Anyone ever hear of Unilateral Pricing Policy? What a scam.

[Snake Alchemist]

If you've been thinking about getting a new HDTV but have been putting off your purchase, now might be the best time to get a great deal on a new set, especially one with step-up features. And you might not want to think about it for too long.....

But this year there's another compelling reason: Several major manufacturers are moving away from MAP (or Minimum Advertised Pricing) to something called Unilateral Pricing Policy (UPP), which penalizes retailers for selling a TV below the manufacturer's preset price......

Here's the big difference between the two pricing policies: With MAP pricing, a manufacturer can cut off co-op advertising funds if a retailer advertised a TV below a minimum price, which is why you often have to actually go through an online retailer's checkout before the price become visible. If the retailer is willing to lose those funds, it can sell the TV for whatever price it wants.

But with UPP, a manufacturer can cut off a retailer's product supplies if the retailer advertises or sells the TV for less than the predetermined minimum price. So basically, the TV's actual selling price is being set by the manufacturer, leaving little wiggle room for dealers to out-discount their competitors.


http://shopping.yahoo.com/articles/yshoppingarticles/844/is-now-your-last-chance-to-get-an-hdtv-deal/

[Atman]

1. We used to call that type thing collusion or price fixing.

But now corporations are people. It's every man for himself. The market is always best under self-regulation, right?

[Snake Alchemist]

2. Fixed is the word of the day

'What all this means for those of us looking for a new TV is that prices on certain 2012 sets from a number of manufacturers will soon be "fixed," much the way products from Apple and Bose t'end to be sold at the same prices, regardless of the retailer. Of course, we'll have to wait and see if these companies stick to their guns, especially if other major competitors don't adopt more rigorous pricing policies and the companies' market share starts to suffer.

[Blue_Tires]

43. That's gone the way of the dodo

along with archaic words like "monopoly, anti-trust, worker's rights, conflicts of interest, insider trading, fraud, usury, etc. etc."

[djg21]

56. This isn't price fixing.

It is a unilateral act, and so long as there is no agreement, it is not an Antitrust violation and always has been perfectly lawful and appropriate so long as the manufacturer is not a monopolist. It's a free country and manufacturers generally may choose to deal, or not to deal, with any distributors they want. Manufacturers also are free to control the channels of distributions. If a manufacturer has a unilateral policy of not distributing through vendors who price cut, or which don't provide appropriate service, or which sell into the grey market, the manufacturer is perfectly within its rights.

MAP was a little differed (as are "structured" terminations) as they induce the vendor to enter an agreement arguably in restraint of trade. The key word here is "unilateral."

[Atman]

62. Are you freaking serious?

"As not as there is not an agreement?"

IOW, as long as the CEO's of the top companies are not stupid enough to hold official meetings and have minutes recorded? That is the gist of it...the people, er, I mean, the CORPORATIONS, have learned. Just join your buddies for cocktails, shake some hands, makes some deals -- okay, nothing new here -- but just make sure there is no way it can be perceived as an "official" meeting. Each of them agrees it's a good idea, then each individually goes back to there respective boards and suggests remarkably similar strategies..."Oh, but there was no collusion! We're just discussing market trends!" If they're really good, they get one of their business magazine writer friends to post an article about the emerging market trends.

Fucking bullshit. You are one naive pup.

[rfranklin]

3. It used to be called price fixing...

and corporations should be prosecuted for doing it.


AU Optronics convicted of U.S. LCD price fixing, to appeal

(Reuters) - Taiwan's AU Optronics Corp will appeal a guilty verdict by a U.S. court in a price fixing suit over liquid crystal display panels that could leave it facing a fine of up to $1 billion just as it looks to recover from a series of losses.

AU, the world's No.4 LCD maker, was charged as part of an investigation into an alleged price-fixing cartel between 1999 and 2006, but was the sole Asian LCD maker to plead not guilty. It told a media briefing in Taipei on Wednesday that the appeal process could last more than a year.

