Avianca: Why is the big industry investigating this and what is the fine for them – companies – the economy

The Industry and Commerce Supervisory Authority (SIC) has launched an investigation into Aerovías del Continente Americano SA (Avianca) and Price RES SAS regarding the alleged violation of the terms imposed by the entity for a decision that in 2018, in a conditional manner, allowed them to process integration to act jointly in the brokerage market in the marketing and reservation of tourist packages on national and international levels.

(You may be interested: Statement of Objections by 4 Companies to Excess Whey in the Milk They Sell)

The Control and Monitoring Authority indicated that it was able to establish that at least from November 2018 to March 2021, the two companies had offered a series of promotional bonuses through which airline tickets are purchased in the UAE. Avianca.com, discounts were given on the purchase of packages or services offered on the Avianca Tours page, a brand that these companies have jointly exploited to develop their business integration process.

He pointed out that this behavior presumes non-compliance with the second condition of Resolution No. 60515 of August 22, 2018, which stipulates that the offer of national or international airline tickets Avianca It had to be offered to potential and existing competitors of the integrated company, in this case achieved through joint exploitation of the Avianca Tours brand, but without applying discriminatory terms to similar operations that would put competitors at a disadvantage.

(Also read: These are the milk producers that SIC investigates using whey)

However, according to the regulator, this kind of practice would have given Avianca and Price RES an undue advantage over other companies that participate in this market in brokerage, marketing and booking tour packages.

The action began after the Industry and Commerce Supervisory Authority received a complaint from the Colombian Association of Travel and Tourism Agencies (ANATO), in which it was said that the two companies would fail to comply with the second condition of the integration process, that is, it sought to mitigate the risks of potential vertical effects of the integration process.

For this case, the Industry and Commerce Supervisory Authority said it could impose fines of up to 100,000 per month of the statutory minimum wage in force, 100,000 million pesos for each violation of the free competition regime, and on those who facilitated and cooperated, authorized, promoted He has, promotes, enforces and/or tolerates anti-competitive behaviour, with a minimum wage of 2,000, i.e. 2,000 million pesos for each infraction.

Leave a Comment