Antitrust Fine for Bernabei Website and App: €400,000 for Misleading Promotional Prices

The Italian Competition Authority (AGCM), known as the Antitrust, has imposed a total fine of €400,000, jointly and severally, on Bernabei Srl and Bernabei Liquori Srl for unfair commercial practices related to price and promotion communication. This concerns the e-commerce site www.bernabei.it and the Bernabei app. The proceedings involve alcoholic and non-alcoholic beverages sold online and, for certain aspects, also in physical stores operated by the companies.

According to the AGCM, the practice is “unified” and consists of two strands. The first concerns advertising prices as “promotional” that are greater than and/or equal to the lowest price in the previous thirty days, an element that European pricing regulations use as a reference to make a price reduction understandable.

The second strand concerns the presentation of crossed-out “full” or “list” prices, indicated as a basis for comparison to create a perception of value, but never applied or applied only marginally or residually outside promotions.

In the ruling, the Authority emphasizes a central point: indicating the lowest price in the previous 30 days is not enough if the reduction is not actually based on that price. The mere display of the lowest price, without the reduction being genuinely determined on the basis of that value, can be misleading. Because it transforms into an announcement of reduction something that is not a reduction, or not in the terms perceived by the consumer.

The Authority links the complaint to the presence of claims and formulas that emphasize value. In some cases, explicit discount percentages. The text includes examples of messages such as «Wines and spirits discounted by 30% and more» and the invitation to «grab the extra discount of -30%», deemed likely to create belief in a specific advantage over the lowest price in the thirty days. Even when, according to the AGCM, that advantage does not exist. Because the promotional price is equal to or higher than the minimum for the period.

The ruling includes specific examples of pages and product sheets, with side-by-side indications of current price, “lowest price,” and “list price.” Among the cases cited: «Ribolla Gialla Baloc 2024» at €6.60, «Lowest price: €6.50 – List price: €11.90». «Müller Thurgau Boem 2023» at €6.10, with «Lowest price: €5.80 – List price: €11.90». «Lambrusco Ottocentonero Albinea Canali 2018» at €6.50, with «Lowest price: €6.20 – List price: €10.80».

The point is not the individual numerical discrepancy, but the communication framework. The presence of the crossed-out list price and discount claims makes the perception of a significant reduction more immediate.

On the second strand, the Antitrust reconstructs a difference between prices actually charged and list prices shown as crossed out. In the inspection findings, it is reported that, for price determination, there would be continuous prices normally used in the absence of promotions and a list price defined at the beginning of the year for positioning.

In a passage from the inspection report, it states that the list prices would be “theoretical” and that “popular” and “promo” prices would be determined in relation to the theoretical list price, as the basis for calculation. It is on this dynamic that the Authority focuses the complaint. Because a theoretical price displayed as crossed out can function as a psychological anchor, even if in practice the product is not actually sold at that level.

The file reveals statements about the alignment of pricing and promotion policies between the website, app, and physical stores. Specifically, the reports state that «the pricing/discount/promotion policy is the same for the website www.bernabei.it, the Bernabei app, and the physical stores also operated by Bernabei Liquori s.r.l.». This element is cited to justify the unity of the commercial strategy and the connection between the two companies.

The process begins with a pre-investigation activity and moral suasion. On July 12, 2024, the Authority invites the removal of potentially unfair aspects and asks how prices would be correctly advertised across all channels.

Further information requests follow between September and November 2024, but the initiatives adopted are deemed inadequate. On May 28, 2025, investigation PS/12804 is initiated, and on the same day, inspections are carried out at the locations indicated in the ruling.

In the text, the Authority lists monitoring conducted on the website and app on multiple dates between November 2024 and May 2025, to verify the persistence of promotion presentation methods. The Antitrust reconstructs the verifications following the responses provided in 2024 to argue that the investigation was initiated within a reasonable time from full knowledge of the facts.

One of the most concrete passages concerns the disproportion between sales at list price and sales on promotion. The ruling highlights that invoices for sales of the products in question at list price to consumers number 51, plus 5 invoices to VAT number holders, while invoices at promotional or discounted prices for the same products amount to several thousand PDF pages, over 45,000 pages for online channels alone. This data is used to argue that the crossed-out list price did not represent the reference price actually charged in the market.

The dossier emphasizes that some cited products are not marginal in sales volumes. «Ribolla Gialla Baloc» and «Vino Spumante Brut Millesimato Lunazzi» were sold in significant quantities during the period April 1, 2024 – May 15, 2025, 4,810 units and 16,548 units respectively, according to acquired documentation. This element is cited to exclude that these are isolated cases or secondary products.

The proceeding also references commitments submitted by the companies. One passage states that, on the website, «the so-called list price will be replaced with the indication of the “regular price,” understood as the selling price habitually and usually charged by the company in the absence of promotions». The Authority uses this statement to reinforce the distinction between the price actually charged and the theoretical list price.

Since the practice was disseminated through the website and app, the AGCM obtained the opinion of the Communications Authority. The ruling highlights that the internet medium is capable of affecting and amplifying the potential deceptiveness of the communication, given the speed of access and the widespread nature of online promotions.

To determine the amount of the fine, the Authority considered the severity and duration of the practice and the economic size of the companies. In 2024, Bernabei Srl recorded revenues exceeding €31 million, while Bernabei Liquori Srl exceeded €62 million.

The AGCM specifies that, for deterrent purposes, total revenue is relevant, not only that attributable to consumer sales. The practice is deemed to have been in place at least since April 1, 2024, and, for part of the conduct, still ongoing.

In the ruling, the Antitrust prohibits the dissemination of the practice and imposes the fine jointly and severally. The companies must communicate within 60 days the initiatives adopted to comply with the injunction. Payment is due within 30 days of notification, with the possibility of appeal to the Lazio Regional Administrative Court or extraordinary appeal to the President of the Republic within the legal timeframe.