Search

Readers response: What seems too expensive but is really worth the price?

We asked our readers what items or experience seem, too expensive but are really worth the price, and the response was overwhelming. Here's what our audience will always justify the price of. Robbie Kirkwood - Travel insurance. Elizabeth Foster - Business class on long haul flights. Jeanette Wallis - Coffee beans. Mandy O'Connor - A good pair of Levi jeans, and a good pair of boots. Pamela McDonald - I would say electricity! Seems lots complain about the cost until you lose power, then you realise how hard life would be without it. Tess Witchell - Real butter! Three ply toilet rolls, frappe iced coffee from McDonald’s, and proper bakery bread. Sue Yunker - Wine! Michael Schulze - A decent cup of coffee. Suzanne Jones - A holiday. Rose Niemack - Fruits and vegetables. Image credits: Shutterstock

Money & Banking

"Misconceived": Coles and Woolies fight allegations of price gouging

Coles and Woolworths are set to fight the allegations that they have been inflating prices, as they begin their cases against the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC). The lawyers for both supermarket giants appeared in the Federal Court on Wednesday after the ACCC claims the companies violated consumer law by intentionally misleading shoppers. The ACCC claim both Coles and Woolworths inflated the prices on hundred of items before placing them on sale with their "Down Down" and "Prices Dropped" campaigns. The products - including dairy, pet food and personal care - sold for less than the inflated prices, but still more than the regular price that applied before the price spike. Cameron Moore SC, representing Woolworths, told the court the supermarket had not initiated the temporary spikes in prices and would be fighting the ACCC's allegations. "The suggestion is that Woolworths initiated temporary price spikes and that's not correct factually," Moore said. "We say factually, the ACCC's case is misconceived." Both Coles and Woolworths said their increase in prices came at the demand of suppliers, who pushed for the increase due to their rising costs. John Sheahan KC, representing Coles, said the case was not as simple as alleged by the ACCC and any outcome could have significant implications for the whole industry. Coles and Woolworths have until November 29th to file a written response to the ACCC's allegations, before both parties return to the Federal Court in December for another case management hearing. Image credits: Shutterstock

Legal

Coles and Woolies shoppers could claim thousands over alleged deceptive pricing

Coles and Woolworths shoppers could claim up to $5,000 if the supermarket giants are found out for deceiving customers with dodgy pricing tactics, according to a leading lawyer. Carter Capner Law is one of two firms investigating whether a class action suit on behalf of shoppers is viable in conjunction with the ACCC's legal action against the two chains. Both Coles and Woolworths have bee accused of violating Australian consumer law by the consumer watchdog after allegedly intentionally misleading customers by driving up prices and then putting those items on sale for their original prices under the "Prices Dropped" and "Down Down" campaigns. “Early estimates suggest that households could claim between $2,000 and $5,000, depending on the amount spent and the impact of the deceptive pricing,” law director Peter Carter said, who began advocating for people after he received an "avalanche of calls from outraged customers". While Carter said the firm initially had no plans to commence a class action, he admitted that after speaking about it to the media, the company were inundated with Coles and Woolworths customers "demanding action and compensation". He believes Australians already doing it tough through the cost of living crisis felt "betrayed" by the supermarkets, while Flinders University research fellow in law Dr Joel Lisk said that the class action is "a positive" for shoppers. "The ACCC proceedings aren't about getting refunds for customers," he told Yahoo. "But if they are successful it would mean customers have, in theory, been misled and deceived and could be entitled to damages." When it comes to damages, it's something Dr Lisk said "starts to add up" for customers, although it's "hard to say" if financial penalties to businesses found guilty of wrongdoing would impact misleading and deceptive conduct in the future. "If [fines are] seen as just the cost of doing business it doesn't really dissuade businesses from engaging in misleading and deceptive conduct," he said. "Seeking damages from business for the losses that individuals like us have incurred is one way of doing that. But of course, we're talking probably about dollars and cents in transactions when businesses like Coles and Woolworths deal in the billions." Image credits: Shutterstock

Legal

"Can you sleep at night?" Frustrated shopper confronts Woolies CEO over price gouging

A frustrated Woolworths shopper has called out the supermarket's CEO in store to demand answers about Woolies' record-breaking profits during the cost of living crisis. Chief executive Amanda Bardwell was walking around a Woolworths store in Wollongong when the heated exchange took place, with the whole thing captured on camera. The customer fired off hard-hitting questions to the CEO and other senior staff members, asking, "What do you have to say to the fact that your company is profiting off price gouging during the cost of living crisis?" Ms Bardwell, looking visibly shocked by the confrontation, replied, "Thank you for reaching out to us, we're doing everything we can to recognise that customers are doing it tough to make sure that they're able to get great prices." The woman didn't accept her answer, firing back, "I really don't believe that. Millions of people in Australia right now have to skip meals in order to survive, while you continue to make big bucks and working class people suffer. Can you sleep at night knowing that?" Ms Bardwell replied, "Our team are doing everything that we can to support our customers. We understand that it is an incredibly difficult time right now." A staff member then intervened, adding, "We have lowered prices and you see that right throughout our store… that's great value for our customers." Ms Bardwell thanked the customer for sharing her views and said Woolworths was doing "everything we can" to keep prices low for customers, before another staff member chimed in to say "It's actually illegal to film people in NSW without permission, with the CEO walking away. Social media users were quick to praise the woman for confronting Miss Bardwell, while sharing their own stories of being stung by hefty supermarket prices. "I'm sick of paying nearly $300 a week on groceries. That's choosing the cheapest products. My fridge still looks half empty when I unpack," one said. "I'm sure Coles and Woolworth management don't have cost of living crisis as they are getting bigger and bigger bonus year after year," a second wrote. Others took aim at one particular comment in the video, pointing out, "'It’s illegal to film in NSW without permission', yet Woolworths has how many cameras in every store? Cameras in people’s faces in self serve on every screen. Did they get our permission?" Another added, "If only their empathy was as big as their prices." Image credits: TikTok

Legal

Shock over op shop item listed for $2,000

An Aussie charity shop has come under fire after a shopper spotted a luxury item with a hefty four-figure price tag. A woman was browsing the shelves at the Vinnies Op Shop in Tamworth where she spotted a forest green handbag by luxury brand Balenciaga for sale for a whopping $2,000. While the handbag retails at roughly $4,000, the eye-watering "sale" price has infuriated many after a customer spotted it isolated on a shelf in-store. "How in the world would a normal everyday person be able to afford that? At the stage now it’s cheaper to go to Kmart," a local woman hit out on social media. Others agreed, saying it's a "slap in the face when everything is donated in first place". "It’s ridiculous these days, all the op shops are so overpriced. Very much so in the suburb I live in because it’s a wealthy area, they think everyone who walks in is loaded," another said, commenting on the designer bag. Vinnies was quick to respond to the backlash over the expensive item, Vinnies North West area manager Julie Crosby reiterated that Vinnies shops are charity stores. "We're raising funds," she told the <a href="https://au.news.yahoo.com/tagged/social-media/" data-i13n="cpos:8;pos:1" data-ylk="slk:ABC;cpos:8;pos:1;elm:context_link;itc:0;sec:content-canvas" data-rapid_p="18" data-v9y="1">ABC</a>. "We can spend that money on helping out homeless people, domestic violence issues where we're relocating families". Store manager Megan Moffat added, "It's a beautiful little handbag" implying the $2,000 is justified. Image credits: Shutterstock / Facebook

Money & Banking

How to revive your curls without paying salon prices

Maintaining curly hair takes a lot of time and effort and sometimes no matter what you do, the frizz just cannot be tamed. While getting your hair done at the salon can be a treat, having to pay salon prices to get softness, shine and definition for your curls is just not sustainable in the long run. Enter <a href="https://www.johnfrieda.com/en-au/home/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">John Frieda</a>'s newest Frizz Ease Miraculous Recovery range, which is now infused with repairing ceramides designed to transform frizzy and damaged hair. The Miraculous Recovery Repairing shampoo and conditioner are two of my personal faves, as I could feel the difference in how soft my hair felt after the first use. Not only are the products safe for colour-treated hair, they also made my curls more manageable and easy to style, with the effects lasting for two days, which is amazing considering how quickly my curls can go limp. I also loved how subtle the scent was, and found the most effective way of applying the conditioner was to comb it through my hair with a detangling brush in the shower, as it helps distribute the product evenly. While different curls all need slightly different care, I found the shampoo provided the perfect balance of cleaning build-up on my hair without leaving it dry or flaky. The star of the range was definitely the All-in-1 extra strength serum, which provided extra protection for my colour-treated and chemically treated hair. I love that you can apply this product through wet or dry hair, and it was the perfect way to revive my curls. The Finishing Creme was a bit too thick for my fine, curly hair, but for those with tighter curls or those looking for some extra moisture during more humid days, a light layer of the product would surely tame any flyaways or frizz. With most of their products retailing for around $20 it is an affordable solution to bringing life back into colour-treated and damaged curls. The product can be found in all major supermarkets and pharmacies across <a href="https://www.chemistwarehouse.com.au/shop-online/5571/john-frieda-haircare" target="_blank" rel="noopener">AU</a> and <a href="https://www.chemistwarehouse.co.nz/shop-online/5571/john-frieda-haircare" target="_blank" rel="noopener">NZ</a>. Images: Supplied

Beauty & Style

Aussies outraged over price of staple snack

Australians have expressed outrage over the price of Tim Tams, after one Reddit user spotted the staple snack being sold in stores and online for $6 per pack. “I (remember) when a double pack used to only be about $4.50. F**k this shit,” the user who posted the photo stated. Others blasted the price hike as excessive and "un-Australian". One commenter pointed out that the iconic Australian biscuit was potentially cheaper overseas, despite the import taxes. “That’s in Australia? They’re half that in Canada and they have to import them from Australia,” one said. “Like many other shrunken and quality reduced products I can live without them," another added. Arnott's traditional flavours are currently listed at $6 in Coles and Woolworths, while a family packet will set buyers back $7. An Arnott's spokesperson told the Daily Mail that the price hike was due to increased input costs. “Like most Australian manufacturers, we are experiencing a significant increase in our input costs, including the surging price of cocoa," the spokesperson said. “This has led us to make the difficult decision to increase the price of our Tim Tam biscuits. “We continue to invest in promotional programs with our retailers year-round, to ensure consumers can buy our products at great value prices. ‘The changes are necessary for Arnott’s to remain competitive as an Australian manufacturer and to continue to make the delicious products Australians know and love.” Image: Reddit

Money & Banking

What is competition, and why is it so important for prices?

<div class="theconversation-article-body"> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/paul-blacklow-1546097">Paul Blacklow</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-tasmania-888">University of Tasmania</a> It’s hard to remember a time before the <a href="https://theconversation.com/you-dont-have-to-be-an-economist-to-know-australia-is-in-a-cost-of-living-crisis-what-are-the-signs-and-what-needs-to-change-210373">cost-of-living crisis</a> dominated news headlines. Most of us would certainly like it to be over. But the fundamental question at its heart – which points to the problem we have to solve – seems simple. What determines the prices we pay? The cost of producing goods and services is certainly one big factor in determining how much we pay for them. So, too, is what we’re prepared to fork out. But when we talk about lowering prices, we often also talk about increasing competition – the number of firms vying to sell us a particular offering. It’s so important for efficient pricing that the government body tasked with making our markets fair is called the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission – the “ACCC” for short. But why does having more people trying to sell us things drive down their prices? And can companies find ways to get around this? <h2>More sellers, lower prices</h2> In a free market system, there are a few different types of competition. In the most ideal, a perfectly competitive market, firms must use resources efficiently to produce what we consumers want at the lowest possible cost. In perfect competition: <ul> <li>the products and services traded are identical (or very similar)</li> <li>there are many buyers and sellers</li> <li>information is perfect</li> <li>firms can enter and exit freely.</li> </ul> A firm charging prices well above the minimum cost will sell no goods or services and be forced to leave the market. Why? Because its competitors will be able to steal customers by charging slightly less for exactly the same thing. Only lower-cost firms will remain and compete prices down until they cover the lowest cost of supplying the good or service, plus an average or normal “return on capital”. At a high level, think of this return as an acceptable monetary reward for the business for investing the inputs and taking on the risks required to operate. If ever an industry is earning above-average returns given its level of risk, new firms will enter and charge less, until only normal returns are earned. Conversely, below-normal profits will see firms exit, decreasing supply and raising prices. Do perfectly competitive markets exist? There are arguably some examples that come close, such as casual labour services, some agricultural commodities like grain, livestock and fruit, and financial and currency markets. But there are more examples of less competitive markets. <h2>The winner takes it all</h2> At the opposite extreme, in monopoly markets, there is only one seller of a good or service. Typically, there is some barrier preventing new firms from entering the market and driving prices down. Without government regulation, monopoly firms will reduce supply, increase prices and earn above-normal profit levels. However, sometimes monopolies emerge naturally because it is far more efficient to have a single coordinating supplier of a particular service – such as in letter delivery, rail tracks, or internet infrastructure. To strike a balance, governments typically regulate or own monopolies. <h2>Same same, but different</h2> More common than monopoly is what’s called monopolistic competition, which is the market structure for many of our tech, entertainment and dining goods and services. In monopolistic competition, firms try to make their offering different by investing in R&D and advertising, so that they do not have to compete on price alone. Think Apple’s iPhone versus Samsung’s Galaxy. Both are technically the same kind of product, but have created their own unique markets. Differentiation allows firms to price above minimum cost and earn above-normal rates of return. At least, that is, until new firms enter and imitate them, increasing supply and lowering prices and profits to normal levels. <h2>A few big players hold market power</h2> In Australia, many key goods and services are traded in oligopoly markets. Oligopolies arise when a few large firms dominate a particular industry, such as supermarkets, domestic airlines, banking, mobile telecommunications, and petrol retailing. Some oligopoly markets are very competitive and drive prices down to cost, plus normal return to capital. But in other more concentrated markets with a few powerful firms, firms may have significant market power and be able to keep prices above the competitive level. It is not illegal to possess market power, but according to Australia’s Competition and Consumer Act 2010, it is illegal to use it “for the purpose, effect, or likely effect of substantially lessening competition”. It is illegal, for example, for firms to explicitly work together when setting prices. This is called collusion. Neither can they force suppliers to deal with them exclusively, or set prices below cost when new firms attempt to enter a market. But that doesn’t mean some firms haven’t learned subtle and legal ways of reducing competition. For example, loyalty programs and charging special loss-leading prices can seem at first glance to be good for consumers, but can also increase the <a href="https://theconversation.com/loyalty-programs-may-limit-competition-and-they-could-be-pushing-prices-up-for-everyone-220669">cost of switching</a> to the lowest-priced firm. <h2>Are we getting a good deal?</h2> Still, you may have noticed the prices charged for many goods and services are very similar across different firms in the economy. Have these prices been driven down by competition to their cost plus a normal return to capital? Or are firms abusing their market power to lessen competition in the market? What can we do if firms are reducing competition through legal measures? These are just some of the difficult questions both government and industry are currently grappling with.<img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/234082/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/paul-blacklow-1546097">Paul Blacklow</a>, Lecturer in Economics, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-tasmania-888">University of Tasmania</a> Image credits: Shutterstock This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/what-is-competition-and-why-is-it-so-important-for-prices-234082">original article</a>. </div>

Money & Banking

Young Aussies hit back at Steve Price for calling them "lazy"

Young Aussies have hit back at Steve Price after being criticised as lazy by the broadcaster. Prince unleashed at younger generations on The Project while they were discussing the campaign for more leave initiated by the Shop, Distributive and Allied Employees Association, which is pushing to increase annual leave to five weeks a year. The union hopes to ease burnout in employees, and Price was not impressed with the calls for extra leave. "We're trying to get productivity up in this country," he said. "So we've got people refusing to go back to the office, working from home in barely washed tracksuit tops and bottoms, three days a week. "And now they want five weeks holiday." Georgie Tunny, a millennial, hit back at the boomer by arguing that the "work culture" has changed, especially among those new to the workforce. "Especially for the younger generations, they see work completely differently," she said. Price interrupted her saying that young Aussies just did not want to "work very hard", to which Tunny replied: "There's been a death of your job as your identity or career." Social media users were quick to back Tunny, and took aim at Price. "Where's the incentive for young people to work hard when working hard won't buy you a house or even afford you basic veggies," one said. "You get what you pay for, and it's not worth it to work hard. There's literally no benefit to working as hard as you can," another added. "When you're priced out of the market, priced out of holidays and priced out of necessities, what motivation is there to care or be productive," another added. Others suggested that employers should "increase wages and introduce bonuses as incentives," to encourage their staff to work harder. "Nobody is interested in working themselves to death for scraps," one person said. "I don't want to work very hard for CEOs to make millions while I'm barley able to afford bread," another said. "Our generation is just sick of working hard to have all the higher ups take the credit and the bag. We know what we're worth," a third added. A recent Productivity Commission report found that Aussies born after 1990 are finding more difficult than previous generations to move up the financial ladder. The report also found that young Aussies are increasingly earning less than their parents did at the same age, with the global financial crisis partially to blame for the weak income growth. Images: The Project

Money & Banking

So when should you book that flight? The truth on airline prices

<div class="theconversation-article-body"><a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/yuriy-gorodnichenko-144556">Yuriy Gorodnichenko</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-california-berkeley-754">University of California, Berkeley</a> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/volodymyr-bilotkach-145437">Volodymyr Bilotkach</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/newcastle-university-906">Newcastle University</a> How airlines price tickets is a source of many <a href="http://airtravel.about.com/od/travelindustrynews/a/mythticket.htm">myths</a> and urban legends. These include tips about the best day of the week to buy a ticket, last-minute discounts offered by the airlines, and the conspiracy theories suggesting that the carriers use cookies to increase prices for their passengers. None of these three statements is entirely true. Studies have suggested that prices can be higher or lower on a given day of the week – yet, there is no clear consensus on which day that is. Offered prices can in fact drop at any time before the flight, yet they are much more likely to increase than decrease over the last several weeks before the flight’s departure. Further, the airlines prefer to wait for the last-minute business traveler who’s likely to pay full fare rather than sell the seat prematurely to a price conscious traveler. And no, the airlines do not use cookies to manipulate fare quotes – adjusting their inventory for specific customers appears to be beyond their technical capabilities. What is true about pricing in the airline industry is that carriers use complex and sophisticated pricing systems. The airline’s per passenger cost is the lowest when the flight is full, so carriers have incentive to sell as many seats as possible. This is a race against time for an airline and, of course, no company wants to discount its product more than it has to. Hence, the airlines face two somewhat contradictory goals: to maximize revenue by flying full planes and to sell as many full-fare seats as possible. This a process known in the industry as yield or revenue management. <h2>Airlines and their bucket lists</h2> Here is how <a href="http://commons.erau.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1522&context=jaaer">yield management</a> works. For each flight or route (if we are talking about multi-segment itineraries), the airline has a set of available price levels – from the most expensive fully refundable fare to the cheapest deeply discounted non-refundable price. The industry jargon for these prices is “buckets.” Then, seats can be interpreted as balls that are allocated among these buckets. Initial allocation of seats between the price buckets is determined by historical data indicating how well a certain flight sells. For example, fewer deeply discounted seats will be offered on a flight on Thanksgiving week than on the same flight during the third week of February. As the seats on a flight sell, yield managers monitor and adjust the seat allocation. If, for instance, the sales are slower than expected, some of the seats might be moved to lower-priced buckets – this shows up as a price drop. As noted above, such price drops can occur at any time before the flight. However, the general trend of price quotes is upward starting from about two to three weeks before the flight departure date. Of course, an average traveler wants to know when he or she should buy the tickets for the next trip. Another important question is where to buy this ticket. Airlines distribute their inventory on their own websites and on several computer distribution systems, meaning that prices can sometimes differ depending on where one looks. We are not entirely sure what precipitates this phenomenon – likely explanations include differences in contracts between the airlines and the distribution systems/travel agents, implying that different travel agents may not have access to the airline’s entire inventory of available prices. <h2>When to book</h2> The airlines’ yield managers start looking at flight bookings about two months before the departure date. This implies that it generally does not pay to book more than two months in advance: studies show that initially the airlines leave the cheapest price buckets empty, and yield managers may move some seats into those buckets if a couple of months before the departure date the flight is emptier than expected. Between two months and about two to three weeks before the flight date, the fare quotes remain mostly flat, with a slight upward trend. However, and perhaps paradoxically, there is a good chance of a price drop during this period. We tend to monitor prices for several days – sometimes up to a week – hoping for a potentially lower quote. It does not always pay off, but sometimes we do manage to save a considerable amount of money. Two to three weeks before the flight date, the price quotes start increasing. This is the time when business travelers start booking. While price drops are still possible, a chance of a price increase is much higher if you wait to book within this time period. This is also the time when one can find significant differences between price quotes, depending on where one looks and what contract they have with the airlines. Thus, if we book a trip earlier than three weeks before the flight date, we tend not to delay the purchase. At the same time, we check quotes from multiple travel agents, or go directly to a site that allows for a quick comparison of prices (such as <a href="https://www.kayak.com">kayak.com</a> or <a href="http://www.skyscanner.net">skyscanner.net</a>). Or check the airline itself. As for answering the original question we posed, here are some simple tips. First, if you have to travel during a peak period, such as Thanksgiving week, it is generally best not to delay buying that ticket. Otherwise, it might pay to monitor the offered prices for some time before committing. The best strategy for booking within the last couple of weeks before the flight, however, is not to delay the purchase, but to try getting quotes from several agents, which is easy to do in the internet age.<img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/34033/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/yuriy-gorodnichenko-144556">Yuriy Gorodnichenko</a>, Associate Professor of Economics, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-california-berkeley-754">University of California, Berkeley</a> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/volodymyr-bilotkach-145437">Volodymyr Bilotkach</a>, Senior Lecturer in Economics, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/newcastle-university-906">Newcastle University</a> Image credits: Shutterstock This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/so-when-should-you-book-that-flight-the-truth-on-airline-prices-34033">original article</a>. </div>

Travel Tips

Cheaper mortgages, tamed inflation and even higher home prices: how 29 forecasters see Australia’s economic recovery in 2024-25

<div class="theconversation-article-body"><a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/peter-martin-682709">Peter Martin</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/crawford-school-of-public-policy-australian-national-university-3292">Crawford School of Public Policy, Australian National University</a> Australia’s top economic forecasters expect the Reserve Bank to start cutting interest rates by March next year, taking 0.35 points of its cash rate by June. If passed on in full, the cut would take $125 off the monthly cost of servicing a $600,000 variable-rate mortgage, with more to come. The panel of 29 forecasters assembled by The Conversation expects a further cut of 0.3 points by the end of 2025. This would take the cash rate down from the current 4.35% to 3.75% and produce a total cut in monthly payments on a $600,000 mortgage of $335. The forecasts were produced after last week’s news of a higher than expected <a href="https://theconversation.com/australias-inflation-rate-jumps-to-4-putting-an-rba-rate-rise-back-on-the-agenda-233331">monthly consumers price index</a>. Several of those surveyed revised up their predictions for interest rates in the year ahead, while continuing to predict cuts by mid next year. Only two expect higher rates by mid next year. Only four expect no change. <hr /> <iframe id="6eIe8" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" style="border: none;" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/6eIe8/" width="100%" height="400px" frameborder="0"></iframe> <hr /> Now in its sixth year, The Conversation survey draws on the expertise of leading forecasters in 22 Australian universities, think tanks and financial institutions – among them economic modellers, former Treasury and Reserve Bank officials and a former member of the Reserve Bank board. Eight of the 29 expect the first cut to come this year, by either November or December. One of them is Luci Ellis, who was until recently assistant governor (economic) at the Reserve Bank and is now at Westpac. She and her team are forecasting three interest rate cuts by the middle of next year, taking the cash rate from 4.35% to 3.6%. <h2>Reserve Bank a ‘reluctant hiker’</h2> Ellis says inflation isn’t falling fast enough for the bank to be confident of being able to cut before November. But after that, even if inflation isn’t completely back within the bank’s target band but is merely moving towards it, a “forward-looking” board would want to start easing interest rates. Another forecaster, Su-Lin Ong of RBC Capital Markets, says in her view the bank should hike at its next board meeting in August after the release of figures likely to show inflation is still too high. But she says the bank is a “reluctant hiker” and keen to keep unemployment low. Although several panellists expect the Reserve Bank to hike rates in the months ahead, almost all expect rates to be lower in a year’s time than they are today. <hr /> <iframe id="2xF3M" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" style="border: none;" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/2xF3M/" width="100%" height="400px" frameborder="0"></iframe> <hr /> The panel expects inflation to be back within the Reserve Bank’s 2-3% target band by June next year, and to be close to it (3.3%) by the end of this year. Twelve of the panel expect inflation to climb further when the official figures are released at the end of this month, but none expect it to climb further beyond that. And all expect inflation to be lower by the end of the financial year than it is today. One, Percy Allan, a former head of the NSW Treasury, cautions that the tax cuts and other government support measures due to start this month run the risk of boosting spending and falling progress on inflation. <hr /> <iframe id="LGJa7" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" style="border: none;" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/LGJa7/" width="100%" height="400px" frameborder="0"></iframe> <hr /> The panel expects wages growth to fall from 4% to 3.5% over the year ahead, contributing to downward pressure on inflation, but to remain higher than prices growth, producing gains in so-called <a href="https://www.investopedia.com/terms/r/realincome.asp">real wages</a>. It expects wages growth to moderate further, to 3.2%, in 2025-26. <hr /> <iframe id="iV7mZ" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" style="border: none;" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/iV7mZ/" width="100%" height="400px" frameborder="0"></iframe> <hr /> Consumer spending is expected to remain unusually weak, growing by only 1.7% in real terms over the next 12 months, up from 1.3% in the latest national accounts. Mala Raghavan, from the University of Tasmania, said even though inflation was falling, previous price rises meant the prices of essentials remained high. AMP chief economist Shane Oliver expected the boost from the <a href="https://treasury.gov.au/tax-cuts">Stage 3 tax cuts</a> to be offset by the depressing effect of a weaker labour market. <h2>Unemployment to climb modestly</h2> The panel expects Australia’s unemployment rate to climb steadily from its present historically low 4% to 4.4%. Moodys Analytics economist Harry Murphy Cruise said although the increase wasn’t big, the effect on pay packets would be bigger. Employers were shaving hours and easing back on hiring rather than letting go of workers. <hr /> <iframe id="SM8PI" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" style="border: none;" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/SM8PI/" width="100%" height="400px" frameborder="0"></iframe> <hr /> Panellists expect China’s economic growth to slip from 5.3% to 5% and US growth to slip from 2.9% to 2.4%. Australia’s economic growth is expected to climb from the present very low 1.1% to 1.3% by the end of this year and to 2% by the end of next year. Although none of the panel are forecasting a recession, most of those who offered an opinion said if there was a recession, it would start this year when the economy was weak. Some said we might later discover that we have been in a recession if the very weak economic growth of 0.1% recorded in the March quarter is revised and turns negative when updated figures are released in September. <hr /> <iframe id="3I49o" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" style="border: none;" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/3I49o/1/" width="100%" height="400px" frameborder="0"></iframe> <hr /> Home prices are expected to continue to climb notwithstanding economic weakness. Sydney prices are expected to increase a further 5% in the year ahead after climbing 7.4% in the year to May. Melbourne prices are expected to rise a further 2.8% after climbing 1.8% in the year to May. Percy Allan said Sydney had fewer homes available than Melbourne, and Victoria’s decisions to extend land tax and boost rights for tenants had upset landlords, many of whom were offloading their holdings. <h2>Home prices to climb further</h2> Julie Toth, chief economist at property information firm PEXA, said rapid population growth was colliding with an ongoing decline in household size since COVID. At the same time, fewer new homes were being commissioned and long delays and high construction costs were also keeping supply tight. <hr /> <iframe id="JzLaY" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" style="border: none;" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/JzLaY/" width="100%" height="400px" frameborder="0"></iframe> <hr /> The panel expects non-mining business investment to continue to climb in the year ahead, by 5.2%, down from 6.9%. It expects the Australian share market to climb by a further 5.6% Read the answers on <a href="https://cdn.theconversation.com/static_files/files/3350/2024-25_The_Conversation_AU_Forecasting_Survey.pdf">PDF</a>, download as <a href="https://cdn.theconversation.com/static_files/files/3351/2024-25_The_Conversation_AU_forecasting_survey.xlsx?1719478737">XLS</a> <hr /> <h2>The Conversation’s Economic Panel</h2> Click on economist to see full profile. <iframe id="tc-infographic-1066" class="tc-infographic" style="border: none;" src="https://cdn.theconversation.com/infographics/1066/93fb29ba32e178ec2dcda111f014a50cf7ea1f49/site/index.html" width="100%" height="400px" frameborder="0"></iframe><img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/233244/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/peter-martin-682709">Peter Martin</a>, Visiting Fellow, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/crawford-school-of-public-policy-australian-national-university-3292">Crawford School of Public Policy, Australian National University</a> Image credits: Shutterstock This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/cheaper-mortgages-tamed-inflation-and-even-higher-home-prices-how-29-forecasters-see-australias-economic-recovery-in-2024-25-233244">original article</a>. </div>

Money & Banking

How would a switch to nuclear affect electricity prices for households and industry?

<div class="theconversation-article-body"><a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/roger-dargaville-1832">Roger Dargaville</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/monash-university-1065">Monash University</a> Peter Dutton has announced that under a Coalition government, seven nuclear power stations would be built around the country over the next 15 years. Experts have declared nuclear power would be <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-06-20/power-prices-wont-fall-with-nuclear/103998172">expensive</a> and <a href="https://www.afr.com/politics/federal/nuclear-to-cost-17b-and-take-until-2040-to-build-csiro-20240521-p5jfaj#:%7E:text=Nuclear%20could%20cost%20up%20to,until%202040%20to%20build%3A%20CSIRO&text=Peter%20Dutton's%20nuclear%20energy%20plans,operational%20until%20at%20least%202040.">slow to build</a>. But what might happen to energy prices if the Coalition were to win government and implement this plan? <h2>How might we estimate the cost of nuclear?</h2> By 2035, 50–60% of the existing coal-fired fleet will very likely <a href="https://aemo.com.au/-/media/files/stakeholder_consultation/consultations/nem-consultations/2023/draft-2024-isp-consultation/draft-2024-isp.pdf">have been retired</a>, including Vales Point B, Gladstone, Yallourn, Bayswater and Eraring – all of which will have passed 50 years old. These five generators contribute just over 10 gigawatts of capacity. It’s probably not a coincidence that the seven nuclear plants proposed by Dutton would also contribute roughly 10 gigawatts in total if built. Neither my team at Monash University nor the Australian Energy Market Operator has run modelling scenarios to delve into the details of what might happen to electricity prices under a high-uptake nuclear scenario such as the one proposed by the Coalition. That said, we can make some broad assumptions based on a metric known as the “levelised cost of electricity”. This value takes into account: <ul> <li> how much it costs to build a particular technology </li> <li> how long it takes to build </li> <li> the cost to operate the plant </li> <li> its lifetime </li> <li> and very importantly, its capacity factor. </li> </ul> Capacity factor is how much electricity a technology produces in real life, compared with its theoretical maximum output. For example, a nuclear power station would likely run at 90–95% of its full capacity. A solar farm, on the other hand, will run at just 20–25% of its maximum, primarily because it’s night for half of the time, and cloudy some of the time. CSIRO recently published its <a href="https://www.csiro.au/en/research/technology-space/energy/gencost">GenCost</a> report, which outlines the current and projected build and operational costs for a range of energy technologies. It reports that large-scale nuclear generated electricity would cost between A$155 and $252 per megawatt-hour, falling to between $136 and $226 per megawatt-hour by 2040. The report bases these costs on recent projects in South Korea, but doesn’t consider some other cases where costs have blown out dramatically. The most obvious case is that of <a href="https://www.edf.fr/en/the-edf-group/dedicated-sections/journalists/all-press-releases/hinkley-point-c-update-1">Hinkley Point C nuclear plant</a> in the United Kingdom. This <a href="https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/edfs-nuclear-project-britain-pushed-back-2029-may-cost-up-34-bln-2024-01-23/">3.2GW</a> plant, which is being built by French company EDF, was recently <a href="https://www.edf.fr/en/the-edf-group/dedicated-sections/journalists/all-press-releases/hinkley-point-c-update-1">reported</a> to be now costing around £34 billion (about A$65 billion). That’s about A$20,000 per kilowatt. CSIRO’s GenCost report assumed a value of $8,655 per kilowatt for nuclear, so the true levelised cost of electricity of nuclear power in Australia may end up being twice as expensive as CSIRO has calculated. <hr /> <iframe id="Aryx7" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" style="border: none;" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/Aryx7/4/" width="100%" height="400px" frameborder="0"></iframe> <hr /> <h2>Other factors play a role, too</h2> Another factor not accounted for in the GenCost assumptions is that Australia does not have a nuclear industry. Virtually all the niche expertise would need to be imported. And very large infrastructure projects have a nasty habit of <a href="https://www.cis.org.au/publication/bungles-blowouts-and-boondoggles-why-australias-infrastructure-projects-cost-more-than-they-should/">blowing out in cost</a> – think of Snowy 2.0, Sydney’s light rail project, and the West Gate Tunnel in Victoria. Reasons include higher local wages, regulations and standards plus aversion from lenders to risk that increases cost of capital. These factors would not bode well for nuclear. In CSIRO’s GenCost report, the levelised cost of electricity produced from coal is $100–200 per megawatt-hour, and for gas it’s $120–160 per megawatt-hour. Solar and wind energy work out to be approximately $60 and $90 per megawatt-hour, respectively. But it’s not a fair comparison, as wind and solar are not “dispatchable” but are dependent on the availability of the resource. When you combine the cost of a mix of wind and solar energy and storage, along with the cost of getting the renewable energy into the grid, renewables end up costing $100–120 per megawatt-hour, similar to coal. If we were to have a nuclear-based system (supplemented by gas to meet the higher demands in the mornings and evenings), the costs would likely be much higher – potentially as much as three to four times if cost blowouts similar to Hinkley Point C were to occur (assuming costs were passed on to electricity consumers. Otherwise, taxpayers in general would bear the burden. Either way, it’s more or less the same people). <h2>But what about the impact on your household energy bill?</h2> Well, here the news is marginally better. Typical retail tariffs are 25-30 cents per kilowatt-hour, which is $250–300 per megawatt-hour. The largest component of your energy bill is not the cost of generation of the electricity; rather, it’s the cost of getting the power from the power stations to your home or business. In very approximate terms, this is made up of the market average costs of generation, transmission and distribution, as well as retailer margin and other minor costs. The transmission and distribution costs will not be significantly different under the nuclear scenario compared with the current system. And the additional transmission costs associated with the more distributed nature of renewables (meaning these renewable projects are all over the country) is included in the estimate. According to my back-of-the-envelope calculations, your retail tariff under the nuclear scenario could be 40–50c per kilowatt-hour. But if you are a large energy consumer such as an aluminium smelter, you pay considerably less per kilowatt-hour as you don’t incur the same network or retailer costs (but the cost of generating electricity in the first place makes up a much bigger proportion of the total cost). So if the cost of electricity generation soars, this hypothetical aluminium smelter’s energy costs will soar too. This would be a severe cost burden on Australian industry that has traditionally relied on cheap electricity (although it’s been a while since electricity could be described as cheap). <h2>A likely increase in energy costs</h2> In summary, in a free market, it is very unlikely nuclear could be competitive. But if a future Coalition government were to bring nuclear into the mix, energy costs for residential and especially industrial customers would very likely increase.<img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/232913/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/roger-dargaville-1832">Roger Dargaville</a>, Director Monash Energy Institute, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/monash-university-1065">Monash University</a> Image credits: Shutterstock This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/how-would-a-switch-to-nuclear-affect-electricity-prices-for-households-and-industry-232913">original article</a>. </div>

