Class Action Lawsuit Filed Over Alleged Conspiracy to Fix Prices for Archery Equipment

New to ClassAction.org? Read our Newswire Disclaimer

A proposed class action lawsuit alleges the Archery Trade Association (ATA) has conspired with numerous manufacturers, distributors and retailers, including Bass Pro Shops, Dick’s Sporting Goods and Cabela’s, among others, to artificially inflate the prices of bowhunting and archery equipment.

Get the latest open class action lawsuits sent to your inbox. Sign up for ClassAction.org’s free weekly newsletter.

According to the 79-page antitrust lawsuit, the ATA and its “co-conspirators” have since at least 2014 engaged in a coordinated scheme to raise the prices of and prevent price competition at the retail level for archery products such as bows, arrows, arrowheads, targets and related accessories. The suit contends that the defendants—which include manufacturers Bowtech, Hoyt Archery and Mathews Archery, among others—have set an artificial price floor for the sale of these products by collectively implementing minimum advertised pricing (MAP) policies and working together to ensure retailers charge at or above the established rates.

The case claims that the ATA has facilitated the agreement to restrict price competition through MAP policies, and repeatedly pushed its members—some of the most prominent archery product manufacturers, distributors and retailers in the United States—to jointly enforce the policies industry-wide.

For example, retail members make efforts to withhold business dealings from manufacturers that do not adopt or enforce MAP policies and attempt to work instead with those that do, the complaint charges.

The alleged agreement between the ATA and its members and their coordinated enforcement of MAP policies violate federal and state antitrust laws and have had a large-scale impact on the industry, the filing contends.

The archery price-fixing lawsuit alleges that as a result of the foregoing, consumers have paid more for archery products than they would have absent the anticompetitive conduct, while the defendants have reaped supracompetitive profits.

“In general, bows can cost consumers hundreds of dollars; arrows can cost more than $100 for six-packs; arrowheads can cost around $40 for 3-packs; and targets range in cost from $50 to hundreds of dollars,” the suit explains, adding that retail profit margins are, generally speaking, “about 27% on bows and 40% on other Archery Products.”

As the case tells it, the ATA provides numerous opportunities for its members to meet and coordinate their apparent MAP policy enforcement efforts, including through exclusive annual trade shows and a members-only online discussion forum called ATA Connect. The ATA’s Board of Directors and Retail Council, which is led by the former’s retail members, are also knowingly involved in and support the promotion of these practices, the complaint claims.

The filing asserts that in recent years, concerns that the success of the allegedly anticompetitive agreement would “draw legal scrutiny” led the ATA to scrub its website of any “potentially problematic references” to its pivotal role in the coordinated implementation and enforcement of industry-wide MAP policies.

The bowhunting and archery products involved in the case include bows such as compound bows, recurve bows, longbows and crossbows, as well as their components; arrows (minus the arrowhead) and components such as the shaft, fletching and nock; arrowheads, or arrowpoints, including broadheads and field points; targets, including bag targets, foam targets and 3D targets; and accessories such as bow cases, arrow quivers, sights, scopes and stabilizers.

The lawsuit looks to represent all individuals and entities in the United States or its territories that, at any time since January 1, 2014, directly purchased archery products manufactured or distributed by an ATA member.

Want to learn how to start a class action lawsuit? We’ve got you covered.