|
< back to issues: commercial communication
Issues
Sales promotion letters to MEPs
August 2002
…………………… MEP
European Parliament,
Rue Wiertz,
Brussels B -1047
30th August 2002
1st Reading Vote on Sales Promotion Regulation
3rd September 2002
Dear…………………………
The European Publishers’ Council (EPC) is a high level group of
Chairmen and CEOs of leading European media corporations actively involved
in multimedia markets spanning newspaper, magazine, Internet and on-line
database publishing; many EPC members also have significant interests
in private television and radio. A list of our members is attached.
Before the vote on 3rd September in Strasbourg we would like to bring
to your attention four amendments which have been approved in Ward Beysen’s
draft report which we feel would pose significant problems for Europe’s
publishing industry.
In previous submissions to the Parliament we have put on record our general
support for the Regulation on Sales Promotion which we believe will simplify
legislation across Europe and remove barriers to cross-border trade which
publishers clearly support.
1. Limitation on the value of a sales promotion:
Amendment 29 (formerly 114, 115, 116) which provides that:
"Member States or non-regulatory bodies shall not impose a limit on
the value of a sales promotion provided that it is consistent with the
value of the goods and services covered by the promotion".
We oppose any limits being placed on the value of a Sales Promotion.
This amendment could become a way of limiting the value of a prize 'through
the back door'. In the many newspaper promotions used by our members,
for example a prize to win a €300,000 holiday home might be held
not to be "consistent" with the value of a newspaper.
It appears that this could allow national authorities to place the sort
of limitations on prize values that we have successfully argued against
so far. We urge you to vote against this amendment which has previously
been rejected by the legal affairs committee.
2. Likely chance of winning a prize:
Amendment 57, 61 (formerly 228 and 229) amending Annex 4.1 indent 7 apparently
provides that in the case of a promotional game,
"the promoter shall provide sufficient information for any participant
in the promotion to understand the likely chance of winning".
We agree that consumers should be well informed but we are concerned
that this particular wording, and the original text proposed by the Commission,
could lead to the imposition by national authorities of a requirement
to provide an unnecessary amount of information, or worse meaningless
information about the odds of winning, which would not enhance a consumer’s
ability to decide to participate or not. Often it is not possible
to give accurate chances of winning, as this depends on the number of
participants. In addition, skill as well as chance may affect the odds
of winning which are not predictable in advance by a promoter. Too
much mandatory information included in the text of a sales promotion can
limit its effectiveness. Instead this information should be available
on request to any interested consumer. In the UK for instance the
British Sales Promotion Code (Clause 40.14) merely provides that "Promoters
should not mislead consumers about the likelihood of winning a prize".
We think this is fair and sufficient and more meaningful.
3: Cash Prizes
Amendment 58 (formerly 235) proposes a deletion of the requirement that
information must be made available, including whether a cash alternative
can be substituted for any prize. This seems to be rather confusing as
nowhere else in the draft Regulation, or other amendments to the draft
Regulation is there a mention of a limitation on cash payment in the course
of a sales promotion. We suggest that this is re-worded to make it clear
that cash payments are not to be prohibited.
4. Competitions of skill
Amendment 20 (formerly 68) is intended to prevent sales promotions from
becoming a disguise for gambling activities. Although we support this
aim, we fear that this amendment could be interpreted too widely to prevent
certain types of competition and games (e.g. Fantasy Football) if a profit
of a purely incidental nature were to be made from a promotion.
As Member States already have national legislation for the purpose of
controlling of prohibiting gambling activities, we suggest this amendment
should be rejected.
We hope you will take these points into account in the vote. It
is important that the text does not have the unintended effect of limiting
the creativity of the European media industry to promote it’s publications
and online services. Newspaper and magazine publishers use a variety of
bona fide sales promotion techniques, according to existing laws and self-regulatory
codes of practice, as a way of attracting new readers and maintaining
existing readership in a steadily declining market. These promotions,
including competitions, prizes, free gifts, special offers and loyalty
schemes are very popular with our readers and help to promote as wide
a distribution of the printed press as possible.
Please contact me if you need any further information on the issues raised
in this letter.
Yours sincerely
Angela C Mills
Executive Director
back
to top
|
