According to this article, the stores are uniting to get cheaper products and set their own retail prices. Considering there’s only about 20 stores in total (if not less), would those 12 shops monopolize the market?
but if you read the article it says “set their own retail prices”. The difference between IGA, wollie and coles, there’s a lot of competitors out there, while health stores, there’s only a hand full.
agreed GnT. however my problem with health stores tends to revolve around the fanaticism the purveyors and regular customers tend to display when i go there to get my bits and pieces that cannot be found anywhere else for my hangover eliminator
It sounds no different to a co-op to get a cheaper price by buying in larger quantities. Not anti-competitive in my opinion.
The stores will have the right for to collectively bargain with suppliers.
They will not have the right to collude to set prices for customers, which I think is what you’re worried about when raising the possibility of a monopoly?
I have a problem with the term “Health Store”. It implies their food is healthier, or that you will be healthier if you shop there. There should be called “Alternative Food Store” or “Specialist Food Store”.
You may just end up with more products of lesser quality and health benefit. They tend to be the cheapest to make. If it costs a supplier a lot to make the product and there’s only so much someone will spend they can’t really give ‘buy in bulk discounts’ as easily.
That’s simply like IGA for health food stores – Coles or Woolies start with a monster health food section then they could be priced out of the market.
Is Canberra's signature dish: