uConsumers Sue To Stop $107B Mega-Beer Mergerr

4 4 4 9

• 

  Anheuser-Busch InBev’s formal $107 billion bid to acquire SABMiller is far from a done deal: federal regulators will likely be combing through the details of the proposal for quite some time to determine how it will affect the global beer markets, and consumers’ wallets. But it looks as if lovers of the sudsy drinks are a bit ahead of the game, filing a lawsuit to stop the mega-merger.

  Bloomberg reports that nearly two dozen consumers filed a joint lawsuit against AB InBev in an attempt to stop the deal, claiming it would force them to pay more for a lower quality product.

  Among other things, the suit claims the merger between the world’s largest and second largest brewer would create an illegal monopoly.

  The 23 consumers who filed the complaint in Oregon say they have purchased products from both SABMiller and InBev in the past.

  For its part, AB InBev maintains that the lawsuit’s claims are without merit and intends to vigorously defend itself and the billion-dollar deal, Bloomberg reports.

  “The U.S. beer market has never been more competitive, with strong growth from craft brewers, and nothing in this transaction will change that fact,” the company said in a statement to Bloomberg on Thursday.

  SABMiller declined to comment on the suit.

  Antitrust experts have expressed concerns over the merger ever since the rumblings of the deal first made waves in the fall, noting that most plausible scenarios would spell higher prices, fewer choices, and a harder life for smaller craft brewers.

  Last month InBev attempted to squash those concerns when it announced a finalized deal outlining plans for SABMiller to sell its 58% stake in MillerCoors to its joint-venture partner Molson Coors Brewing, which already owns 42% of the brand, for $12 million.

  The companies say the massive sell-off plan [PDF] is meant to “promptly and proactively address regulatory considerations.”

  The fate of the MillerCoors brand was one of the largest concerns for antitrust experts who widely agreed that regulators would not approve the deal without the divestiture. If AB InBev and SABMiller were to merge without selling off that stake in MillerCoors, the combined company would control an astounding 70% of the U.S. beer market.

  The deal to sell MillerCoors to Molson is contingent on the completion of the SABMiller/AB InBev deal and is expected to close in mid-2016.

  Beer Drinkers Sue to Stop AB InBev’s $110 Billion SABMiller Deal [Bloomberg]

  
• 
  

ribbi

by Ashlee Kieler via Consumerist

uChicken Of The Sea, Bumble Bee Abandon Plan To Unite As One Giant Can Of Tuna After DOJ Objectsr

4 4 4 9

• 
  Chicken of the Sea and Bumble Bee will be leaving their underwater wedding separately despite going steady since 2014: the two tuna companies won’t be merging into one giant can of fish after the U.S. Justice Department put the kibosh on their planned union.

  The DOJ announced on Friday that the merger — proposed a year ago between Thai Union Group, owner of Chicken of the Sea and Bumble Bee — is kaput, saying it would’ve hurt competition in the U.S. canned tuna market.

  If the two tuna companies had united forces, it would have combined the second- and third-largest sellers of tinned tuna in the U.S. That’s a big deal when you consider that there are really only three major players in the canned fish business in the country, with the first-largest seller being Starkist.

  “Consumers are better off without this deal,” Assistant Attorney General Bill Baer said in a statement, adding that the two companies shouldn’t be surprised. “Our investigation convinced us – and the parties knew or should have known from the get go – that the market is not functioning competitively today, and further consolidation would only make things worse.”

  
• 
  

ribbi

by Mary Beth Quirk via Consumerist

uRazor Accuses “Hoverboard” Distributor Swagway Of Infringing On Patentr

4 4 4 9

• Although “Hoverboard” scooters – you know, those boards that don’t actually hover at all, in spite of the nickname – have taken over the Internet and the holiday wish lists in recent months, they’ve also made headlines for all the wrong reasons, such as allegedly exploding while charging and being under investigation by federal safety officials. And now the devices are the center of a lawsuit between big-time scooter manufacture Razor and Swagway -a leading hoverboard distributor. 

  BuzzFeed News reports that Razor, which recently purchased a patent for a “two-wheel, self-balancing vehicle with independently moveable foot placement sections,” filed a complaint against Swagway accusing the company of patent infringement.

  The lawsuit, filed in U.S. District Court in California on Nov. 27, alleges that Swagway infringes on Razor’s patent by “making, using, offering for sale, selling, and/or importing… without license or authority, Swagway, Swagway X1, Swagway smart balancing electric skateboard, and related and similar products.”

  The complaint focuses on Razor’s recent exclusive licensing agreement with Shane Chen, the holder of a patent for the personal vehicles. Razor currently sells its own device called the Hovertrax for $599.99.

  Razor seeks supplemental and compensatory damages from Swagway, as well as an order directing the company to turn over all products that infringe on the patent.

  Razor USA Sues Swagway Over Hoverboards [BuzzFeed News]

  
• 
  

ribbi

by Ashlee Kieler via Consumerist

uAmerican Apparel Founder Not Ready To Give Up Yet, Hires Investment Bank To Work On Bid For The Companyr

4 4 4 9

• 
  Now that American Apparel has filed for bankruptcy after losing money for years, there’s at least one very interested party possibly looking to swoop in and snap it up: the company’s founder and former CEO Dov Charney isn’t going to let the small matter of his termination from the company get in his way, and has hired an investment bank to help him put together a potential bid.

  If at first you don’t succeed, try, try again, right? That seems to be Charney’s plan, after his failed takeover bid in 2014. He’s brought in a small investment bank called Cardinal Advisors LLC to evaluate options, reports Bloomberg.

  “Charney is confident that new and existing investors, working with him and his team of industry leaders, would be able to realize significant long-term value for American Apparel’s stakeholders,” according to a statement from his camp sent to Bloomberg.