Tuesday's verdict came after rival LG Electronics Inc agreed to pay a $400 million fine in 2008, while Samsung Electronics Co Ltd cut an early deal to avoid prosecution.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/03/14/us-auoptronics-idUSBRE82C1C820120314

[Snake Alchemist]

4. It's a different twist, but similar flavor. nt

[fasttense]

5. Price fixing out in the open for all to see.

Too bad all those anti-trust laws were repealed. Oh wait they were never repealed just ignored.

[Snake Alchemist]

7. I'm not even sure any of those laws would apply. That's how sneaky this is. nt

[Atman]

11. It's all in the terminology

I'd like to try my new Unilateral Arrival-Time Enhancement strategy next time I travel. No, no, it's not "speeding," it is simply a method used to assure maximum time at my destination while avoiding unnecessary strain associated with excessive drive time.

It should work, right? After all, people are people, too. Aren't we?

[pipoman]

8. It isn't anti-trust unless

different manufacturers of like products are in collusion to set prices.

edit...as with the collusion between LCD makers in the article above..

[Romulox]

9. OK. It is still "price fixing". nt

[pipoman]

16. Depends if you are using the legal definition of the term or simply describing what

they are doing. Feel free to make up your own definitions at will...carry on.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Price_fixing

Price fixing is an agreement between participants on the same side in a market to buy or sell a product, service, or commodity only at a fixed price, or maintain the market conditions such that the price is maintained at a given level by controlling supply and demand. The group of market makers involved in price fixing is sometimes referred to as a cartel.

The intent of price fixing may be to push the price of a product as high as possible, leading to profits for all sellers but may also have the goal to fix, peg, discount, or stabilize prices. The defining characteristic of price fixing is any agreement regarding price, whether expressed or implied.

Price fixing requires a conspiracy between sellers or buyers. The purpose is to coordinate pricing for mutual benefit of the traders.

-more at link-

[Romulox]

17. Hmmm...."The defining characteristic of price fixing is any agreement regarding price..."

"The defining characteristic of price fixing is any agreement regarding price, whether expressed or implied...The intent of price fixing may be to push the price of a product as high as possible..."

Collusion between retailers and manufacturers to keep prices high is embraced by your definition.

[oldhippie]

44. No, it is not

Collusion between retailers and manufacturers to keep prices high is embraced by your definition.

The manufacturer and its retailers constitute one "seller." The collusion would have to be among two or more "sellers."

Apple, and Rolex, keep very tight control of their distribution and sales chain. As long as Rolex is not colluding with Omega, Patek, Seiko, Timex, etc., it is not price fixing. They can control the terms on which they will sell to and incentivize their distributors.

[Snake Alchemist]

49. It's collusion by default.

If Samsung decides that know seller can sell any of their TV's for less that 1K, and then LG, and Sony follow suit, the result is the same.

[djg21]

66. This is nonsense.

While there can be parallel conduct in a highly concentrated market, there is as much of an incentive for manufactures, i.e., Sanyo here, to reduce prices and try to increase their own sales volumes at the expense of its competitors, i.e., SONY, which supposedly have raised their prices. It all about incentives.

There is no price fixing here unless there is an agreement, and manufacturers have the lawful right to control channels of distribution and terminate vendors who do not adhere to suggested pricing protocol, SO LONG AS THE MANUFACTURER IS ACTING UNILATERALLY, AND NOT COERCING VENDORS INTO ENTERING AGREEMENTS VIS A VIS THEIR PRICING (and even then, this can in instances be defensible). This always has been the law.

[Snake Alchemist]

67. An agreement? LOL. It's a wink and a nod as usual. nt

[Romulox]

54. Just wanted to say that this post displays a basic misunderstanding of retailing.

Retailers are customers of products, which they then sell on to consumers. Manufacturers and retailers do not "constitute one 'seller'" under a legal, tax, business, or common sense definition.

[djg21]

68. The answer is "sometimes"

A manufacturer is generally free to have a unlateral policy regarding pricing. In other words, a manufacturer lawfully can maintain a policy of not dealing with any vendors who sell at below MSRP, and can unilaterally terminate any vendor found not to be complying with its policy. This is a necessary implication of what is know as the Colgate Doctrine (United States v. Colgate & Co., 250 U.S. 300, 307-08 (1919) (a company is free to deal with whomever it wishes unilaterally as long as it does not act with the purpose of forming a monopoly)).

One rub comes when either the manufacturer does something intended to ellicit an agreement from the vendor, for instance, by enacting a policy whereby the first offense results in a warning, the second in a penalty, and the third in a termination. This is called a "structured termination" and may be intended to illicit a tacit or express agreement from the vendor to maintain set prices. MAP was one of these policies -- advertising funds were offered only to those vendors who agreed to advertise, and hence sell, at prices dictated by manufacturers. These can be antitrust violations.

Note that I am speaking in general terms, and the necessary analysis can be very fact-intensive. But, as a general rule, people, and companies, are free in this country to do business with whomever they wish.

[Romulox]

69. LOL. It's a little OTT for this board, no? nt

[jmowreader]

78. Unilateral pricing is not "collusion"

unless you consider "charge this, or else" to be collusion.

[pipoman]

6. This could help smaller merchants

if the language would only preclude manufacturers from issuing multiple model numbers to the same model. They make model 'A' available to WalMart, Best Buy etc at say a minimum price of $1000, they make model 'B' available to smaller distributors at a minimum sales price of say $1200. 'A' and 'B' are the same product except for minor cosmetic differences.

Minimum pricing has been around as a condition of being a brand dealer for decades. Price fixing is usually associated with escalating prices on needed products because of some external force increasing demand. Anti-trust would only apply if different manufacturers of the same product were communicating about fixing prices.

The manufacturer is free to set minimum pricing requirements for dealers of their products.

[Romulox]

10. LOL. nt

[onenote]

12. why are you laughing?

http://www.dealerscope.com/article/samsung-sony-level-tv-pricing-policies-could-help-independent-retailers/1

[Romulox]

13. There are not a significant number of "independent Television dealers" for this to help--it's an

attempt to fix prices in a business that is in the midst of brutal competition.

[pipoman]

14. Only if the different manufacturers are colluding to set prices.

And, yeah, you're right, just screw the few independents who are left, not enough to care about..

[Romulox]

15. Screw the consumer overall to "help" multinational behemoths like Sony and Samsung--

and perhaps the several dozen independent tv dealers in the US will profit, too. That's *my* framing.

[pipoman]

18. How does it help Sony or Samsung?

If sony and Samsung aren't in collusion? They have always sold at a wholesale price certain, the retailer sets the profit margin they wish to maintain. The way I read this, it is simply going to stop the nickel and dime sale game promoted by dealers, isn't going to change the wholesale price to the retailer.

[Romulox]

19. They want more money for TVs. If this isn't clear, please re-read the OP. nt

[onenote]

21. Can you point to the part of the OP that discusses wholesale pricing?

I'm not saying its not there, its just that I've read the OP and the linked article and I didn't see anything about wholesale price maintentance.

[pipoman]

23. How about you quote the OP

and show me anythin at all which indicates collusion between manufacturers or any mention of effecting wholesale pricing? Manufacturers have been doing this for years in the fashion industry, the auto industry and many others. It is designed to make service the more deciding factor in consumer purchases, and to keep their products from being football items used by retailers to get people into the store. Example would be Best Buy advertises a model of Samsung at $50 less than wholesale cost, only has a few of that model, and upsells people when they respond to the ad.

[Romulox]

38. The collusion is between manufacturers and their retail channels.

You want me to disprove an argument only YOU have made, and the first rule of arguing on the internets is that YOU prove arguments that only YOU (pipoman, i.e.) have made.

