Page images
PDF
EPUB

WISCONSIN AUTOMOTIVE WHOLESALERS ASSOCIATION, INC.,
Madison, Wis., April 9, 1963.

Mr. W. E. WILLIAMSON,

Clerk, House Interstate and Foreign Commerce Committee, House Office Building, Washington, D.C.

DEAR MR. WILLIAMSON: I am informed that hearings on the quality stabilization bill are scheduled for April 23, 24, and 25. I wish that you would include in the record of the hearings the sentiment of the board of directors of the association I represent as executive secretary.

That statement is: "The need is now for all-out support to pass this much needed legislation and to have it enacted at the earliest date possible."

Very truly yours,

R. C. SALISBURY, Executive Secretary.

FLORIDA STATE RETAILERS ASSOCIATION,

Winter Park, Fla., April 8, 1963.

HOUSE INTERSTATE AND FOREIGN COMMERCE COMMITTEE,
House Office Building,

Washington, D.C.

GENTLEMEN: The innocent American consumer will continue to get less and less for his money until quality stabilization legislation is enacted to put an end to predatory retail practices which force manufacturers to squeeze quality out of their honored products.

Merchants throughout Florida, expressing their views through the Florida State Retailers Association, strongly and vigorously support the quality stabilization bill now pending before your committee and urge its early enactment. Respectfully,

K. K. KENNEDY, President.

DALLAS L. HOSTETLER, Executive Director.

NATIONAL OUTERWEAR & SPORTSWEAR ASSOCIATION, INC.,
New York, N.Y., April 8, 1963.

Re quality stabilization bill.
The quality stabilization bill is the best step in the direction of preventing
the public from being misled by the promotional type of store, including the dis-
count operation, which takes well-known branded merchandise and uses it as a
loss leader in order to draw the consumers into the store to sell them an inferior
kind of merchandise.

Brand name merchandise is assurance to the consumer that the product is an honest one, and both the maunfacturer and the consumer should be protected from the practice of pawning off an inferior product upon the consumer once he is led into the store by the offering of a quality brand name as a loss leader. We earnestly hope that this bill will be passed by the current session of Congress.

JULES GOLDSTEIN, Secretary.

MCMONAGLE & ROGERS, INC., Middletown, N.Y., March 27, 1963.

Re quality stabilization bill, Harris-Madden bill No. 3669.

Messrs. OREN HARRIS and RAY J. MADDEN,
Cochairmen, Commerce Committee,

House Office Building, Washington, D.C.

GENTLEMEN: It is our understanding that the quality stabilization bill has been introduced in both the House and Senate of the 88th Congress.

This important bill has to do with the future existence of the small retailers that go to make up such a large segment of our business enterprises in the United States.

We strongly urge you to favor this bill.

The giant outlets of distribution that have been gradually growing toward monopoly of general commodities are rapidly crushing out the existence of the small businessman. This has also brought about the destruction of established

trademark goods as well as price chaos in the marketplace of reputable com modities.

Before any more damage is created, the quality stabilization bill should become law.

We urge your full support of this measure during this session of the Congress. Respectfully,

W. R. MOORE, President.

CHRISTIAN BOOKSELLERS ASSOCIATION, INC.,

Chicago, Ill., April 16, 1963.

DEAR SIRS: The Government of the United States has for many years been aware of the importance of the small businessman in the American economy. Special legislation and many fine publications from the Small Business Administration have been a real help and encouragement to every small businessman. The Christian Booksellers Association is not seeking legislation that will protect the inefficient merchant, but rather we seek legislation that will provide the necessary protection against the encroachment of unfair competition by unscrupulous merchants.

It is our considered opinion that the early enactment of the quality stabili zation bill is needed. Please give this bill your all-out support, and I am sure that the small merchant in your community will be most grateful.

Your task is not an easy one, but it carries real responsibility to all of the American people. Legislation such as the quality stabilization bill enacted with your help will aid in strengthening our economy at a very critical time in the history of the United States.

Sincerely yours,

W. F. MOORE.

TACOMA RETAIL TRADE BUREAU,
Tacoma, Wash., April 12, 1963.

HOUSE COMMERCE COMMITTEE,
House Office Building,

Washington, D.C.

GENTLEMEN: This organization, comprised of approximately 150 retailers in downtown Tacoma, Wash., went on record last year in support of the quality stabilization bill which was Senate Joint Resolution 159 at the last session. Now that the bill has been reintroduced and is the subject of a hearing before your committee, this statement is written to reiterate our unqualified endorsement of the measure.

As you are aware, this bill would reaffirm a principle established in a unanimous decision of the U.S. Supreme Court to the effect that a manufacturer's property rights in this trademark continue in effect when his merchandise is purchased by wholesalers and retailers. The bill is specific in permitting manufacturers to revoke the right of a reseller to use his trademark if the latter misrepresents the merchandise, cuts the established retail price or utilizes the branded articles in so-called bait merchandising.

