In the Matter of

Stone Container Corporation, a corporation.



Pursuant to the provisions of the Federal Trade Commission Act, and by virtue of the authority vested in it by said Act, the Federal Trade Commission, having reason to believe that Stone Container Corporation, a corporation, hereinafter sometimes referred to as respondent or "Stone Container", has violated the provisions of said Act, and it appearing to the Commission that a proceeding by it in respect thereof would be in the public interest, hereby issues its complaint, stating its charges in that respect as follows:

PARAGRAPH ONE: Respondent Stone Container Corporation is a corporation organized, existing and doing business under and by virtue of the laws of the State of Delaware, with its office and principal place of business located at 150 N. Michigan Avenue, Chicago, Illinois 60601. Stone Container is the largest manufacturer of linerboard in the United States.

PARAGRAPH TWO: In January 1993, Stone Container unsuccessfully attempted to increase the price for all grades of linerboard by $30 per ton, to take effect the following March. Stone Container believed that its attempted price increase failed in significant part because Stone Container and other firms in the industry had excess inventory.

PARAGRAPH THREE: Stone Container devised a strategy to invite its competitors to increase the price of linerboard. As part of the strategy to effect a coordinated price increase, Stone Container planned to take downtime at its plants, to reduce its production by approximately 187,000 tons, and contemporaneously to purchase 100,000 tons of linerboard from competitors and to reduce Stone Container’s inventory by 87,000 tons.

PARAGRAPH FOUR: During late June and early July 1993, Stone Container conducted a telephone survey of major U.S. linerboard manufacturers, asking competitors how much linerboard was available for purchase and at what price.

PARAGRAPH FIVE: Senior officers of Stone Container contacted their counterparts at competing linerboard manufacturers to inform them of the extraordinary planned downtime and linerboard purchases. In the course of these communications, Stone Container arranged and agreed to purchase a significant volume of linerboard from each of several competitors. The participation of high level executives in these communications was outside the ordinary course of business. The specific intent of Stone Container’s communications with its competitors was to coordinate an industry wide price increase.

PARAGRAPH SIX: During the second half of 1993, Stone Container communicated to competitors its intention to take mill downtime and to draw down industry inventory levels, and its belief that these actions would support a price increase. The methods of communication included private conversations and public statements, including press releases and published interviews.

PARAGRAPH SEVEN: The acts and practices alleged herein constitute an invitation by Stone Container to its competitors to join a coordinated price increase. The invitation, if accepted, was likely to result in higher prices, reduced output, and injury to consumers. The acts and practices of Stone Container were undertaken with anticompetitive intent and without an independent legitimate business reason.

PARAGRAPH EIGHT: The acts and practices alleged herein are in commerce or affect commerce, as "commerce" is defined in the Federal Trade Commission Act, and constitute unfair methods of competition in or affecting commerce in violation of Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act, as amended, 15 U.S.C. 45. The acts and practices alleged herein could be repeated in the absence of the relief requested.

WHEREFORE, THE PREMISES CONSIDERED, the Federal Trade Commission on this eighteenth day of May, 1998, issues its complaint against respondent.

By the Commission, Commissioner Swindle dissenting.

Donald S. Clark