[pipoman]

40. You are the one making unsubstantiated claims

You have stated that this will somehow increase profits for Sony and Samsung. This article is about retail pricing. No mention of any change what-so-ever in wholesale pricing. How does Sony and Samsung increase profits without adjusting their margin through wholesale price increases, which isn't mentioned in the article?

Now here you are claiming "collusion is between manufacturers and their retail channels", yet the article is about stripping the retail channels of the ability to price using their own judgement, doesn't seem to necessarily help the retailers...unless it is small retailers who you claim don't exist..

[stevenleser]

50. That person does that pretty frequently. They love to assert facts not in evidence. nt

[Romulox]

71. It's always fun to have fans! nt

[Romulox]

72. The only "claim" I've made is that this will in no way help consumers. nt

[stevenleser]

76. You've made lots of claims, many of them strawmen and none of them supported. nt

[Romulox]

81. Steve, I hurt your feelings over a year ago. Please let your anger go! :P nt

[stevenleser]

90. LOL, believe me, if people on tv who are much better at this than you cant hurt my feelings, you

have no chance.

[Romulox]

93. You're on TV, you say? That's a relevant point to bring up, if this is about your ego. nt

[stevenleser]

95. Two logical fallacies in one post. For anyone else, I would say thats an accomplishment.

For you, standard practice.

[Romulox]

96. That's not what "logical fallacy" means. nt

[stevenleser]

99. You wanted examples of things you dont get? You just provided another one. nt

[Romulox]

102. This is silly and childish. Goodbye, steven. nt

[stevenleser]

100. P.S. to help you out, you committed the non-sequitur and ad-hominem logical fallacies.

As I said, two logical fallacies in one post.

[Romulox]

103. Nonsense. I merely pointed out your appeal to authority.

[stevenleser]

91. P.S., this is yet another example of you using logical fallacies instead of arguments. nt

[pipoman]

80. Good thing that anyone who can read knows better..

hint: You can't make claims in one post, then deny making those claims in the next post without deleting the post which the claim was made...

[Romulox]

82. Um, pipoman, I didn't delete anything. What a lazy fabrication! nt

[pipoman]

85. Who said you did?

[Romulox]

86. What a bizarre game. I'm going to pass, this turn. nt

[stevenleser]

92. That person must have attended the Palin-Quayle school of critical thought.

They don't understand anything you write, make crazy unsupported claims that they contradict a post or two later, equate things that are apples and oranges and otherwise make bizarre analogies, but they think they are winning and hurting people's feelings.

A real prize that one.

[Romulox]

94. Is there anything specifically posted in this thread that you can cite to back this up?

Or is that another "bizarre" idea of mine, that accusations should be backed up with evidence?

[stevenleser]

98. If you read Pipoman's post #80 again, really slowly, you might get it. Then again, since its you,

you might not.

Lets take them one at a time. If you manage to get that one, we'll work on the dozens of other examples of what I am talking about in your responses to this OP alone.

[Romulox]

104. This isn't productive. Your personal attacks are coming from a place of extreme anger.

[MNBrewer]

88. Doesn't the collusion have to be horizontal (i.e., among manufacturers) in order to count?

Vertical "collusion" happens all the time, but it's not illegal.

[Romulox]

97. Not sure who this is directed at, but in order to be *legally actionable*, it likely does. nt

[Snake Alchemist]

20. I'm sure that smaller merchants are at the forefront of the minds of execs at Samsung and Sony. nt

[onenote]

22. The consumer electronics retailers and manufacturers are at war

The national chains and big box stores increasingly have the ability to push around the manufacturers. Having a robust independent retail market is indeed something that the manufacturers want. Is it self-interest? Of course. But it doesn't mean that its a bad thing, unless you are resigned to a marketplace in which there is no alternative to national chains/big box retailers (or online sales with no customer service).

[Snake Alchemist]

26. Sounds like the manufacturers are doing the pushing this time and of course it falls on the

consumers wallets.