Money & Banking

Steve Price fires up over Dan Andrews' special honour

Steve Price has sparked a bitter row on-air with his co-hosts of The Project, as he spoke out against former premier Dan Andrews being named on the King’s Honours list this year. Andrews, the former premier of Victoria who saw the state through the Covid pandemic, has been recognised on the prestigious list for his “eminent service to the people and parliament of Victoria, to public health, to policy and regulatory reform, and to infrastructure development”. After the announcement of Andrews' upcoming recognition, Price let loose on The Project as he condemned the former premier. “It’s got to be some sort of sick joke,” he said as he began his rant. “Who would expect Daniel Andrews would get the highest honour that you can possibly get from the King? It’s the equivalent of a Knighthood! This is a bloke who locked Victoria up longer than anywhere else in the word. Apart from Covid, this bloke wasted 600 million dollars not holding the Commonwealth Games.” <blockquote class="instagram-media" style="background: #FFF; border: 0; border-radius: 3px; box-shadow: 0 0 1px 0 rgba(0,0,0,0.5),0 1px 10px 0 rgba(0,0,0,0.15); margin: 1px; max-width: 540px; min-width: 326px; padding: 0; width: calc(100% - 2px);" data-instgrm-permalink="https://www.instagram.com/reel/C8B5Ft8Pe0k/?utm_source=ig_embed&utm_campaign=loading" data-instgrm-version="14"> <div style="padding: 16px;"> <div style="display: flex; flex-direction: row; align-items: center;"> <div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 50%; flex-grow: 0; height: 40px; margin-right: 14px; width: 40px;"> </div> <div style="display: flex; flex-direction: column; flex-grow: 1; justify-content: center;"> <div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 4px; flex-grow: 0; height: 14px; margin-bottom: 6px; width: 100px;"> </div> <div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 4px; flex-grow: 0; height: 14px; width: 60px;"> </div> </div> </div> <div style="padding: 19% 0;"> </div> <div style="display: block; height: 50px; margin: 0 auto 12px; width: 50px;"> </div> <div style="padding-top: 8px;"> <div style="color: #3897f0; font-family: Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 14px; font-style: normal; font-weight: 550; line-height: 18px;">View this post on Instagram</div> </div> <div style="padding: 12.5% 0;"> </div> <div style="display: flex; flex-direction: row; margin-bottom: 14px; align-items: center;"> <div> <div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 50%; height: 12.5px; width: 12.5px; transform: translateX(0px) translateY(7px);"> </div> <div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; height: 12.5px; transform: rotate(-45deg) translateX(3px) translateY(1px); width: 12.5px; flex-grow: 0; margin-right: 14px; margin-left: 2px;"> </div> <div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 50%; height: 12.5px; width: 12.5px; transform: translateX(9px) translateY(-18px);"> </div> </div> <div style="margin-left: 8px;"> <div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 50%; flex-grow: 0; height: 20px; width: 20px;"> </div> <div style="width: 0; height: 0; border-top: 2px solid transparent; border-left: 6px solid #f4f4f4; border-bottom: 2px solid transparent; transform: translateX(16px) translateY(-4px) rotate(30deg);"> </div> </div> <div style="margin-left: auto;"> <div style="width: 0px; border-top: 8px solid #F4F4F4; border-right: 8px solid transparent; transform: translateY(16px);"> </div> <div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; flex-grow: 0; height: 12px; width: 16px; transform: translateY(-4px);"> </div> <div style="width: 0; height: 0; border-top: 8px solid #F4F4F4; border-left: 8px solid transparent; transform: translateY(-4px) translateX(8px);"> </div> </div> </div> <div style="display: flex; flex-direction: column; flex-grow: 1; justify-content: center; margin-bottom: 24px;"> <div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 4px; flex-grow: 0; height: 14px; margin-bottom: 6px; width: 224px;"> </div> <div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 4px; flex-grow: 0; height: 14px; width: 144px;"> </div> </div> <p style="color: #c9c8cd; font-family: Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 17px; margin-bottom: 0; margin-top: 8px; overflow: hidden; padding: 8px 0 7px; text-align: center; text-overflow: ellipsis; white-space: nowrap;"><a style="color: #c9c8cd; font-family: Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 14px; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: 17px; text-decoration: none;" href="https://www.instagram.com/reel/C8B5Ft8Pe0k/?utm_source=ig_embed&utm_campaign=loading" target="_blank" rel="noopener">A post shared by The Project (@theprojecttv)</a> </div> </blockquote> He continued, “Every infrastructure project he’s [Andrews] ticked off on is either over budget or over time. And we give him an award? I mean it is pathetic!” “I have never heard people today so angry about something like this. Daniel Andrews should be run out of the State, not given an award. It’s pathetic!” As co-host Waleed Aly began to share his own thoughts on the matter, Price butted in to ask, “You’re not going to defend Andrews are you?” “Will you let me say something?” replied Aly awkwardly, as Price nodded his head. “Premiers usually get these awards, but they don’t usually get them this quickly,” continued Aly. “And the weird thing about this is that it isn’t for services to the State, it’s for services to health. And that makes it about the pandemic disproportionately. If this was happening in a few years, I don’t think we’d be having this conversation.” Despite Price's claims that many were angry with the decision to award Andrews with the honour, it turns out most of the outrage was directed towards Price himself as many condemned his "embarrassing" rant. “What criteria is The Project applying to Steve Prices opinion? The short man is a self serving blowhard that has no credible platform for his opinions. Surely in 2024 there are better options in Australia,” ranted one annoyed viewer. A second person commented, “If it makes Steve Price mad then it’s a great decision!!” with another replying, “Like anybody should give credibility to anything Steve Price says”. The onslaught of remarks didn’t end there, with another firing back, “Steve Price is jealous and miserable,” while a similarly annoyed viewer wrote, “Dan living rent free in Price’s head, embarrassing”. Image credits: The Project / AMES ROSS/EPA-EFE / Shutterstock Editorial

Yes, Australia’s big supermarkets have been price gouging. But fixing the problem won’t be easy

<div class="theconversation-article-body"><a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/bree-hurst-174985">Bree Hurst</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/queensland-university-of-technology-847">Queensland University of Technology</a>; <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/carol-richards-153226">Carol Richards</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/queensland-university-of-technology-847">Queensland University of Technology</a>; <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/hope-johnson-125018">Hope Johnson</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/queensland-university-of-technology-847">Queensland University of Technology</a>, and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/rudolf-messner-1373038">Rudolf Messner</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/queensland-university-of-technology-847">Queensland University of Technology</a> A much-awaited report into Coles and Woolworths has found what many customers have long believed – Australia’s big supermarkets engage in price gouging. What <a href="https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Senate/Supermarket_Prices/SupermarketPrices/Terms_of_Reference">started</a> as a simple Senate inquiry into grocery prices and supermarket power has delivered a lengthy 195-page-long <a href="https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Senate/Supermarket_Prices/SupermarketPrices/Supermarket_Prices">report</a> spanning supermarket pricing’s impact on customers, food waste, relationships with suppliers, employee wages and conditions, excessive profitability, company mergers and land banking. The report makes some major recommendations, including giving courts the power to break up anti-competitive businesses, and strengthening the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC). It also recommends making the Food and Grocery Code of Conduct mandatory for supermarket chains. This code governs how they should deal with suppliers. The government’s recent <a href="https://treasury.gov.au/consultation/c2024-510813">Independent Review of the Food and Grocery Code</a> also recommended making it mandatory for the supermarket giants. But at this point it’s hard to say what, if anything, the recommendations will mean for everyday Australians and the prices they actually pay. <h2>Price gouging isn’t illegal</h2> At the heart of the Senate inquiry was the question of whether Australian supermarkets were price gouging. According to the committee, the answer is a “resounding yes”, despite the evidence presented by supermarkets to the contrary. Price gouging is when businesses exploit a lack of competition by setting prices well above cost price. But the practice is <a href="https://www.accc.gov.au/consumers/pricing/setting-prices-whats-allowed">not explicitly illegal</a>. The committee put forward a number of recommendations that could help reduce price gouging. These include making it an offence to charge excess prices and establishing a new “Commission on Prices and Competition” to examine price setting practices in different sectors. The committee also wants the ACCC to be given enhanced powers to investigate and prosecute unfair trading practices, and to be better funded and resourced. The committee says supermarket claims that price gouging does not exist should mean the giants have nothing to fear under tougher legislation. However, it says: <blockquote> the evidence brought forward by people willing to speak out about the business practices of Coles and Woolworths suggests that maintaining margins and increasing margin growth is occurring at the expense of suppliers, consumers, and best business practices, and without proper justification. </blockquote> <h2>It’s unlikely we’ll see relief anytime soon</h2> Will these recommendations actually deliver any relief on prices? It’s hard to say at this point. The recommendations put forward are comprehensive, but they’re unlikely to result in any short-term change for consumers. At any rate, the Albanese government does not support many of them. In the report’s additional commentary, Labor senators argue that Australian competition law already addresses excessive pricing by prohibiting misleading and deceptive conduct. They also don’t support establishing a new commission to examine prices. Rather, the report calls for a dramatic overhaul of current regulatory settings, which it says are “not appropriate or fit for purpose”. This is not going to be an easy or fast process. <h2>What does the report mean for the Greens’ divestiture bill?</h2> While the inquiry was underway, the Greens <a href="https://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/search/display/display.w3p;page=0;query=BillId%3As1413%20Recstruct%3Abillhome">introduced a bill</a> which would give courts “divestiture powers”. This means a corporation could be ordered to sell some of its assets to reduce its market power. While the bill lacks support from the major parties, the committee suggested that such divestiture powers should be introduced specifically for the supermarket sector. Where abuse of market power was able to be proven, supermarkets could be forced to sell certain stores. While Australia does not have divestiture powers in this context, some other countries do. In New Zealand, the UK and the US, courts can force corporations that are abusing their market power to sell components of their business. Such powers are very rarely used, but the deterrent they impose can be <a href="https://theconversation.com/its-time-to-give-australian-courts-the-power-to-break-up-big-firms-that-behave-badly-226726">highly influential</a> on corporate behaviour. Labor rejects creating any forms of divestiture power in the report’s additional commentary. But the Coalition isn’t entirely against the idea, noting that it “does not believe the committee has persuasively found that divestiture powers should not be pursued at all” and that “divestiture powers should be targeted to sectors of concern”. <h2>What’s next?</h2> At this stage, the report suggests there’s only one action all political parties agree on at this stage: making the Food and Grocery Code of Conduct mandatory and ensuring its full enforcement. We’re unlikely to see much unity on the other recommendations. In a scathing commentary, the Coalition argues the report represents “a missed opportunity to address some of the structural imbalances in our supermarket sector that are impacting Australia’s growers, farmers, small businesses, and ultimately consumers”. While this is a harsh assessment, the reality is that unless these structural imbalances in our food system are addressed, we’re unlikely to see meaningful change. The report draws on substantial evidence to paint a troubling picture of the food system in Australia – in particular, how growers and consumers are struggling. The task for regulators is working out what mechanisms can be used to address the imbalance of power in the market, in a way that doesn’t force growers or Australian consumers to bear the cost.<img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/229602/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/bree-hurst-174985">Bree Hurst</a>, Associate Professor, Faculty of Business and Law, QUT, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/queensland-university-of-technology-847">Queensland University of Technology</a>; <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/carol-richards-153226">Carol Richards</a>, Professor, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/queensland-university-of-technology-847">Queensland University of Technology</a>; <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/hope-johnson-125018">Hope Johnson</a>, ARC DECRA Fellow, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/queensland-university-of-technology-847">Queensland University of Technology</a>, and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/rudolf-messner-1373038">Rudolf Messner</a>, Postdoctoral Research Fellow, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/queensland-university-of-technology-847">Queensland University of Technology</a> Image credit: Shutterstock This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/yes-australias-big-supermarkets-have-been-price-gouging-but-fixing-the-problem-wont-be-easy-229602">original article</a>. </div>

