Competition – simply a popularity contest?

Posted on 29/06/2013 | 3 Comments

On 26 June, representatives from FoHV attended a meeting with the ACCC to express concerns about the likely loss of product and service variety and choice should Woolworths proposed purchase of the Hawker IGA go ahead.   Contrary to expectation, they were advised that closure of small businesses at Hawker would not be a competition issue as new businesses might open up and operate more successfully;  loss of a single store would not, by itself, affect local suppliers and the ACCC does not have the authority to monitor and consider the overall impact of successive closures;  possible construction of a larger supermarket on the car park was not a consideration as the issues would be the same as for the current store;  creeping acquisition by Woolworths of independent supermarkets at Kippax, Charnwood and now, possibly, Hawker is only significant in that there are already four Woolworths stores in Belconnen, with a fifth to be built in Giralang.   The ACCC is waiting on analysis of the survey results to ascertain whether the product and service choice provided by Supa IGA is valued by a sufficient percentage of the population to warrant preserving it.

This entry was posted in Community consultation, Supermarket competition and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

3 responses to “Competition – simply a popularity contest?”

  1. John Krnc | 04/07/2013 at 11:56 pm | Reply

    Hello FoHV

    Could I suggest that your organisation delve into more useful and pertinent matters that may actually benefit the Hawker Village Shops.
    How about pursuing the line marking of the carpark , arranging for overgrown shrubs to be cut down to improve visabiltaly and safety or even addressing the vandalism and graffiti issues.

    Commenting to the media on behalf of businesses who are unlikely to be members is offensive and portraying a view of your group that is not necessarily true.
    If you are concerned about the future of the businesses at Hawker , support them with your patronage and put your money into these businesses.

    The overall negative attitude of your group to anything to do with progress at the Hawker Village is certainly very unwelcome and you are certainly not Friends to everyone and a name change to your organisation should be addressed at your next meeting .

    Yours Sincerely
    John Krnc
    Director – Supa IGA Hawker

  2. hawkerfriends | 07/07/2013 at 5:03 pm | Reply

    John,
    The FoHV committee have considered your comments and wish to express our appreciation of the Hawker Supa IGA over past years. Your store will be missed by many, along with its different range of goods and services. Many people have told us how much they have valued the friendly atmosphere of the store, the willingness to order in special items and to take orders over the phone, pack the order and deliver it. This has, in particular, been an age-friendly initiative that has been of considerable help to elderly residents. It is regretted by many that this is not the normal practice of Woolworth’s stores. We agree with the need for improvements in the Hawker Centre; unfortunately, they are the responsibility of either the government or the building owners/traders. We would welcome any suggestions as to how we can assist in achieving the improvements you mention.

  3. hawkerfriends | 07/07/2013 at 5:16 pm | Reply

    Received 2 July 2013: After reading your e-mail on Sunday and seeing Rod Sims’s explanation, in which he dismisses almost every issue put forward by FoHV representatives as being matters of planning, not competitiveness, I decided to wait a day or two and reread Sims’s explanation carefully. I have done so, and now I see that what we simpleminded members of the public think have something to do with competitiveness, Sims doesn’t think so. Hence, impacts on other traders, ‘the sort of businesses there’ (!), ‘the effect on individual competitors’ (!), and ‘creeping acquisition’ (in regard to which he begins by saying that the fact that Woolworths bought two shops locally in recent years is NOT in ACCC’s power to assess)–none of these are relevant as far as ACCC is concerned. All they can do is decide whether to oppose the purchase or not, on the basis of whether the product and service choice provided by Supa IGA is valued by a sufficient % of the population (my question here was, ‘what population? of Canberra? of Belconnen? of Hawker/Weetangera/Page/Scullin?’). And then the astounding statement at the end: even if ACCC opposes it, Woolworths can still go ahead and purchase the place, and ACCC would have to take them to court–to prove ‘substantially lessening competition’. Now how is one going to prove ‘substantial’ lessening by a proposed acquisition, when common sense tells you that you’d have to judge from what happened from previous acquisitions? But Sims ruled out the relevance of previous acquisitions, etc. So the impression I get is that the bureaucrats will make sure they get their way so they can make lots of money from construction projects of every kind.

    Ed

Leave a comment