[onenote]

29. Do you think its good for consumers in the long run if independents are driven out of business?

[Snake Alchemist]

33. Samsung only made 4.5 billion last quarter, but if we work together we can get that up even higher.

http://thenextweb.com/mobile/2012/01/06/samsung-posts-preliminary-record-fourth-quarter-profit-eats-htcs-lunch/

[onenote]

37. So what happens to independent stores doesn't interest you.

To each his own.

[tkmorris]

45. Independent stores? I remember those

Haven't seen many lately. Actually, except in a few limited niches, none.

I couldn't buy a television around here from anybody but a chain.

[Snake Alchemist]

47. Like newegg.com? nt

[onenote]

51. are you suggesting newegg.com is an indpendent retailer?

Because that would be pretty funny.
I'm not a big fan of having now independent retail alternatives and having to choose between national chains or national (international) online retailers.

But like I said, to each his own.

[Snake Alchemist]

52. So you can't be independent if you're on the internet? You're right that this whole internet thing

has gotten out of hand.

[onenote]

57. The whole point of the pricing strategy is to help out local brick and mortar establishments

Not the large and superlarge national or international chains/online retailers.

But you knew that.

[Snake Alchemist]

58. ROFL. You think the retailer is going to be able to keep the additional revenue?

Samsung is nothing if not a champion of the little guy.

[stevenleser]

60. The question is not of additional revenue, but of leveling competition between internet and B&M

But, yes, with brands that mandate a minimum sales prices, if you sell at a premium, you can keep any additional profit. This doesnt happen very often.

[Snake Alchemist]

61. Brick and mortar is on the decline for other reasons than price.

Crowds, lousy service, messy stores, etc. It's rare that I walk into a retail store for anything but clothes and groceries these days. Even my books are now turning into e-books unless I want them for display.

[onenote]

63. Thanks for confirming where you stand with respect to mom and pop business v. megachains.

Viva Amazon. Good riddance to the local bookstore!

By the way, if Samsung was so interested in its bottom line, why is it worrying about retail prices--it could more directly improve its bottom line by raising its wholesale prices.

[Snake Alchemist]

64. Sorry that technology has made e-books more attractive. nt

[Romulox]

73. My "local bookstore" is a Barnes and Noble. Amazon is fantastic! nt

[Romulox]

74. We didn't "level competition" between the covered wagon and the steam locomotive. nt

[stevenleser]

75. Who is 'we' and why are 'we' making a preindustrial age comparison to current day commercial events?

nt

[Romulox]

84. Luddites always demand technology be hobbled in favor of the status quo.

"We" refers to "human civilization". You'd have picked up on that, if you came here to discuss rather than vent your anger.

[stevenleser]

89. What you posted makes no such argument. It's complete nonsense. nt

[Romulox]

101. You come to these threads unable to engage with the posts.

This is not an appropriate place to hash out past grievances. My analogy between brick and mortar stores and covered wagons is obvious, if you were even attempting to discuss the matter.

Instead, this is venting for you.

[pipoman]

31. Big cheer leader for low, low prices

even at the expense of US workers and smaller retailers, huh? This is exactly the kind of consumer think which has made offshoring so attractive for manufacturers. They know that much of the US retail market really doesn't give a shit about US workers, only their own pocket book..so short sighted..nice..

[Snake Alchemist]

35. How many US workers are working for Samsung.

They are really struggling.

http://thenextweb.com/mobile/2012/01/06/samsung-posts-preliminary-record-fourth-quarter-profit-eats-htcs-lunch/

[pipoman]

41. Apparently quite a few..

Samsung Electronics America (SEA)

SEA is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd., an established leader in the worldwide electronics market. SEA is focused on continually expanding its position in the U.S. market while upholding Samsung's mission to provide consumers with innovative products that converge digital technologies and offer exceptional quality, features, performance and value.