Money & Banking

Adorable Collie sells for world record-breaking price

A border collie has been sold for a world record-breaking amount at the Ray White Rockhampton Working Dog Sale and Trial. Helen and James Parker paid $40,000 for Liz, a border collie who they describe as the "whole package". The couple, who run a wagyu cattle farm in Monto, Queensland are keen to welcome the pup who will help them muster cattle as part of the day-to-day running of the farm. "We leave in the morning early, they might do three to four hours mustering in the morning, then we get the cattle to the yard and then in the afternoon we'll walk them away," Helen said. "Our mustering round's about a week, so all day for a week, so some big days and it's hot up here in summer so they need to be able to travel and follow us on a horse and big days in hot conditions so we can't do the job without them." Liz, who was raised by Joe Leven, is the second dog the couple have purchased from Joe, and they say the price was worth it. "We weren't planning on breaking records but we're happy to have her," Helen told 2GB's Ben Fordham. "She's the whole package, she's got breeding behind her, she has all herding ability, natural instinct. I just think she's a great asset to our team." Although Liz is an unusual name for a cattle dog, it is actually a tribute to the late Queen Elizabeth. "Joe named them and there's a bit of a story behind how Liz got her name. She was born the year that Queen Elizabeth passed away, so she's really upheld her name, she's the queen," Helen explained. The Rockhampton Working Dog trial and Sale was a success for Joe and Cabra Glebe Working Dogs, who managed to sell another dog, Jenny for $38,000. Image: Ray White Working dog sale Facebook

Family & Pets

"You will be a massive failure": Steve Price unleashes on Kyle Sandilands

The feud between Steve Price and Kyle Sandilands has taken a new turn, as Price unleashed on Sandilands over the launch of The Kyle and Jackie O Show in Melbourne. The Project panel were discussing the show's first episode in the Victorian capital which was met with a mixed reception, given the use of coarse language. Price took the discussion to the next level as he made it clear he is not a fan of the KIISFM show or its host. “Kyle, last time I mentioned you on this program I called you a grubby buffoon. That was a compliment in hindsight,” Price said on Monday night's episode of The Project. “That garbage you put to air this morning, sexualised rubbish, toxic, nobody should listen to it and you will be a massive failure in Melbourne.” Price continued his tirade, accusing Sandilands of sending him a “threatening message” last November after his “grubby buffoon” comments, and he dared the KIIS FM star to “do it again”. He ended the spray by saying, “I do note that you didn’t have the guts to sit down and do an interview with me to talk about your new radio show, perhaps because you’ve got the intellect of a cumquat”. Sandilands responded to Price's comments live on air on Tuesday morning, taking aim at the co-host and the show at large. “[The Project] is no good,” he said about the Channel 10 program. “It’s a piece of s**t”. “No one watches it, and they don’t like us.” As for Price's claims, Sandilands accused the fellow broadcaster of being “fake”, and claimed that Price sent a revealing note to his manager last month. The note allegedly said, “I’m very aware Kyle and I have had some interesting whacks at each other over the years but as we know, it’s all part of the game.” “See, I’m right, it is feigned outrage,” Sandilands said. “Does he mean what he says or is he just full of s**t?” Kyle and Jackie O tried to call Price on Tuesday morning to address their ongoing feud, but he didn’t answer. Image credits: The Project / Instagram

Loyalty programs may limit competition, and they could be pushing prices up for everyone

<a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/alexandru-nichifor-1342216">Alexandru Nichifor</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/the-university-of-melbourne-722">The University of Melbourne</a> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/scott-duke-kominers-1494057">Scott Duke Kominers</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/harvard-university-1306">Harvard University</a> Loyalty programs enable firms to offer significantly lower prices to some of their customers. You’d think this would encourage strong competition. But that isn’t always what actually happens. <a href="https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4377561">New research</a> shows that paradoxically, by changing the way companies target customers, loyalty programs can sometimes reduce price competition. The research also points to solutions. <h2>A win-win proposition?</h2> Joining a loyalty program is supposed to be a win-win. You – the customer – get to enjoy perks and discounts, while the company gains useful commercial insights and builds brand allegiance. For example, a hotel chain loyalty program might reward travellers for frequent stays, with points redeemable for future bookings, upgrades or other benefits. The hotel chain, in turn, records and analyses how you spend money and encourages you to stay with them again. Such programs are commonplace across many industries – appearing everywhere from travel and accommodation to supermarket or petrol retailing. But they are increasingly coming under scrutiny. In 2019, the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) <a href="https://www.accc.gov.au/about-us/publications/customer-loyalty-schemes-final-report">cautioned</a> consumers about the sheer volume of personal data collected when participating in a loyalty program, and what companies can do with it. Hidden costs – such as having to pay a redemption fee on rewards or losing benefits when points expire – are another way these schemes can harm consumers. But a larger question – how loyalty programs impact consumers overall – remains difficult to settle, because their effect on competitiveness is unclear. As the ACCC’s <a href="https://www.accc.gov.au/about-us/publications/customer-loyalty-schemes-final-report">final report</a> notes, on the one hand: "Loyalty schemes can have pro-competitive effects and intensify competition between rivals leading to competing loyalty discounts and lower prices for consumers." But on the other hand: "Loyalty schemes can also reduce the flexibility of consumers’ buying patterns and responsiveness to competing offers, which may reduce competition." <h2>How a two-speed price system can hurt everyone</h2> A new economic theory research <a href="https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4377561">working paper</a>, coauthored by one of us (Kominers), suggests that on competitive grounds alone, loyalty programs can sometimes harm all consumers – both ordinary shoppers and the program’s own members. It’s easy to see how the ordinary shopper can be worse off. Since a firm’s loyalty program enables it to offer discounted prices to its members, the firm can raise the base prices it offers to everyone else. Those not participating in the program pay more than they otherwise would have, and the firm can respond by saying “join our program!” instead of having to lower its price. But sometimes, even the program’s own members can end up worse off. When a given customer’s loyalty status is not visible to a firm’s competitors – as is the case in many loyalty programs today – it’s hard for those competitors to identify them and entice them to switch. The main way to compete for those customers becomes to lower the base price for everyone, but this means missing out on the high base margins achieved through the existence of your own loyalty program – remember, having a loyalty program means you can charge non-members more. It’s often more profitable for firms to just maintain high base prices. This, in turn, reduces overall price competition for loyal customers, so firms can raise prices for them, too. <h2>What’s the solution?</h2> Despite these effects on competition, loyalty programs still offer benefits for consumers and an opportunity for brands to form closer relationships with them. So, how do we preserve these benefits while enabling price competition? The research suggests an answer: making a customer’s loyalty status verifiable, transparent and portable across firms. This would make it possible for firms to tailor offers for their competitors’ loyal customers. This is already happening in the market for retail electricity. While there aren’t loyalty programs there per se, a consumer’s energy consumption profile, which could be used by a competitor to calibrate a personalised offer, is known only to their current electricity supplier. To address this, in 2015, the Victorian government launched a <a href="https://compare.energy.vic.gov.au">program</a> encouraging households to compare energy offers. This process involved first revealing a customer’s energy consumption profile to the market, and then asking retailers to compete via personalised offers. By opening information that might have otherwise been hidden to the broader market, this approach enabled firms to compete for each other’s top customers, in a way that could be emulated for loyalty programs. Such systems in the private sector could build upon “<a href="https://thepointsguy.com/guide/airline-status-matches-challenges/">status match</a>” policies at airlines. These allow direct transfer of loyalty status, but currently rely on a lengthy, individual-level verification process. For example, a design paradigm known as “<a href="https://hbr.org/2022/05/what-is-web3">Web3</a>” – where customer transactions and loyalty statuses are recorded on public, shared blockchain ledgers – offers a way to make loyalty transparent across the market. This would enable an enhanced, decentralised version of status match: a firm could use blockchain records to verifiably identify who its competitors’ loyal customers are, and directly incentivise them to switch. Both startups and established firms have experimented with building such systems. <h2>What next?</h2> New academic research helps us model and better understand when loyalty programs could be weakening supply side competition and undermining consumer welfare. A neat universal solution may prove elusive. But targeted government or industry interventions – centred on increasing the transparency of a customer’s loyalty status and letting them move it between firms – could help level the playing field between firms and consumers.<img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/220669/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/alexandru-nichifor-1342216">Alexandru Nichifor</a>, Associate Professor, Faculty of Business and Economics, University of Melbourne, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/the-university-of-melbourne-722">The University of Melbourne</a> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/scott-duke-kominers-1494057">Scott Duke Kominers</a>, Sarofim-Rock Professor of Business Administration, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/harvard-university-1306">Harvard University</a> Image credits: Getty Images This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/loyalty-programs-may-limit-competition-and-they-could-be-pushing-prices-up-for-everyone-220669">original article</a>.

