§ 5-93 Claims Based on Price of Comparable Merchandise or Services:"Comparable Value" and Similar Terms.
RCNY § 5-93
If the term: "comparable value" "compare with" "equal to" or other similar term implying comparison with non-identical merchandise is used (a) the advertisement must not imply that the comparison is with the former or usual price of the advertised merchandise or service itself; and (b) the compared merchandise or service must be of essentially similar quality in those material respects which affect consumer preferences and marketability; and (c) the price to which the advertiser's price is compared must be the retail market price or the genuine list, suggested or catalog price of the comparable article or service; and (d) the comparable article or service must be generally available in New York City at the price stated; and (e) the advertisement must clearly and conspicuously disclose that "comparable value" pertains to similar but not identical merchandise or services. If an aggregate "open stock" price is used as a comparative price for an advertised set, the advertisement must disclose this fact and indicate that the advertised saving is based upon the difference between the price for the set and the total open stock price for items comprising the set.