Samsung holds true to this mission across all categories by offering a broad range of award-winning products that are backed by industry-leading warranties, customer service and technical support programs.

SEA comprises the Consumer Business Division (CBD), and the Enterprise Business Division (EBD),both headquartered in Ridgefield Park, NJ. The North American headquarters, also located in Ridgefield Park, NJ, oversees the North American Subsidiaries of Samsung Telecommunications America; Samsung Semiconductor, Inc,;Samsung Information Systems America; and Samsung Austin Semiconductor. as well as Samsung Electronics Canada; and Samsung Electronics Mexico.
Samsung Consumer Business Division (CBD)

Samsung's Consumer Business Division (CBD) offers a full range of award-winning digital products for the home and individual use, including LED, LCD and Plasma televisions, Blu-ray Disc players, Home Theater Systems, Digital Cameras, Digital Camcorders, Solid State Hard Drives, External Hard Drives and Portable Audio Devices. CBD also contains Samsung's Home Appliance group which sells products that rank very high in consumer satisfaction, including refrigerators, washers & dryers, ranges, dishwashers, microwave ovens, and vacuums.

Over the years, consumers have come to expect exciting innovations from Samsung's CBD product lines. Samsung is the marketing leader in 3DTV, Smart TV, LED TV, Blu-ray and French Door Refrigerators. Samsung is also the only company to have a digital camera with a front LCD screen to create perfect self-portraits and the only TV manufacturer to have a TV apps platform which powers the Samsung Apps Platform.
Samsung Enterprise Business Division (EBD)

As one of the fastest growing IT companies in the world, Samsung EBD is committed to serving the needs of consumers ranging from the home user to the Fortune 500 elite and supporting the valued channel partners who serve our customers. Samsung EBD offers a complete line of award-winning color and mono-laser printing solutions, desktop monitors, laptop computers, digital signage solutions and projectors.
Samsung Telecommunications America (STA)

Headquartered in Dallas, Texas, STA was founded by Samsung Electronics Corporation in 1996. STA researches, develops and markets a variety of personal and business communications products throughout North America, including handheld wireless phones, wireless communications infrastructure systems, fiber optics and enterprise communication systems.
Learn more about careers at Samsung Mobile USA.
Samsung Semiconductor, Inc.(SSI)

SSI, headquartered in San Jose, California, is a wholly owned U.S. subsidiary of Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., the second largest semiconductor manufacturer in the world and the industry's volume and technology leader in DRAM, NAND Flash, and SRAM memory and TFT-LCD panels. Samsung Semiconductor's five business units—Memory, TFT-LCD, Storage, Foundry and System LSI-provide advanced solutions for the mobile, desktop computing, consumer electronics and industrial markets communication systems. Learn how SSI works with the industry's OEMs.
Samsung Information Systems America (SISA)

SISA, a wholly owned subsidiary of Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., is located in the Silicon Valley with offices in Southern California. SISA is engaged in researching "frontier" technologies for creating new businesses, as well as developing core technologies to enhance the competitiveness of existing products of Samsung. The research activities of SISA focus on the development of hard disk drives, digital TV technologies, printer software, wireless connectivity and high-level software such as middleware.
Samsung Austin Semiconductor(SAS)

Samsung Austin Semiconductor (SAS), located in Austin, Texas, is the company's only semiconductor manufacturing plant located outside Korea. SAS has been providing the latest in semiconductor technology to the world since 1997. The complex includes one of the most advanced semiconductor plants in the United States where state-of-the-art NAND Flash memory and Mobile SoC chips are made.

http://www.samsung.com/us/aboutsamsung/ourbusinesses/businessarea/usdivisions.html

[Snake Alchemist]

46. I see city names and not #'s. nt

[LanternWaste]

83. I'm sure those numbers are available should your curiosity be sincere...

I'm sure those numbers are available should your curiosity indeed be sincere...