Money & Banking

Think $5.50 is too much for a flat white? Actually it’s too cheap, and our world-famous cafes are paying the price

<a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/emma-felton-143029">Emma Felton</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-south-australia-1180">University of South Australia</a> Even in a stubborn cost-of-living crisis, it seems there’s one luxury most Australians <a href="https://www.comparethemarket.com.au/news/what-australians-wont-give-up-cost-of-living-crisis-report/">won’t sacrifice</a> – their daily cup of coffee. Coffee sales have largely <a href="https://www.statista.com/statistics/866543/australia-domestic-consumption-of-coffee/">remained stable</a>, even as financial pressures have bitten over the past few years. So too have prices. Though many of us became upset when prices began to creep up last year, they’ve since largely settled in the range between $4.00 and $5.50 for a basic drink. But this could soon have to change. By international standards, Australian coffee prices are low. No one wants to pay more for essentials, least of all right now. But our independent cafes are struggling. By not valuing coffee properly, we risk losing the <a href="https://bizcup.com.au/australian-coffee-culture/">internationally renowned</a> coffee culture we’ve worked so hard to create, and the phenomenal quality of cup we enjoy. <h2>Coffee is relatively cheap in Australia</h2> Our recent survey of Australian capital cities found the average price of a small takeaway flat white at speciality venues is A$4.78. But in <a href="https://pabloandrustys.com.au/blogs/drinkbettercoffee/global-coffee-prices">some international capitals</a>, it’s almost double this, even after adjusting for local <a href="https://www.investopedia.com/updates/purchasing-power-parity-ppp/">purchasing power parity</a>. <iframe id="gaplH" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" style="border: none;" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/gaplH/" width="100%" height="400px" frameborder="0"></iframe> In London, a small flat white costs about A$6.96. Singapore, A$8.42. In Athens, as much as A$9.95. <h2>The cafe business is getting harder</h2> Over the past few decades, coffee prices haven’t kept pace with input costs. In the early 2000s, after wages, food costs, utilities and rent, many cafes <a href="https://www.coffeecommune.com.au/blog-why-are-cafes-so-expensive/">earned healthy profit margins</a> as high as 20%. The <a href="https://www.ibisworld.com/au/industry/cafes-coffee-shops/2015/">most recent data from IBISWorld</a> show that while Australian cafe net profits have recovered from a drop in 2020, at 7.6%, they remain much lower than the Australian <a href="https://www.money.com.au/research/australian-business-statistics">average business profit margin of 13.3%</a>. For an independent owner operating a cafe with the <a href="https://www.ibisworld.com/au/industry/cafes-coffee-shops/2015/">average turnover of A$300,000</a>, this would amount to a meagre A$22,800 annual net profit after all the bills are paid. <h2>What goes into a cup?</h2> Just looking at the cost of raw inputs – milk, beans, a cup and a lid – might make the margin seem lucrative. But they don’t paint the whole picture. <figure class="align-center "><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/584949/original/file-20240328-24-rlngpk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/584949/original/file-20240328-24-rlngpk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/584949/original/file-20240328-24-rlngpk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/584949/original/file-20240328-24-rlngpk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/584949/original/file-20240328-24-rlngpk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=754&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/584949/original/file-20240328-24-rlngpk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=754&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/584949/original/file-20240328-24-rlngpk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=754&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" alt="A takeaway coffee cup showing the price inputs, with wages and operation costs making up over 65% of the cost of a coffee" /><figcaption>Chart: The Conversation. <a class="source" href="https://pabloandrustys.com.au/blogs/drinkbettercoffee/whats-in-the-cost-of-coffee">Data: Pablo and Rusty's Coffee Roasters</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/">CC BY-SA</a></figcaption></figure> Over the past few years, renting the building, keeping the lights on and paying staff have all become <a href="https://www.reuters.com/business/ground-down-australia-coffee-shops-an-early-inflation-casualty-2023-07-10/">much bigger factors</a> in the equation for coffee shop owners, and many of these pressures aren’t easing. 1. Green coffee price Increasingly <a href="https://www.aa.com.tr/en/environment/brewing-crisis-how-climate-change-is-reshaping-coffee-production/3113886">subject to the effects</a> of climate change, the baseline commodity price of green (unroasted) coffee is <a href="https://perfectdailygrind.com/2024/02/demand-for-robusta-prices-record-high/">going up</a>. Arabica – the higher quality bean you’re most likely drinking at specialty cafes – is a more expensive raw product. Despite levelling off from post-pandemic highs, its price is still trending up. In 2018, it <a href="https://www.statista.com/statistics/675807/average-prices-arabica-and-robusta-coffee-worldwide/">sold</a> for US$2.93 per kilogram, which is projected to increase to US$4.38 dollars in 2025. Robusta coffee is cheaper, and is the type <a href="https://www.lavazza.com.au/en/coffee-secrets/difference-type-arabica-robusta-coffee">typically used to make instant coffee</a>. But serious drought in Vietnam has just pushed the price of robusta to an <a href="https://www.barchart.com/story/news/25094367/coffee-rallies-with-robusta-at-a-record-high-on-shrinking-coffee-output-in-vietnam">all-time high</a>, putting pressure on the cost of coffee more broadly. 2. Milk prices The price of fresh milk has risen by <a href="https://cdn-prod.dairyaustralia.com.au/-/media/project/dairy-australia-sites/national-home/resources/reports/situation-and-outlook/situation-and-outlook-report-march-2024.pdf?rev=b0222df4b01b40d0ae36cf8ac7b01bc0">more than 20%</a> over the past two years, and remains at a peak. This has put sustained cost pressure on the production of our <a href="https://gitnux.org/australian-coffee-consumption-statistics/#:%7E:text=Coffee%20is%20a%20beloved%20beverage,approximately%206%20billion%20cups%20annually.">most popular drink orders</a>: cappuccinos and flat whites. 3. Wages and utilities Over the past year, Australian wages have grown at their <a href="https://ministers.treasury.gov.au/ministers/jim-chalmers-2022/media-releases/real-wages-growth-back">fastest rate</a> since 2009, which is welcome news for cafe staff, but tough on operators in a sector with low margins. Electricity prices remain elevated after significant inflation, but could <a href="https://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/heres-how-much-your-energy-bills-might-go-down-by-and-when/k8g00jheg">begin to fall mid-year</a>. <h2>Specialty vs. commodity coffee: why price expectations create an industry divide</h2> One of the key factors keeping prices low in Australia is consumer expectation. For many people coffee is a fundamental part of everyday life, a marker of livability. Unlike wine or other alcohol, coffee is not considered a luxury or even a treat, where one might expect to pay a little more, or reduce consumption when times are economically tough. We anchor on familiar prices. <iframe id="oDbah" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" style="border: none;" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/oDbah/" width="100%" height="400px" frameborder="0"></iframe> Because of this, it really hurts cafe owners to put their prices up. In touch with their customer base almost every day, they’re acutely aware of how much inflation can hurt. But in Australia, a huge proportion of coffee companies are also passionate about creating a world-class product by only using “<a href="https://medium.com/@samandsunrise/why-is-specialty-coffee-so-expensive-6cf298935e4b#:%7E:text=Specialty%20Shops%20Feature%20High%20Grade%20Coffees&text=Their%20coffees%20are%20hand%2Dpicked,even%20on%20the%20same%20tree.">specialty coffee</a>”. Ranked at least 80 on a quality scale, specialty beans cost significant more than commodity grade, but their production offers better working conditions for farmers and encourages more sustainable growing practices. Although not commensurate with the wine industry, there are similarities. Single origin, high quality beans are often sourced from one farm and demand higher prices than commodity grade coffee, where cheaper sourced beans are often combined in a blend. Running a specialty cafe can also mean roasting your own beans, which requires a big investment in expertise and equipment. It’s an obvious example of doing the right thing by your suppliers and customers. But specialty cafes face much higher operating costs, and when they’re next to a commodity-grade competitor, customers are typically unwillingly to pay the difference. <h2>Approach price rises with curiosity, not defensiveness</h2> When cafe owners put up their prices, we often rush to accuse them of selfishness or profiteering. But they’re often just trying to survive. Given the quality of our coffee and its global reputation, it shouldn’t surprise us if we’re soon asked to pay a little bit more for our daily brew. If we are, we should afford the people who create one of our most important “<a href="https://theconversation.com/how-cafes-bars-gyms-barbershops-and-other-third-places-create-our-social-fabric-135530">third spaces</a>” kindness and curiosity as to why. <img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/226015/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/emma-felton-143029">Emma Felton</a>, Adjunct Senior Researcher, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-south-australia-1180">University of South Australia</a> Image credits: Getty Images This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/think-5-50-is-too-much-for-a-flat-white-actually-its-too-cheap-and-our-world-famous-cafes-are-paying-the-price-226015">original article</a>.

