Steph Chalmers

And if you don't think about it that much, you might be surprised, but most people probably aren't surprised, that these price drop periods are pre-negotiated.

And that's in the evidence as well that's being presented in this case is that

when the supplier and Woolworths are talking about raising the price, they're also pre-planning dropping the price.

So it's not, you know, they just decide willy-nilly to offer a discount because they feel sorry for people having to pay $5 now for Oreos.

This is all planned.

And that is part of what the ACCC is arguing as well, is that

It's not genuine because it is kind of planned and they've only offered it for a very short period of time.

And that's misleading the customer into thinking they're getting a better price when in fact they were getting a better price for several years when Oreos were less than $4.

And that seems to be fairly standard in Australian retail.

That element of it doesn't seem to really be in contention here.

You hear about price investment and it's really considered part of their marketing budgets for particular products are offering these discounts periodically or

the price dropped tag is kind of a longer term signal that the price has been cut.

So the argument here between the ACCC and Woolies is really around, is this time reasonable?

And as a result, it's really led to, you know, it's better me than you having to listen to this.

It's really quite dry, quite legalistic.

For a few minutes I was.

But yeah, it was quite technical around

Essentially, the judge was saying, why are you bringing in all these other things about inflation and why you are raising the price?

Aren't we really just arguing about whether you need to raise it for longer?

Exactly.