Word: clorox
(lookup in dictionary)
(lookup stats)
Dates: during 1960-1969
Sort By: most recent first
(reverse)
...ANTITRUST. The year's big merger case involves mammoth Soapmaker Procter & Gamble's acquisition of Clorox Chemical Co., the top U.S. manufacturer of liquid bleach. The FTC washed out the 1957 merger, ruling it unfair to smaller competitors; a U.S. appellate court reversed the FTC, calling it hostile to mere bigness. The Government, which has yet to lose a major antitrust case in the Warren court, now seeks to vindicate...
...though it had been done by a Mongolian headsman; the dubbing is so wildly out of sync that occasionally a word spoken by one actor seems to come out of another actor's mouth; and the color print looks like a fresco restored with the assistance of Clorox...
Does bigness, as such, constitute a violation of the Clayton Antitrust Act? Federal Trade Commission lawyers deny that the FTC has ever argued that it does. Nevertheless, the FTC surely appeared to be nearing such a doctrine in 1962 when it ordered Procter & Gamble to sell off Clorox Chemical Co., which P. & G. had acquired seven years earlier (TIME, Dec. 24). At the time of acquisition, Clorox held 49% of the U.S. market for liquid household bleaches. By buying the biggest bleach maker, the FTC contended, P. & G. avoided the risks of going into the field...
...Clorox v. Purex. The FTC case arose from P. &G.'s acquisition in 1957 of Clorox Chemical Co., which held 49% of the market for liquid household bleaches. Second-place Purex Corp., which had 16% of the market, had managed by heavy promotion to boost its share in several areas, including the Erie, Pa., market, where it had captured 33%. Clorox, now backed by P. & G.'s marketing know-how and money, did not let the gains go unchallenged. It blanketed the areas with ads, offered $1 ironing-board covers for 50? and cut the price of Clorox...
...case has significance far beyond the possible loss of Clorox's nearly $40 million in annual sales. Its management has relied on acquisitions and such selling devices as giveaways and selective price cuts to keep P. & G. growing. Under the FTC's steady gaze, the company has already had to compete less aggressively and slow down its acquisition of new companies. The results are showing up in earnings: in 1960, before the FTC order, profits rose 20%; in 1964 they rose 13%; last year, earnings before taxes actually declined. Says President Howard J. Morgens...