this post was submitted on 20 Mar 2025
55 points (100.0% liked)

Australia

4059 readers
125 users here now

A place to discuss Australia and important Australian issues.

Before you post:

If you're posting anything related to:

If you're posting Australian News (not opinion or discussion pieces) post it to Australian News

Rules

This community is run under the rules of aussie.zone. In addition to those rules:

Banner Photo

Congratulations to @Tau@aussie.zone who had the most upvoted submission to our banner photo competition

Recommended and Related Communities

Be sure to check out and subscribe to our related communities on aussie.zone:

Plus other communities for sport and major cities.

https://aussie.zone/communities

Moderation

Since Kbin doesn't show Lemmy Moderators, I'll list them here. Also note that Kbin does not distinguish moderator comments.

Additionally, we have our instance admins: @lodion@aussie.zone and @Nath@aussie.zone

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
lodion@aussie.zone
Fluid@aussie.zone
bestusername@aussie.zone
eatham@aussie.zone
Nath@aussie.zone
55
'Limited incentive' for Coles and Woolworths to compete vigorously on price, and margins have risen, ACCC finds (www.abc.net.au)
submitted 1 week ago by dockedatthewrongworf@aussie.zone to c/australia@aussie.zone
17 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Interesting reading the article. Would be good to see the complete ACCC report.

top 17 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Nath@aussie.zone 10 points 1 week ago (4 children)

I swear there's a hole in the market here. A third option that was online-only with collection points/delivery services similar to Colesworth that undercut on price.

Startup costs would be massive, though not as much as trying to enter the market as a third retailer with physical stores in all the suburbs.

It could start with a few distribution nodes (warehouses) and grow out. Order online, go to warehouse to collect. The next step where you can distribute in more suburbs or deliver to homes is where it gets most difficult.

[–] absGeekNZ@lemmy.nz 8 points 1 week ago (1 children)

That was tried here, and the guy couldn't get contracts with suppliers. They didn't want to endanger their contracts with the Woolies and Foodstuffs.

[–] Salvo@aussie.zone 4 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Those sort of exclusivity deals should be made illegal.

Unfortunately, a Duopsony is just as destructive to the market as a Duopoly.

[–] absGeekNZ@lemmy.nz 2 points 1 week ago

They are illegal.

But by the time the courts have heard the case, the business is already bust.

[–] dumblederp@aussie.zone 7 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I think the hole is if there was a logistics company that could handle Aldi deliveries.

[–] MisterFrog@aussie.zone 2 points 1 week ago

Aldi is a nice way to save, but, their fresh food selection is pretty meh, and often not great quality (as in, going mouldy fast, I don't care about how they look).

I usually pair going to Aldi and an Asian supermarket

[–] melbaboutown@aussie.zone 4 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

Unfortunately delivery or transport probably ups costs… Which is why Aldi doesn’t deliver. Really sucks for someone who requires it

[–] Nath@aussie.zone 2 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Home delivery services are a recent offering. What did these people do before about 5 years ago?

[–] dgriffith@aussie.zone 2 points 1 week ago

If they are house-bound, organise with a local taxi driver to get to the shop and get some things for them.

If they are mostly-mobile, same thing, but organise a drop off and pickup time and get a hand with getting groceries into the house and up stairs, etc.

A lot of the older "career" drivers will happily do regular stuff like this. Especially during the middle of the day in suburbia when it's pretty quiet. Beats sitting at a taxi rank reading the paper.

[–] melbaboutown@aussie.zone 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

The customers or the supermarkets?

[–] Nath@aussie.zone 2 points 1 week ago

I meant customers, but Dave has already answered.

[–] Taleya@aussie.zone 1 points 1 week ago

Well that, and immediately having wesfarmers trying to buy you out. Cf: catch

[–] sola@aussie.zone 10 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I diverge from common thoughts here. I don't want my productivity going to prop up business lobby groups. Colesworth is the result of an economic system that cannot resolve the need for more efficiencies via economies of scale monopolies and the need for much competition to get an accurate price signal. No Australian party wants to tamper with the current economic system, so it was obvious this ACCC report was leading to nothing.

[–] MisterFrog@aussie.zone 3 points 1 week ago

While a large part of the population is mislead about capitalism or benefitting from the system themselves, I think you'll find your sentiments are shared by many. Especially here on Lemmy.

This system sucks.

But yeah, our media is so fully captured by corporate interests that any proposal tooooo socialist is promptly demonised.

Oh those profits from our minerals? Nahhhh the foreign companies deserve that. Can't have a mining tax.

Breaking up monopolies? Nahhhh that's practically communism (despite competition being part of capitalism's rhetoric)

Big sad :(

At least Trump will likely secure us another term without an LNP majority government hehe

[–] Ozzy@lemmy.news 5 points 1 week ago (1 children)

'$2.9 million over 3 years. This would be cash "to help suppliers stand up to the big supermarkets", the government said.'

I am confused, the goverment thinks there is a problem with how big supermarkets treat producers Handing over 1 million a year solves the issue?

[–] zero_gravitas@aussie.zone 1 points 1 week ago

This SMH live post provides a bit more information: https://www.smh.com.au/national/australia-news-live-accc-puts-most-profitable-supermarkets-in-the-world-on-notice-israeli-strikes-kill-dozens-in-gaza-20250321-p5llcp.html?post=p58d1c#p58d1c

9.01am

Government pledges $2.9m to help suppliers stand up to supermarkets

By Josefine Ganko

As the ACCC supermarkets report reveals how the duopoly exerts power over consumers and suppliers, the government has announced $2.9 million in funding for produce industry associations to support education programs that will empower farmers to enforce their rights under the Food and Grocery Code.

Speaking at a press conference in Canberra, Treasurer Jim Chalmers says the funding was about “strengthening the arms” of the groups that represent farmers and producers. Treasurer Jim Chalmers, Assistant Minister for Competition Andrew Leigh and Finance Minister Katy Gallagher at a press conference in Canberra

Treasurer Jim Chalmers, Assistant Minister for Competition Andrew Leigh and Finance Minister Katy Gallagher at a press conference in Canberra Credit: Alex Ellinghausen

“We want to make sure that when our supermarkets are negotiating with our farmers, that we can strengthen the arguments of the people who produce our food.”

Chalmers added that Labor’s move to make the code mandatory and to introduce bigger penalties would also benefit suppliers.

Assistant Minister for Competition Andrew Leigh added that there were particular concerns around fresh food producers being required to agree to annual contracts, but then being subjected to week-to-week bidding, with the notion they will face much lower prices at the markets if the big supermarkets don’t stock their produce.

“This new initiative does ensure that the suppliers are going into those negotiations better able to take on the big supermarkets,” Leigh said.

[–] beeng@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 1 week ago

If you only shop at one supermarket (but you have access to more) you're also complicit?