Samsung to Pay $300M Fine for Price Fixing

Discussion in 'Current Events' started by Mac_Freak, Oct 13, 2005.

  1. Mac_Freak macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2005
    #1
    Here is the link guys Yahoo News
    This why Apple's RAM was so expensive. Lets hope that the price of RAM will come down now.
     
  2. Lord Blackadder macrumors G5

    Lord Blackadder

    Joined:
    May 7, 2004
    Location:
    Sod off
    #2
    I thought that this was going to be about the the new Samsung flash memory in the Nano...whew (relieved).
     
  3. OnceUGoMac macrumors 6502a

    OnceUGoMac

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2004
    #3
    It's nice to see the occasional bitch-slapping of corporate greed.
     
  4. jaw04005 macrumors 601

    jaw04005

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2003
    Location:
    AR
    #4
    Yeah, because there is no way that Samsung is going to spread the cost of that $300 million fine to its customers (Apple being one of the largest). :rolleyes: Which, ultimately means the costs of memory will rise for me and you. :mad:
     
  5. OnceUGoMac macrumors 6502a

    OnceUGoMac

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2004
    #5
    You make a good point in theory, but that would be illegal per the conditions of the judgement. Samsung wasn't the only company involved, there were two others that were charged around the same amount. Also, the price fixing occurred between 1999 and 2002.
     
  6. Abstract macrumors Penryn

    Abstract

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2002
    Location:
    Location Location Location
    #6
    So now instead of high prices for RAM due to price fixing, I'll have to pay high prices for RAM due to Samsung's $300M fine? Greeeaaat. :p
     
  7. jaw04005 macrumors 601

    jaw04005

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2003
    Location:
    AR
    #7
    If you honestly believe that Samsung is going to eat the cost of that fine, you are sorely mistaken. LOL. No company out to make a profit would. Samsung will find a way to pass the cost down to their consumers. You can bet on that!
     
  8. jaw04005 macrumors 601

    jaw04005

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2003
    Location:
    AR
    #8
    Haha, well not so much "instead" more like "in addition to", assuming you had a computer that supported DIMM memory.
     
  9. Macmaniac macrumors 68040

    Macmaniac

    #9
    Oh there is!

    Have a gander at this:
    "Apple, Samsung face possible antritust probe"
    Although Samsung said it would seek ways to reduce the gap of supply price between Apple and domestic MP3 player makers to less than 10 percent, other MP3 manufacturers say that Samsung may not offer the Apple's price to them, which may lead to an investigation by South Korea's government over antitrust allegations. According to the report, Samsung will consider accepting a joint order for flash memory of the MP3 player manufactures, but the announcement may not be enough to prevent South Korea's Fair Trade Commission (FTC) from launching an investigation if it finds out any sign of unfair deals between Samsung and Apple. "Many in the industry argue that Samsung has undermined fair competition in the market by supplying NAND flash to Apple at half the price it charges to domestic MP3 player makers. Rep. Kim Hyun-mee of the ruling Uri Party cited iSuppli, a research firm, that the price of 2GB NAND memory for Apple Nano was $54, which is half the market price. Samsung is cornering domestic MP3 brands by doing this, she added."

    Other Korean MP3 player makers argue that Samsung should deliver enough as late as early November to allow them to bring products to market in time for the lucrative December holiday season. However, they are skeptical about whether Samsung would supply the memory by the time at an appropriate price, according to the report. "They argued the problem is that Samsung didn’t reveal the supply price for Apple, which make it impossible for them to check whether Samsung really narrow the price gap to 10 percent."

    Now Apple and Samsung are in trouble...
     
  10. Mac_Freak thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2005
    #10
    Yikes this thing starts to take on an ugly turn. Lets hope Apple wont be in much of a trouble for that or we might see some funny sh**t happen with all that memory stuff.
     
  11. Le Big Mac macrumors 68020

    Le Big Mac

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2003
    Location:
    Washington, DC
    #11
    If they're actually competing now, they'll have to drop their prices to remain competitive. They can't pass along higher costs, because no one will buy their products over the competitor who doesn't have those costs (e.g., Micron, who turned over the conspiracy and got amnesty).
     
  12. Le Big Mac macrumors 68020

    Le Big Mac

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2003
    Location:
    Washington, DC
    #12
    That one (the Apple/Samsung one) is totally bogus. Companies always get discounts for agreeing to buy a large share of output. Lets samsung guarantee sales. Lets apple guarantee low costs. Ifit harms someone, it's Apple's competitors, which means only that they aren't as good at competiting Nothing more.
     
  13. chucknorris macrumors 6502a

    chucknorris

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2005
    Location:
    Moscow, ID (No Kremlin here!)
    #13
    Micron (in whom I have an interest due to their being the largest employer in my hometown) is starting to look very smart for the first time in quite a while.

    They've diversified, they just had a fantastic quarter and things seem to be looking up. No more layoffs for the near future at least...
     

Share This Page