Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 06 MAY 2016

Forcing Exclusivity On Your Customers May Not Be The Best Competitive Response

BakerHostetler
BakerHostetler
Contributor
BakerHostetler

BakerHostetler

Recognized as an innovator and one of the top firms for client service, BakerHostetler helps...

View firm profile
Explore more from BakerHostetler

According to the FTC's administrative complaint, Invibio responded to new rivals seeking to sell PEEK at lower prices by adopting a strategy of expanding the scope and coverage of exclusivity terms in its own PEEK supply contracts.

United StatesAntitrust/Competition Law

In the words of the director of the Federal Trade Commission's (FTC's) Bureau of Competition, the recent enforcement against Invibio, Inc., the first company to sell implant-grade polyetheretherketone, known as PEEK, to medical device makers, "affirms that the first company to enter a market cannot rely on anticompetitive contract terms to lock up customers and box out rivals." But what if you are not the first company to enter the market? More on that below, but first, what exactly did Invibio do when faced with new rivals?

According to the FTC's administrative complaint, Invibio responded to new rivals seeking to sell PEEK at lower prices by adopting a strategy of expanding the scope and coverage of exclusivity terms in its own PEEK supply contracts. Concerned that if it did not block these new rivals, it would be forced to engage in painful price competition, Invibio implemented its exclusivity strategy through negotiations with existing and potential customers.

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from