Victory CEO Recorded Pressuring Suppliers to Raise Competitors' Prices First

Ayal Ravid, CEO and controlling shareholder of the Israeli retail chain Victory, was recorded telling Uri Levi, CEO of canned goods company Beit HaShita, that he would only approve price increases if rival chains Rami Levy and Yohananof raised their prices first. The recorded conversation was played on Wednesday at the Central District Court in Lod during the evidentiary phase of a price-fixing case involving Ravid. The recordings and evidence were first revealed by Calcalist.

The case focuses on allegations that Ravid pressured suppliers to raise prices first at competing chains Rami Levy and Yohananof, or else he would refuse to approve their price increases at Victory, effectively threatening to stop selling their products beyond existing stock. This conduct is alleged to violate the Food Law, which prohibits retailers from interfering with competitors’ pricing. The suppliers involved include Dr. Fischer, Shestovitz, and Beit HaShita.

Uri Levi testified about the tense negotiations with retailers, explaining that no retailer wants to be the first to raise consumer prices and that failure to reach agreement can lead to supply cutoffs. In the recordings, Ravid expresses impatience with empty shelves at Victory and pressures Levi to wait for competitors to raise prices first, threatening to replace Beit HaShita with another supplier if they do not comply by Sunday.

Ravid also sent a message to Yigal Elal, a Beit HaShita shareholder, stating that he did not care if canned goods prices rose by 20% as long as the "two terrorists" (referring to Rami Levy and Yohananof) also raised prices. Levi explained that the suppliers were negotiating price increases out of necessity, not to stop selling, and that Ravid monitored competitors’ prices through a real-time pricing website to ensure Victory’s prices were not lower.

The testimonies and recordings highlight alleged coordinated efforts to manipulate prices across major Israeli food retailers, raising legal and ethical questions about competition in the sector. The court proceedings continue as the investigation by the Competition Authority unfolds.