Page 31 - CCS_E-AR_V6_Neat
P. 31
Competition Commission of Singapore 25
Annual Report 2013/14
Manufacturing: Ball and Roller Bearing Industry
Four Japanese Ball and Roller
Bearing Manufacturers and
their Singapore Subsidiaries
Penalised for Price-Fixing
Lawyers in Singapore have
observed that CCS, which was
established in 2005, is starting
to step up its enforcement and
take on bigger cases.
“Clearly the honeymoon period
is over and they will want to
crack down on any such cartels
which come to their attention”
said Ken Chia, a lawyer with in March 2006, they were engaged in covert conduct,
continued in Japan and attended
Baker and McKenzie in a including referring to each
Reuters report on 26 May 2014. by representatives from the participant by code name. CCS
“This is the first case involving Japan parent companies. also found that the Parties
a foreign cartel, but we expect have a substantial share of the
more soon.” Over the years, the strategies product market in Singapore.
and actions of the Parties
The case in point involves included setting an agreed price The ball and roller bearing is a
four ball and roller bearing list and making a minimum price homogenous product, that is, a
agre
manufacturers and their ement for Singapore, and product from one manufacturer
Singapore subsidiaries. For also agreeing on the relevant can be easily replaced by a
years, at meetings in Japan exchange rates to be applied similar product from another
from as early as 1980 to 2011, to derive the minimum prices manufacturer. Without their anti-
for Singapore. When the price competitive agreements and
these four manufacturers
discussed and agreed on the of steel began to increase, the exchange of information, the
overall strategies for their Parties agreed on percentage Parties would have to compete for
Singapore subsidiary companies price increases and exchanged their market shares through more
to implement so that each information on the percentage competitive prices or non-price
participant could maintain its price increases to be applied strategies, and customers would
market share and protect its to aftermarket customers in benefit from more competitive
profit and sales. Singapore. pricing and/or better product
quality as a result.
At similar meetings in Singapore The Investigation
from 1998 until March 2006, the Investigation into this case After evaluating all the evidence,
Singapore subsidiary companies commenced in December 2011 CCS concluded that the conduct,
discussed the overall strategies after CCS received an application which included price-fixing
decided by their Japan parent for immunity from Koyo under agreements and exchanges
companies and the methods to CCS’s leniency programme. of strategic information, such
protect their respective market The investigation revealed a as future pricing intentions,
shares and profits. After the secretive and sophisticated amounted to a single overall
meetings in Singapore ended cartel in which the participants infringement.
Annual Report 2013/14
Manufacturing: Ball and Roller Bearing Industry
Four Japanese Ball and Roller
Bearing Manufacturers and
their Singapore Subsidiaries
Penalised for Price-Fixing
Lawyers in Singapore have
observed that CCS, which was
established in 2005, is starting
to step up its enforcement and
take on bigger cases.
“Clearly the honeymoon period
is over and they will want to
crack down on any such cartels
which come to their attention”
said Ken Chia, a lawyer with in March 2006, they were engaged in covert conduct,
continued in Japan and attended
Baker and McKenzie in a including referring to each
Reuters report on 26 May 2014. by representatives from the participant by code name. CCS
“This is the first case involving Japan parent companies. also found that the Parties
a foreign cartel, but we expect have a substantial share of the
more soon.” Over the years, the strategies product market in Singapore.
and actions of the Parties
The case in point involves included setting an agreed price The ball and roller bearing is a
four ball and roller bearing list and making a minimum price homogenous product, that is, a
agre
manufacturers and their ement for Singapore, and product from one manufacturer
Singapore subsidiaries. For also agreeing on the relevant can be easily replaced by a
years, at meetings in Japan exchange rates to be applied similar product from another
from as early as 1980 to 2011, to derive the minimum prices manufacturer. Without their anti-
for Singapore. When the price competitive agreements and
these four manufacturers
discussed and agreed on the of steel began to increase, the exchange of information, the
overall strategies for their Parties agreed on percentage Parties would have to compete for
Singapore subsidiary companies price increases and exchanged their market shares through more
to implement so that each information on the percentage competitive prices or non-price
participant could maintain its price increases to be applied strategies, and customers would
market share and protect its to aftermarket customers in benefit from more competitive
profit and sales. Singapore. pricing and/or better product
quality as a result.
At similar meetings in Singapore The Investigation
from 1998 until March 2006, the Investigation into this case After evaluating all the evidence,
Singapore subsidiary companies commenced in December 2011 CCS concluded that the conduct,
discussed the overall strategies after CCS received an application which included price-fixing
decided by their Japan parent for immunity from Koyo under agreements and exchanges
companies and the methods to CCS’s leniency programme. of strategic information, such
protect their respective market The investigation revealed a as future pricing intentions,
shares and profits. After the secretive and sophisticated amounted to a single overall
meetings in Singapore ended cartel in which the participants infringement.
