7am Did Coles and Woolies con customers?
May 11, 2026
Greg Jericho, Chief Economist at the Australia Institute, explains the ACCC cases against Coles and Woolworths in plain terms. He outlines the claims about misleading discounts and how supermarkets defended pricing. He discusses potential penalties, legal hurdles, and what a win or loss could mean for retail practices and competition.
AI Snips
Chapters
Transcript
Episode notes
Supermarkets Allegedly Created Fake Discounts
- The ACCC alleges Coles and Woolworths manipulated prices to create illusionary discounts rather than genuine sales.
- Examples include Oreo family pack and Fab where short price spikes allowed later “sale” prices to be higher than earlier regular prices.
Woolworths Claims Inflation Justified Pricing Moves
- Woolworths defended itself saying suppliers and post-COVID inflation drove price hikes and that advertised sale prices were factually accurate.
- Their argument: temporary higher prices were real and subsequent reductions (e.g., $14 to $8) were truthful promotions.
Court Win Would Force Truthful Sale Claims
- A successful ACCC case would set a broad precedent banning this pricing tactic across industries and force genuine sale claims.
- The ACCC seeks hefty penalties so deceptive pricing isn’t treated as a mere cost of doing business for major chains.