132 / 391
NEWS LETTER 2 0 1 0
118
Besd-Bir in a position where chicken producers meet under its roof and
exchange sensitive information about competition. In these meetings,
discussions oriented to the market and such items as seasonal evaluations,
sale policies, prices, costs, and sales systems are held. The Board concluded
that the Besd-Bir meetings are not solely aiming to deal with sector
specific problems, but are also intended to find ways to restrict the amount
of supply, which should be balanced by market mechanisms. Moreover,
it was determined that during periods when the sector had an economic
crisis, Besd-Bir encouraged its members to restrict their supply.
The Board also investigated the effects of agreements on the relevant
market. On one hand, the agreements on price fixing have been proved
by market outputs. On the other hand, it could not be determined whether
the agreements on restricting the amount of supply have been fulfilled or
not. However, it was noted that the correspondence between the parties
includes statements declaring that the practices as to restricting the supply
had been successful in 2005.
The Board stated that although there are many undertakings in the
chicken production sector, the market share of the nine main actors who
have been active in anti-competitive practices are big enough to have
significant effects in the market.
In light of the price analysis and statements of the undertakings,
the coordination between the undertakings as regards price fixing and
supply restriction has been successful from time to time. However, this
coordination could not be consistently maintained, and therefore its effect
on the chicken market was limited.
In conclusion, it was determined that Abalıoğlu, Banvit, Beypi, CP,
Erpiliç, Keskinoğlu, Pak Piliç, Şeker Piliç and Şen Piliç had been in active
communication, that agreements had been formed in the surroundings of
these undertakings, and that the other undertakings with minor market
shares had been informed about the agreements from time to time by the
major undertakings.
V. Fines
Pursuant to the Fines Regulation Article 5, the Board determined the
basic fine as 2% since the nine undertakings taking part in anti-competitive
practices had been involved in the cartel from time to time during a period