546US1
170
Unit: $U15
[08-22-08 15:43:12] PAGES PGT: OPIN
VOLVO TRUCKS NORTH AMERICA, INC. v. REEDERSIMCO GMC, INC. Opinion of the Court
resale of the purchased product. Competition of that char acter ordinarily is not involved when a product subject to special order is sold through a customer-specific competitive bidding process. I Volvo manufactures heavy-duty trucks. Reeder sells new and used trucks, including heavy-duty trucks. 374 F. 3d 701, 704 (CA8 2004). Reeder became an authorized dealer of Volvo trucks in 1995, pursuant to a five-year franchise agree ment that provided for automatic one-year extensions if Reeder met sales objectives set by Volvo. Ibid. Reeder generally sold Volvo’s trucks through a competitive bidding process. Ibid. In this process, the retail customer de scribes its specific product requirements and invites bids from several dealers it selects. The customer’s “decision to request a bid from a particular dealer or to allow a particular dealer to bid is controlled by such factors as an existing rela tionship, geography, reputation, and cold calling or other marketing strategies initiated by individual dealers.” Id., at 719 (Hansen, J., concurring in part and dissenting in part). Once a Volvo dealer receives the customer’s specifications, it turns to Volvo and requests a discount or “concession” off the wholesale price (set at 80% of the published retail price). Id., at 704. It is common practice in the industry for manu facturers to offer customer-specific discounts to their dealers. Ibid.; App. 334, 337. Volvo decides on a case-by-case basis whether to offer a discount and, if so, what the discount rate will be, taking account of such factors as industry-wide de mand and whether the retail customer has, historically, pur chased a different brand of trucks. App. 348–349, 333–334.1 The dealer then uses the discount offered by Volvo in prepar 1
To shield its ability to compete with other manufacturers, Volvo keeps confidential its precise method for calculating concessions offered to deal ers. 374 F. 3d 701, 704–705 (CA8 2004); App. 337–338.
