The Alleged “Price Gap” Deal
The lawsuit leans heavily on claims outlined in the FTC’s now-unsealed complaint, which alleged that since 2015, Pepsi and Walmart maintained an agreement establishing a “price gap.” Under that alleged arrangement, Pepsi provided Walmart with favored pricing in exchange for allowing the retailer to aggressively promote its low prices on Pepsi soft drinks.
Plaintiffs argue that the deal effectively locked in Walmart’s pricing advantage while forcing rival retailers — and their customers — to absorb higher costs.
Price Differences Cited in the Complaint
The lawsuit offers concrete examples of the alleged disparity. According to the filing, a 12-pack of 12-ounce Pepsi cans sold for $8.27 at Walmart, compared with $8.39 at Target and $8.99 at Wegmans.
Plaintiffs say such gaps reflect a system where Pepsi sold products to Walmart at lower-than-competitive prices, pushing consumers at other stores to pay more for the same soda.
Promotional Benefits Under Scrutiny
Beyond pricing, the FTC complaint also accused Pepsi of providing Walmart with promotional payments, allowances and other services that were not extended to competing retailers. The lawsuit contends those benefits further tilted the competitive landscape in Walmart’s favor.
In a statement responding to the suit, a PepsiCo spokesperson said the case “leverages the inaccuracies and unsubstantiated allegations in the dismissed FTC Complaint, including mischaracterizations of our business dealings with customers.”
As the PepsiCo, Walmart price fixing class action moves forward, the case promises to test whether alleged pricing strategies amounted to healthy competition — or crossed the line into a scheme that left consumers footing a higher bill.