[pipoman]

24. Sometime read about Vlasic pickles and walmart

A model playing out in the electronics industry right now.

http://www.larouchepub.com/other/2003/3046wal-mart_pricing.html

edit..I don't know if this is LaRouche link, as in Linden LaRoush, the whack job, but the story is published throughout the manufacturing community publications as a lesson to manufacturers.

[Snake Alchemist]

25. ROFL. There's always the option of not signing the contract in the 1st place. nt

[pipoman]

27. WalMart is known for buying at a reasonable wholesale price

buying huge quantities. Requiring manufacturers to increase production, go into debt to build facilities, buy equipment and hire workers to meet demand, then when the contract comes uprefusing to renew unless the manufacturer dramatically reduces pricing. The manufacturer can't afford to loose the volume, and walmart then owns the manufacturer forcing the manufacturer to lower production costs, usuaolly by moving to 3rd worlds.

The point is obvious. Manufacturers are in fact interested in maintaining some independent retailers for this reason, contrary to your assertion in post #20.

[Snake Alchemist]

28. ROFL. Given that this is a known value, maybe manufacturers shouldn't sign those contracts.

Apple has somehow managed without Walmart. Maybe Vlasic can use their model.

[pipoman]

30. So sorry you are not getting it..others do..

[Snake Alchemist]

32. Pinnacle only made 41 million last quarter.

http://www.pinnaclefoods.com/Investor+Relations/Investors+News/Investor+News/Pinnacle+Foods+Finance+LLC+Reports+Fiscal+2011+Third+Quarter+Results

[pipoman]

34. It ultimately doesn't hurt the companies to offshore US jobs

[Snake Alchemist]

36. Call me when they're making below 10 million a quarter. We can start a DU fund drive. nt

[pipoman]

42. You are on the side of the 'screw US workers brigade'..got it

[Snake Alchemist]

48. I keep waiting for Vlasic to open their own franchised stores. nt

[KamaAina]

55. It is indeed the whackjob

"Executive Intelligence Review".

Yup, that's the guy whose acolytes are running around with pictures of Obama with a Hitler mustache.

[Zalatix]

53. People can also do without.

I bet that's going to happen more often as this UPP pushes prices up and people decide not to pay or play at all.

I see this as a self-correcting problem. It's not like the consumer electronics industry hasn't taken brutal hits before.

[stevenleser]

59. This has been going on in multiple industries for a long time. Pandora Jewlery is a good example

You cannot discount Pandora Jewlery without express prior permission from Pandora. To become a retailer of that Jewlery, you have to sign a contract to abide by their policies. Another of their policies is that you are not allowed to sell their products on e-bay.

Various brands in various industries force retailers to sign contracts stipulating similar policies.

[On the Road]

65. Sounds Like a Case That Came Up During the Bork Hearings

in which manufacturers wanted to be able to determine the retail price charged for their goods. There's a certain argument for this, but in legal terms it has generally to violate antitrust laws.

[Romulox]

70. Headline today was that Sharp is in serious trouble. Flat tv sales = cutthroat. nt

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

77. This has been around for years for all kinds of products.

When I worked for a major retailer in supply chain there were policies like this on everything from shoes to dish washers. Although our gripe wasn't usually minimum selling/advertised prices so much as it was requirements we carry products in locations where we knew they WOULD. NOT. SELL. to retain the co-op marketing stipend and other incentives. Often it wasn't worth it so we either dropped the merchandise or opted out of the co-op stipend.

[Mopar151]

79. There is a work-around

What is included in the price? My friend bought a Honda generator, and called around to check prices. No different, so he went to his friend's dealership - who held the price, but included a 5 year maintainence plan.

Can you get a wall mount thrown in to the deal, or a couple HDMI cables?

Another friend bought a Dart SHP engine block. Same price as everyone else - but this one was machined to his dimensions, painted inside & out, freeze plugs & cam bearings installed = about a 25% discount.

[originalpckelly]

87. How is that a free market for a retailer?

[Romulox]

105. Didn't expect this to turn into such a hot topic!