Members of our organization, in common with most established retailers, are adversely affected by price cuts and by unethical practices on the part of discount houses and so-called fly-by-night operators who conduct alleged distressed merchandise sales. This legislation will be a major step in checking practices which are definitely hurting the established methods and institutions of our distributive economy.

This is not an attempt to reenact fair-trade laws and this bill will be workable without any expense to the Federal Government since enforcement will rest with manufacturers who will be permitted injunctive relief through the courts. We join the 70-some national trade associations who have gone on record in support of this measure and respectfully urge your committee to report the measure to the floor of the House for favorable action.

Respectfully yours,

NED MCMAHON, Acting President.

TULSA EXECUTIVES' ASSOCIATION,
Tulsa, Okla., April 11, 1963.

CHAIRMAN, COMMITTEE ON INTERSTATE AND FOREIGN COMMERCE,

House of Representatives, Washington, D.C.

Whereas it is recognized that many retail outlets are engaging in unfair and deceptive practices by way of bait merchandising, misrepresentations as to quality, model, etc., particularly in the cases of brand names; and

Whereas many small businesses are being destroyed by such practices, due to lack of protective laws; and

Whereas small businesses are essential to the economy of our Nation and to our community and must therefore be afforded protection by law in order to survive; and

Whereas it is believed that H.R. 3669, which is presently before the House Interstate and Foreign Commerce Committee, will afford a measure of protection: Be it therefore

Resolved, That we go on record as favoring prompt enactment of this bill and that a copy of this resolution be forwarded to the House Interstate and Foreign Commerce Committee.

ROY ROLLER.

RESOLUTION

CHAIRMAN, INTERSTATE AND FOREIGN COMMERCE COMMITTEE,
House of Representatives, Washington, D.C.

Whereas it is recognized that many small businesses are being destroyed by the unfair and deceptive practices of many retailers by way of bait merchandising, misrepresentations as to quality, size, model, year of manufacture, etc.; and Whereas it is believed that adequate protection for said small businesses is not afforded by present laws; and

Whereas our Nation has been built by small business concerns and must have adequate protection by law in order to survive; and

Whereas it is believed that H.R. 3669, before the House Interstate and Foreign Commerce Committee at this time, will provide a measure of such protection: Be it therefore

Resolved, That we go on record as favoring its prompt enactment and that a copy of this resolution be forwarded to the House Interstate and Foreign Commerce Committee.

TULSA, OKLA,

Mr. W. E. WILLIAMSON.

BELLAIRE MERCHANTS ASSOCIATION, By L. G. ECKEE, President.

WHITE STAG MFG. CO., Portland, Oreg., April 18, 1963.

Clerk of the House Interstate and Foreign Commerce Committee, House Office Building, Washington, D.C.

DEAR MR. WILLIAMSON: Will you please include my following statement in the record of the House Commerce Committee hearings on the quality stabilization bill, which I understand are scheduled April 23, 24, and 25 of 1963:

As president of a company which has for 79 years produced high-quality textile products, and distributed among quality stores throughout the United States, at published wholesale prices, and at nationally advertised and suggested retail prices, I want to go on record as favoring the proposed Quality Stabilization Act.

Our main interest is to check disastrous price cutting and the deliberate misrepresentation of merchandise to the unsuspecting American public, who, of necessity, gets substitute merchandise foisted upon it, which is the "bait and switch" tool of the price cutter. If this can't be prevented in an orderly way, price wars result, and disorderly distribution, instead of orderly distribution, takes over with its downward spiral of prices, and the consequent cheapening of quality (in order for price cutters to exist), and finally, a bitterly disillusioned public.

We prefer to maintain the standards of quality that have upheld our name for almost eight decades, and made it almost a household byword, synonymous

with quality. If we were forced to fool the public by cheapening our merchandise, and hence depreciating our name, and if our dealers were forced to cut our suggested retail prices to meet the cheapened prices of deliberately misrepresented merchandise, our name would soon be worth nothing to the consuming public, nor to our dealers, and neither would our company be worth anything as a producer any longer.

In the past, there have been better business bureaus at the local level, trying to prevent misrepresentation to the public, but these too often are emasculated by local pressures. Only a national Quality Stabilization Act that is above attack, and above reproach, can be effective in preventing piracy by unscrupulous purveyors. We try to price our products legitimately, without inflation, we try to encourage our dealers to sell them in the same manner. Neither we nor the stores selling our products can command more than fair prices, because both competition and supply and demand factors, quality for quality, naturally hold us in line.

We must maintain the public confidence in our marketplace, instead of the ruthless disorder of the street bazaar which could take over if we don't protect ourselves from quality misrepresentation in an orderly way.

