If the retail or service establishment meets the requirements in
paragraphs (a) through (c) of Sec. 779.227, it may enter into the
following arrangements without becoming a part of the larger enterprise,
that is, without losing its status as a ``separate and distinct
enterprise'' to which section 3(s) would not otherwise apply:
(a) Any arrangement, whether by agreement, franchise or otherwise,
that it will sell, or sell only certain goods specified by a particular
manufacturer, distributor, or advertiser.
(b) Any such arrangement that it will have the exclusive right to
sell the goods or use the brand name of a manufacturer, distributor, or
advertiser within a specified area.
(c) Any such arrangement by which it will join with other similar
retail or service establishments in the same industry for the purpose of
collective purchasing. Where an agreement for ``collective purchasing''
is involved, further requirements are imposed, namely, that all of the
other establishments joining in the agreement must be retail or service
establishments under independent ownership, and that all of the
establishments joining in the collective purchasing arrangement must be
``in the same industry.'' This has reference to such arrangements by a
group of grocery stores, or by some other trade group in the retail
industry.
(d) Any arrangement whereby the establishment's premises are leased
from a person who also leases premises to other retail or service
establishments. In connection with this rental arrangement, the Senate
Report cites as an example the retail establishment which rents its
premises from a shopping center operator (S. Rept. 145, 87th Cong., 1st
Sess., p. 41). It is clear that this exception was not intended to apply
to
the usual leased department in an establishment, which is specifically
included within the larger enterprise under the definition of section
3(r). (See discussion under Sec. 779.225.)
