply of Physicians: Has the Market Become More Competitive? Monica Noether,
September 1984
The Effect of Government Policy Changes on the Supply of Physicians: Expansion of a Competitive Fringe
Monica Noether, September 1984

ANNUAL REPORT 1984

77

MISCELLANEOUS ECONOMIC POLICY PAPERS
Stephen Martin and John Lunn, "Market Structure, Firm Structure, and Research and Development,"
December, 1983.
Alexander Sannella, "Segment Reporting: The Cost Allocation Issue, November, 1983.
William F. Long and David J. Ravenscraft, "The Impact of Concentration and Elasticity on Line of Business
Profitability," November, 1983.
Richard Schmalensee, "Do Markets Differ Much?" February, 1984.
Leonard W. Weiss and George A. Pascoe, Jr., "Concentration and X-Inefficiency," January, 1984.
Martin Melman, "Discovering a Business Entity's Costs, Profits, and Assets in Legal Actions," September,
1984.

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK BY FTC

78

ANNUAL REPORT 1984

79

INTERVENTIONS
A. Statements Presented to Other Agencies
1. FERC
FTC joint bureau comments to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) on a proposed
rulemaking to eliminate variable costs from certain natural gas pipeline minimum commodity bill
provisions. Staff concluded that except for certain instances, the proposed rule would enhance
efficiency in the natural gas industry.
2. CAB
Joint bureau comments in response to a CAB proposed rulemaking regarding airline computer
reservation systems (CRSs). FTC staff comments recommend that the CAB determine whether the
CRSs have caused "substantial consumer injury", and, if so, that the CAB adopt the most costeffective rule.
3. Virginia Health Commission
Oral argument in the State of Virginia on a request for certificate of public need by a home health
care firm (Total Patient Care.) - given by Dave Kass (BE).
4. ICC
Joint bureau comments to the ICC recommending the withdrawal of antitrust immunity for collective
ratemaking by motor carriers.
5. FMC
Joint bureau comments to the FMC in response to the Notice of Inquiry into regulation of port and
marine terminal operators. FTC staff comments concluded that there is no justification for exemption
of marine terminal agreements from the antitrust laws.
6. PRC
Notice of the FTC's intention to intervene as a limited participant in the matter of the Postal Rate and
Fee Changes (Omnibus proceeding), Dkt No. R84-1.

80

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION
7. PRC
FTC joint bureau comments before the Postal Rate Commission (PRC) opposing the rates proposed
by the United States Postal Service (USPS) for electronic - computer originated mail.
8. ITC
FTC comments to the ITC (Investigation No. 337-TA-133) arguing that trademark protection for
product shape should not be granted to a certain U.S. producer of vertical milling machines.
9. ITC
FTC oral argument in ITC (Investigation No., 337-TA-133) arguing that trademark protection for
product shape should be granted to certain U.S. producers of vertical milling machines.
10. New York State Dept. Agriculture and Markets
Commission letter to Joseph R. Gerace, Commissioner of Agriculture and Markets; evaluating the
competitive effect of granting or denying new applicants permission to sell milk and dairy products
in New York State.
11. ITC
Letter to Kenneth R. Mason, Secretary of International Trade requesting permission to enter
appearance in Investigation No. TA-201-5:L, Carbon and Certain Alloy Steel Products.
12. ITC
Letter to Kenneth R. Mason, Secretary of the International Trade Commission requesting permission
to enter appearance in Investigation No. TA-201-52, Unwrought Copper.
13. ITC
Letter to Kenneth R. Mason, Secretary of International Trade requesting permission to enter
appearance in Investigation No. TA-201-50, Nonrubber Footwear.
14. ITC
Letter to Kenneth R. Mason, Secretary of the International Trade Commission, requesting permission
to enter appearance in Investigation No. TA-201-53, Certain Canned Tuna Fish.

ANNUAL REPORT 1984

81

15. HUD
FTC joint bureau comments submitted to Department of Housing and Urban Development on
whether a notice warning of potential health risks from formaldehyde vapors should be required on
manufactured homes.
16. FMC
Oral argument before the Federal Maritime Commission arguing that there should be antitrust and
consumer welfare considerations regarding competitive restrictions on ports and marine terminals.
17. ITC
FTC brief to the International Trade Commission on the Escape Clause Petition for Basic Steel Mill
Products.
18. FCC
Joint bureau comments in regard to the Federal Communication Commission's Public Notice, Report
No. DS-265, dated 3/12/84, on the excess demand for satellite orbital slots. The comments
recommended against comparative hearings, and suggested instead that the FCC hold auctions, or
lotteries combined with the transferability of slot rights.
19. ITC
FTC brief to the International Trade Commission commenting on import relief being sought for
refined and blister copper under Section 201 of the Trade Reform Act of 1974.
20. FMC
Joint bureau comments to the Federal Maritime Commission on additional arguments for antitrust
immunity that were not addressed in our 12/20/83 comments.
21. ITC
Brief by the FTC before the International Trade Commission on the Escape Clause Petition for
Canned Tuna.
22. Alabama
FTC staff letter to the Alabama Supreme Court regarding regulations for lawyer advertising.