  Charney, the former chairman and CEO, was kicked out of the company in December 2014 following allegations of misconduct. American Apparel has seen worsening sales since at least 2010, and things didn’t get much better after Charney’s departure. The retailer filed for bankruptcy protection in October of this year, after earlier admitting it’d run out of financing to keep things going.

  The final approval for American Apparel’s reorganization plan is expected on Jan. 20, after it evaluates bids it may receive.

  American Apparel Founder Hires Investment Bank to Pursue Bid [Bloomberg]

  
• 
  

ribbi

by Mary Beth Quirk via Consumerist

uAlaska Airlines Joining Premium Ticketing Bandwagon In 2016r

4 4 4 9

• 

  Following the lead of other domestic carriers, Alaska Airlines will soon offer passengers a premium economy ticket option. The Premium Class section will debut in late 2016 and provide customers three to four inches of extra legroom, priority boarding and as yet unspecified “additional amenities.” The upgrade will be available to Alaska Airlines elite Mileage Plan members on a complimentary basis at booking or on the day of travel, but it was unclear how much the option will cost for other passengers. [Alaska Airlines]

  
• 
  

ribbi

by Ashlee Kieler via Consumerist

uLawsuit Claims Macy’s Detains Minorities In Shoplifting Cells, Makes Them Pay Bogus Finesr

4 4 4 9

• 
  More than a year after Macy’s agreed to pay $650K to settle allegations of racial profiling in its stores and promised it would incorporate more staff training to combat such behavior, a woman has filed a class-action lawsuit against the department store, claiming it unfairly detains minority shoppers and puts them in holding cells, whether they’ve done anything wrong or not. On top of that, the complaint claims, Macy’s then extorts those people for bogus fines.

  In the complaint [PDF] the woman says the retailer imprisons minority shoplifters in special holding cells.

  “This coercive collection practice or scheme has become so profitable that Macy’s…has dedicated an entire unit within its existing store, which operates like a typical jail, equipped with holding cells, where alleged shoplifters are held for hours on end, and are pressured, threatened, and often harassed until they find no reprieve but to make civil penalty payments to [Macy’s],” the suit states.

  The plaintiff says that she was detained at Macy’s flagship Herald Square location in New York City back in July 2014. She claims that a guard took her to the cell under suspicion that she was planning to steal a set of shirts. According to the complaint, she was kept in that cell and questioned for three hours, without being given the chance to call a lawyer or her family, and forced to sign papers admitting her guilt. She accuses the retailer of making her pay $100 fine in cash before she was turned over to police.

  If this sounds familiar, it’s because Macy’s has been here before: an investigation into the retailer by New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman’s office concluded back in 2014 that the retailer’s “loss prevention employees at the store tracked and followed African-American, Latino, and other minority customers much more frequently than white customers.”

  Schneiderman’s office reviewed 18 complaints from 2007 to 2014 involving minority customers who claimed to have been held wrongly for shoplifting at the Herald Square store. Investigators found that Macy’s detained 1,947 people in a one-year period at the store, compared to about 6,000 total at Macy’s other 42 stores in New York state.

  A Macy’s spokesperson told TIME it rejects the lawsuit’s claims and that the company is in full compliance with the law.

  “Our company takes great pride on the proactive steps we have taken in recent years as an industry leader in shopping equality,” the spokesperson said. “In fact, we sponsored a first-ever symposium hosted last fall at John Jay College by the Retail Council of New York State to discuss how all retailers can improve the shopping experience across all segments of the population.”

  
• 
  

ribbi

by Mary Beth Quirk via Consumerist

uFeds Forgive $103M In Debt For Nearly 7,000 Former Corinthian College Studentsr

4 4 4 9

• Nearly 7,000 additional former students of defunct for-profit chain Corinthian College will have their loan debt erased by the federal government. While the $103 million tab sounds like a lot, it’s only a fraction of the billions of dollars that Wyotech, Heald College and Everest University charged in tuition. 

  The Department of Education announced Thursday that it had approved a second wave of loan forgiveness for former Corinthian students, this time focused on “borrower’s defense” claims made against the company, the Associated Press reports.

  The relief covers 1,300 former students from Heald College, totaling about $28 million and 5,800 former Corinthian students who filed “closed school” claims, totaling $75 million.

  Lawmakers were quick to applaud the additional relief on Thursday. Senators Dick Durbin of Illinois and Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut called the Department’s decision to erase the debt “progress for students.”

  “The Department of Education’s approval of relief today is welcome news for some 1,300 former Heald students, but there are thousands more across the country who deserve the same relief,” the senators wrote in a letter. “We encourage the Department to step up the pace and scope of its Corinthian debt relief efforts to give those students the relief they deserve under the law now.”

  Relief for former Corinthian students has been trickling in since the college chain collapsed – and filed for bankruptcy – in this spring.

  In September, the Department said it had received 4,140 claims for borrower defense discharge since it announced in June that it would provide relief for students who attended (after June 20, 2014) the 30 CCI campuses that closed in April.

  Those reviews are taking longer than one might expect as the team has to analyze state laws for each claim.

  Under the law, a borrower defense to repayment provides loan forgiveness to students if their school committed fraud or broke laws.

  Independent monitor for the relief process, Joseph Smith, said at the time that his team of four attorneys is reviewing claims where the “facts and law are clear,” such as those who attended Heald Colleges in California, Hawaii and Oregon.

  Additionally, in February the CFPB and Dept. of Education secured $480 million in debt relief for former students.

  More federal loan debt forgiven for Corinthian students [The Associated Press]

  
• 
  

ribbi

by Ashlee Kieler via Consumerist