Money & Banking

Qantas announces major price hike

Qantas customers have been warned that they will see a significant increase in price to the airline’s domestic club lounges from next month. For the first time in seven years, the airline will charge Qantas Club membership holders 17 per cent more to access their lounges, with price changes set to be made from April 18. The increase coincides with Qantas' plans to renovate 24 of their domestic lounges over the next year, with the carrier spending an estimated $100 million on renovations. This means that annual fees for new members will increase from $699 to $828, including the $129 joining fee. For current members looking to renew, their annual fees will rise from $540 to $629. “This is the first time the Qantas Club membership fees have increased in seven years and will help cover cost increases passed on from a range of suppliers over that time. This follows a reduction in the membership fees for several years during the pandemic,” a spokesperson told news.com.au. They added that these changes will not affect Qantas Frequent Flyers members who will continue to receive complimentary access to the Club through Points Club Plus or their Gold, Platinum or Platinum One status. Members can also avoid the price hike if they renew their membership before April 18. Image: Getty

Money & Banking

Worried about price gouging? For banks, there’s a simple solution

<a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/peter-martin-682709">Peter Martin</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/crawford-school-of-public-policy-australian-national-university-3292">Crawford School of Public Policy, Australian National University</a> Does it feel like you’re being charged more for all sorts of things these days, from <a href="https://theconversation.com/supermarkets-airlines-and-power-companies-are-charging-exploitative-prices-despite-reaping-record-profits-222755#:%7E:text=According%20to%20the%20inquiry%2C%20the,dairy%20products%20and%20breakfast%20cereals.&text=Farmers%20recently%20accused%20supermarkets%20of%20making%20too%20much%20profit%20from%20their%20crops.">groceries</a> to <a href="https://theconversation.com/see-when-australias-biggest-banks-stopped-paying-proper-interest-on-your-savings-and-what-you-can-do-about-it-200265">banking</a>? Turns out, you’re right. While we might be more likely to remember prices that go up than prices that go down, the very best evidence – assembled by Australia’s <a href="https://treasury.gov.au/sites/default/files/2023-11/competition-review-mergers-background-note.pdf">Treasury</a>, the federal government’s lead economic adviser – says your suspicions are right. We really are being charged more than we used to be two decades ago. Coupled with the latest profit reports from Australia’s biggest supermarkets and banks, including Tuesday’s half-year results from Coles, it suggests we are contributing more to company profits than we used to. <h2>Climbing price markups</h2> The Treasury estimates show in the 13 years between 2003-04 and 2016-17, the average price markup – the difference between the cost of a product and its selling price – across all Australian industries climbed 6%. That’s extra profit, taken from your wallet, going to the people selling you things. Those Treasury estimates are contained in a background paper prepared for the competition <a href="https://treasury.gov.au/review/competition-review-2023">inquiry</a> being undertaken by a panel including Productivity Commission chair Danielle Wood, former Competition and Consumer Commission chief Rod Sims, and business leader David Gonski. At the same time, the average share of each industry held by its biggest four firms edged up from 41% to 43%. Profit margins are also higher here than in more competitive markets overseas. This is true in banking, where the big four have taken over St George, BankWest, and the Bank of Melbourne – and are about to take over <a href="https://www.accc.gov.au/media-release/australian-competition-tribunal-authorises-anz%E2%80%99s-proposed-acquisition-of-suncorp-bank">Suncorp</a>. It’s also true in supermarkets, where the big two, Woolworths and Coles, have taken over or seen off Franklins, Bi-Lo and Safeway. <h2>Bigger profit margins than overseas</h2> Coles supermarkets reported earnings <a href="https://www.investopedia.com/terms/e/ebitda.asp#:%7E:text=EBITDA%2C%20or%20earnings%20before%20interest,generated%20by%20the%20company's%20operations.">before adjustments</a> of <a href="https://cdn-api.markitdigital.com/apiman-gateway/ASX/asx-research/1.0/file/2924-02777616-3A637432">A$1.73 billion</a> on sales of $19.778 billion in the half year to December – a profit margin of 8.7%. Last week, Woolworths supermarkets reported earnings of <a href="https://cdn-api.markitdigital.com/apiman-gateway/ASX/asx-research/1.0/file/2924-02774826-2A1506104">$2.45 billion</a> on sales of $25.648 billion – a margin of 9.6%. By way of comparison, the dominant UK supermarket group, Sainsbury’s, has a profit margin of <a href="https://stockanalysis.com/quote/lon/SBRY/statistics/">6.13%</a>. In banking, the Commonwealth Bank has just reported a return on equity (profit as a proportion of shareholders’ funds) of <a href="https://cdn-api.markitdigital.com/apiman-gateway/ASX/asx-research/1.0/file/2924-02772167-2A1504649">13.8%</a>. National Australia Bank reported <a href="https://www.nab.com.au/content/dam/nab/documents/reports/corporate/2023-full-year-results.pdf">12.9%</a>. While on a par with the big banks overseas, those recent returns are a good deal higher than CommBank’s <a href="https://www.commbank.com.au/content/dam/commbank-assets/about-us/2021-08/2021-annual-report_spreads.pdf">11.5%</a> and NAB’s <a href="https://www.nab.com.au/content/dam/nab/documents/reports/corporate/2021-full-year-results-management-discussion-and-analysis.pdf">10.7%</a> reported two years ago. <h2>Little hope for groceries</h2> For supermarkets, there’s not a lot the government can do, apart from launching an <a href="https://www.accc.gov.au/inquiries-and-consultations/supermarkets-inquiry-2024-25">inquiry</a>, and perhaps giving Australian authorities the power to <a href="https://www.afr.com/policy/economy/break-up-firms-that-abuse-market-power-says-former-competition-tsar-20230709-p5dmtq">break up</a> firms that abuse their market power. But Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has said he isn’t keen on giving Australian authorities the sort of powers available to authorities in the United States and the United Kingdom, saying (incongruously) Australia is “<a href="https://www.pm.gov.au/media/radio-interview-abc-radio-brisbane-mornings">not the old Soviet Union</a>”. And doing anything short of that would be unlikely to have much effect. Australia’s two supermarket giants have invested a fortune in high-tech <a href="https://theconversation.com/coles-and-woolworths-are-moving-to-robot-warehouses-and-on-demand-labour-as-home-deliveries-soar-166556">warehouses and distribution systems</a>, which new rivals would be hard-pressed to match. <h2>Hope for more competitive banking</h2> But for banks it’s altogether different. Richard Denniss of the Australia Institute has come up with the idea, and it’s a beauty. It’s for the government to provide a low-cost banking service – expanding on services it already offers. The costs would be so low, other banks might decide to add features and resell them in the same way as resellers sell <a href="https://www.whistleout.com.au/MobilePhones/Guides/Telstra-network-coverage-vs-ALDI-Woolworths-Belong-Boost">mobile phone</a> and <a href="https://www.nbnco.com.au/residential/service-providers">NBN</a> services. The primary function of any bank is to provide a numbered account into which Australians can deposit and withdraw funds. The Australian Tax Office does this already, at an incredibly low cost. The tax office gives every working Australian a <a href="https://www.ato.gov.au/individuals-and-families/tax-file-number">tax file number</a>. Employers deposit money into these accounts, and – should the tax office owe a refund – taxpayers withdraw them. Some taxpayers ensure their tax is <a href="https://www.ato.gov.au/businesses-and-organisations/international-tax-for-business/in-detail/income/refund-of-over-withheld-withholding-how-to-apply">overpaid</a>, so they withdraw later. Denniss describes it as a bank account with the world’s clumsiest interface. <h2>The government could offer bank loans</h2> It wouldn’t be much of a stretch from improving that interface to offering government loans. In fact, government loans are already provided in some circumstances: such as to retirees with home equity through the <a href="https://www.dss.gov.au/our-responsibilities/seniors/benefits-payments/home-equity-access-scheme">home equity access scheme</a>, and to Centrelink recipients through <a href="https://www.servicesaustralia.gov.au/centrelink-online-account-help-apply-for-advance-payment">advance payments</a>. It woudn’t be much more of stretch to provide loans more broadly, at an incredibly low administrative cost. The government already lends against the <a href="https://www.servicesaustralia.gov.au/who-can-get-loan-under-home-equity-access-scheme">value of homes</a>. Back in the days when the federal government owned the <a href="https://www.commbank.com.au/about-us/our-company/history.html">Commonwealth Bank</a>, it had to cover the high costs of running bricks and mortar branches. Freed from those costs, the government could now offer a low-cost, technology-enabled basic banking service that would tempt us away from the big four banks – unless they offered better value. Of course it would cost money, although a lot of it has already been spent setting up the system of tax file numbers and accounts. And of course the banks would hate the idea. That would be the point. But doing what we can to stop Australians being overcharged is important, not only for wage earners but also for businesses. The <a href="https://treasury.gov.au/review/competition-review-2023">competition inquiry</a> the government has launched is a good start. It shouldn’t be frightened about where it might lead.<img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/223821/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/peter-martin-682709">Peter Martin</a>, Visiting Fellow, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/crawford-school-of-public-policy-australian-national-university-3292">Crawford School of Public Policy, Australian National University</a> Image credits: Getty Images This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/worried-about-price-gouging-for-banks-theres-a-simple-solution-223821">original article</a>.

Money & Banking

Our Partners

Over 60

News

Shop

Catalogues

Contests

Entertainment

Travel

Health

Lifestyle

Finance

Property

Games

Information

Keep up to date

Search

Readers response: What seems too expensive but is really worth the price?

"Misconceived": Coles and Woolies fight allegations of price gouging

Coles and Woolies shoppers could claim thousands over alleged deceptive pricing

"Can you sleep at night?" Frustrated shopper confronts Woolies CEO over price gouging

Shock over op shop item listed for $2,000

How to revive your curls without paying salon prices

Aussies outraged over price of staple snack

What is competition, and why is it so important for prices?

Young Aussies hit back at Steve Price for calling them "lazy"

So when should you book that flight? The truth on airline prices

Cheaper mortgages, tamed inflation and even higher home prices: how 29 forecasters see Australia’s economic recovery in 2024-25

How would a switch to nuclear affect electricity prices for households and industry?

Steve Price fires up over Dan Andrews' special honour

Yes, Australia’s big supermarkets have been price gouging. But fixing the problem won’t be easy

Adorable Collie sells for world record-breaking price

"You will be a massive failure": Steve Price unleashes on Kyle Sandilands

Loyalty programs may limit competition, and they could be pushing prices up for everyone

Think $5.50 is too much for a flat white? Actually it’s too cheap, and our world-famous cafes are paying the price

Qantas announces major price hike

Worried about price gouging? For banks, there’s a simple solution

Our Partners