82

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION
23. ITC
Prehearing relief brief to the International Trade Commission, regarding import relief being sought
for carbon steel under Section 201 of the Trade Act of 1974.
24. Colorado
Joint bureau letter to the Department of Regulatory Agencies of the State of Colorado, regarding
state law restrictions on commercial practice by physicians, chiropractors, podiatrists, and
optometrists in Colorado.
25. ITC
Prehearing relief brief intended for submission to the ITC on the Escape Clause Petition for
Unwrought Copper.
26. DHHS
Commission letter to the Health Care Financing Administration regarding proposed regulations
which set forth requirements that certain providers must meet to qualify for Medicare
reimbursement.
27. Nebraska
Joint bureau comments urging Nebraska Bar Association to recommend that the state Supreme Court
permit practicing attorneys in the state "to use advertising and trade names so long as their use is
neither false nor deceptive."
28. FAA
Joint bureau comments (and testimony at the public hearing) to the Federal Aviation Administration
regarding the proposal to permit sales of landing rights at high density airports.
29. ITC
FTC brief to the Trade Policy Committee (chaired by the Office of U.S. Trade Representatives)
regarding import relief being sought for certain copper articles under Section 201 of the Trade Act
of 1974.
30. New Mexico
Request to file a motion for a stay of the proceedings before the New Mexico Public Service
Commission in connection with File No. 841-0145. The proceeding involves the proposed
acquisition of Southern Union Company's New Mexico natural gas utility operations by the Public
Service Company of New Mexico.

ANNUAL REPORT 1984

83

31. ITC
FTC brief before the Trade Policy Committee (Chaired by the Office of U.S. Trade Representative)
to assist in the development of recommendations regarding what action, if any, the President should
take in providing import relief of carbon and alloy steel.
32. CPSC
Commission letter to the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC), commenting on a proposed
regulatory amendment that would allow CPSC to "adopt," "endorse," or "recognize" voluntary
industry standards for product safety.
33. Virginia Dept. of Health Regulatory Boards
Joint bureau letter to the Department of Health Regulatory Boards of the Commonwealth of Virginia,
regarding state law restrictions on commercial practice by dentists and physicians.
34. CAB
Staff comments to the Civil Aeronautics Board in response to Eastern Airlines' petition for
immediate short-term antitrust immunity to permit the operation of airline scheduling committees
to relieve congestion in several of the nation's airports.
35. FAA
Joint bureau comments to the Federal Aviation Administration on its plans to implement scheduling
restrictions at a number of airports.
36. Virginia Dept. of Health Regulatory Boards
Joint bureau letter to the Department of Health Regulatory Boards of the Commonwealth of Virginia,
addressing restrictions on advertising contained in the regulations of the Boards of Optometry and
Veterinary Medicine. The letter also addresses restrictions on corporate practice, trade name usage,
and prepaid service plans in the statute governing optometrists.
B. Statements Presented to Congressional Committees and State and Local Legislative Committees
1. Senate Communications Subcommittee on Commerce, Science & Transportation
FTC staff testimony summarizing its conclusions concerning repeal or modification of the FCC's
syndication and financial interest rules.

84

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION
2. Senate Committee on Small Business
FTC staff testimony (Presented by Director of Bureau of Competition) on "Competition by Utilities
in the Energy Conservation and Home Appliance Field." Testimony concluded that state-created
monopolies have an unfair advantage over private competitors and therefore should be watched
carefully.
3. Senate Judiciary Committee
Joint bureau comments to Senate Judiciary Committee on proposed shipping legislation (S.47 and
H.R. 1878). The comments analyzed the advance notice requirement for independent action in ocean
shipping conference agreements.
4. Senate Judiciary Committee
FTC testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee opposing S. 1680, the Malt Beverage
Interband Competition Act. The bill would create a partial antitrust exemption for the malt beverage
industry to set up exclusive sales territories.
5. House Committee on Energy and Commerce
Letter to the Chairman of the Committee on Energy and Commerce in response to a request for
comments on H.R. 2250, a bill "to provide a moratorium until June 30, 1988, on changes to the FCC
rules regarding network television syndication, network television financial interest, and prime time
access."
6. Senate Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs
Letter to Senator Jake Garn, Chairman of the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs
in response to a request for comments on H.R. 4278, a bill to extend the prohibition against the
imposition of credit card surcharges until July 31, 1984.
7. House Subcommittee on Aviation
Testimony by Commissioner George W. Douglas on whether legislation is needed to ensure
continued protection for consumers of air transportation, given the impending sunset of the CAB.
8. Alaska, Senate Labor and Commerce Committee
Letter to the Chairman of the Alaska Senate Labor and Commerce Committee supporting Senate Bill
432 that would expand the jurisdiction of the Alaska Securities Act of 1959 to cover all oil and gas
leases on land located in Alaska.