We therefore seek a national act which will make it unlawful to misrepresent or bootleg merchandise proclaimed to be the same or similar, but at lower prices. It's OK for a standard brand and standard quality with standard prices to become the target for vendors who can give the same quality for lower prices, but when prices are cut, and inferior merchandise is claimed to be the same, that must be stopped to prevent havoc in the marketplace. Elimination of standard brands and standard quality would remove the very guideposts on which the American consumer has long depended.

HAROLD S. HIRSCH, President.

P.S.-If you will remember in the old days of prohibition, the public was offered branded Scotch "or similar" at cut prices, but usually discovered that the brands had been faked, and that the word "similar" was a complete myth, that the only thing which had been cut was the quality of the ingredients, which had been cut with water.

No one could control this, because it was all undercover during prohibition, and no purchaser dared complain because the purchaser himself was breaking the law and had no legal protection. Today, he is not breaking the law by buying a substitute product at cut prices, and he should be protected legally if he discovers he has been duped.

Hon. HARLEY O. STAGGERS,

NORTH CAROLINA GENERAL ASSEMBLY,
Raleigh, April 19, 1963.

Chairman, Subcommittee on Commerce and Finance,
House Office Building, Washington, D.C.

DEAR CONGRESSMAN: I am no less convinced this year than I was last that some legal protection must be afforded the owner of a legitimate and respected brand name. Our experience during the past 12 months has convinced all of us at Hanes Hosiery that the quality stabilization bill is more needed than ever. It is our hope that you will give this matter your most serious consideration. Sincerely yours,

WINSTON-SALEM, N.C.

GORDON HANES, President, Hanes Hosiery Mills.

Mr. W. E. WILLIAMSON,

RETAIL JEWELERS OF AMERICA, INC.,
Washington, D.C., May 24, 1963.

Clerk, House Interstate and Foreign Commerce Committee, House Office Building, Washington, D.C.

DEAR Mr. WILLIAMSON: Rather than submit a formal statement in support of the quality stabilization bill, in which the House Interstate and Foreign Commerce Committee has been holding hearings, the Retail Jewelers of America. which have endorsed the quality stabilization bill are submitting the letters of

many of their members which indicate the urgent and vital need for Federal legislative assistance now.

We would appreciate it if you would incorporate this letter and its attachments in the record of the hearings on the quality stabilization bill.

Sincerely,

JAMES C. LUCAS, Executive Vice President.

CARROLL'S,

Coral Gables, Fla., May 13, 1963.

Mr. JAMES C. LUCAS,

Executive Vice President, Retail Jewelers of America,
Washington, D.C.

DEAR Mr. LUCAS: Gordon Smith, president of the Florida Jewelers Association has asked me to sum up the reaction of our membership with reference to price-cutting activities of many stores, etc., on brand name goods.

Among the average small retailer the result has worked a terrible hardship. While we are sure no merchant worth his salt wants a "crutch" nonetheless he neither wants the price war to erupt in his neighborhood-one that is so often the result of one chain fighting another. Each are "loaded" with various and sundry advantages he cannot have, such as extra discounts, allowances for quantity purchases advertising bonuses, etc., etc.

In our personal case we make it a policy not to feature or even show very many advertised brands, because of this condition. Over 60 percent of our sales are unbranded or little-known names-as a matter of fact in some lines we sell 80 percent of that type of goods with our own name on same. This is a name we know no one else can offer at any price. Yet you may be sure our prices are very competitive and meet with practically no resistance. The name brand manufacturer who wants us to feature his product has to offer us some assurance that his merchandise will not be "footballed" to the extent that we are made to look foolish.

The survival of many small merchants-taxpayers-depends upon some such protection, and many manufacturers need it too.

Very truly yours,

Mr. JAMES C. LUCAS,

CARROLL C. SEGHERS. LITTLE RIVER JEWELRY, MIAMI, FLA., May 14, 1963.

Executive Vice President, Retail Jewelers of America,
Washington, D.C.

DEAR MR. LUCAS: We are in the retail jewelry business, and we are having a very hard time meeting our bills.

We believe that one of the reasons is that the customer has lost all confidence in the trademark on merchandise.

Many firms have used the reputable trademark to get customers in their stores. By using this trademark as bait (selling it a little under cost to leave the impression that all the merchandise is priced the same way).

We, the retailer, need the reputable manufacturer as well as he needs us for an outlet for his merchandise. But, when his trademark is destroyed so is the manufacturer.

The question that we hear most today is "What is wrong with this product? I see so many different prices on it."

We have had to drop many of our brands that we were handling because we felt that they were cheapening their product to fit the price that mass distributors demanded on the product.

We like to sell a product that the customer has confidence in, that it is the best made to give service that the customer expects from the trademark.

We can't say that this is the total answer to our staying in business, but it is a big question. We think that quality stabilization will be a step in the right direction. If we don't get help, we may be the next business to disappear off the American scene.

GORDON E. SMITH.

« PreviousContinue »