ANNUAL REPORT 1984

85

9. California State Assembly
Joint bureau comments to the California State Legislature opposing Assembly Bill 3584 which
would prohibit the use of rebates and coupons in the sale of alcoholic beverages.
10. Michigan Legislature
FTC joint bureau comments submitted to the Michigan State Legislature on a proposed bill that
would create an antitrust exemption for certain exclusive territorial arrangements in the beer and
wine industries.
11. Senate Commerce Committee
Commissioner Douglas testified on behalf of the Commission before the Senate Commerce
Committee on S. 707, the Domestic Content Bill.
12. California State Assembly
Joint bureau comments on proposed changes in the regulation of the Department of Alcoholic
Beverage control that would restrict the use of rebates and coupons in the sale of alcoholic
beverages.
13. House Subcommittee on Antitrust and Restraint of Trade Activities Affecting Small Business
Winston S. Moore, Assistant Director for Planning of the Bureau of Competition, presented joint
bureau testimony before the House Subcommittee on Antitrust and Restraint of Trade Activities
Affecting Small Business on "Regulated Monopolies Competition with Small Business." The focus
of the testimony was on the competitive concerns arising from utilities' competition with small
business in the supply, installation, and service of heating and cooling systems.
14. House Subcommittee on Commerce, Transportation, and Tourism
Testimony by Barbara Clark, Deputy Director of the Bureau of Competition, before the
Subcommittee on Commerce, Transportation, and Tourism, on H.R. 5305, the auto fleet sales bill.
15. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation
Letter to Bob Packwood, Chairman, Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation
on the redrafted version of S.286, the Office Machine and Equipment Dealers Act,

86

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION
which Senator Exon proposed to offer as a substitute for the existing version of the bill.
16. Senate Subcommittee on Aviation, Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation
Testimony by James C. Miller III on "CAB Sunset." Chairman Miller presented FTC's views on the
relative merits of transferring consumer protection authority for airline passengers from CAB - when
the agency expires at the end of the year - to either FTC or Department of Transportation (DOT) and
also whether DOT should receive antitrust authority over commercial carriers, now scheduled to be
transferred to Department of Justice.
17. California State Assembly
Joint bureau letter to the California Assemblyman Art Agnos, regarding a bill that would allow an
optometrist or group of optometrists to operate any number of branch, offices.
18. Senate Committee on the Judiciary
Testimony by Timothy J. Muris, Bureau Director for the Bureau of Competition on S. 2051 Health
Care Cost Containment Act of 1984 before the Senate Committee on the Judiciary.
19. Chicago City Council
Staff testimony of William MacLeod, Chicago Regional Director, before the Transportation
Committee of the Chicago City Council concerning a proposed ordinance that would gradually
eliminate entry restrictions for Chicago taxicabs.
20. King County Council
Staff testimony of Ross Petty, Seattle Assistant Regional Director and Richard Zerbe, Economist,
before the King County Council concerning a proposed ordinance that would regulate price and
entry of taxicabs in King County, Washington.
21. Seattle City Council
Staff letter to the Seattle City Council concerning a proposed ordinance that would regulate price
and entry of taxicabs in the City of Seattle.
22. Oregon Legislature Research Office

Joint bureau letter to the Oregon Legislature Research Office, addressing restrictions on corporate
employment of op-

ANNUAL REPORT 1984

87

tometrists and dentists, and on other forms of business associations between them and non-licensees,
including limitation's on trade name and other non-deceptive advertising.
C. Amicus Curiae Briefs
1. Court of International Trade
FTC motion for participation by the FTC as amicus curiae before the Court of International Trade
on countervailing duty and antidumping cases involving nitrocellulose.
2. Court of Appeals of the State of California
FTC amicus curiae brief involving an administrative interpretation of California statute regulating
the sale of alcoholic beverages. The interpretation would restrict price competition by prohibiting
cash rebates to retail purchasers of Taylor California Cellars wine.
3. Court of International Trade
FTC amicus curiae brief to the Court of International Trade commenting on whether the financial
assistance the Spanish government gives to certain uncreditworthy carbon steel producers should be
considered a subsidy.
4. Iowa Supreme Court
FTC amicus curiae brief to the Iowa Supreme Court commenting for the limited purpose of
addressing the impact on consumer welfare and on competition that results from restrictions on
otherwise truthful, non-deceptive attorney advertising.
5. Illinois Supreme Court
Brief by the FTC as amicus curiae before the Illinois Supreme Court arguing that Illinois' real estate
restrictions discourage informed choice and price competition.