Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Status
Not open for further replies.

mgguy

macrumors 6502
Original poster
Dec 26, 2006
484
1,357
Might Apple be engaged in price fixing? Everywhere I look the prices are almost identical, and there are never any markdowns except for refurbished goods. Why is it that other computers go on sale but Macs never do? Is this even legal (isn't there a law against price fixing)? How does Apple get suppliers to go along with this, by threatening not to supply them with products to sell? Don't get me wrong, I love Macs and won't switch because of the price, but really ...:mad: :mad: :mad:
 
Might Apple be engaged in price fixing? Everywhere I look the prices are almost identical, and there are never any markdowns except for refurbished goods. Why is it that other computers go on sale but Macs never do? Is this even legal (isn't there a law against price fixing)? How does Apple get suppliers to go along with this, by threatening not to supply them with products to sell? Don't get me wrong, I love Macs and won't switch because of the price, but really ...:mad: :mad: :mad:

Apple is just setting prices and limits the discounting of its products. Price fixing would be if Apple got together with other computer makers in collusion to sidestep true competition.
 
The profit margin on apple products are REALLY low. Store don't have much mark up on them, if they didn't sell them for the same price apple did they wouldn't make any money. You wouldn't believe how little stores make on apple sales. On most iPods the store only makes about $10 per unit. This is not a lot when they might make $50 or more on another MP3 player.

TS
 
Apple is one of many manufacturers requiring retailers to comply with a set "minimum advertised price" (MAP) for their products, which is only a few dollars below MSRP. Many retailers get around MAP by advertising "$1,299 before $300 instant savings," or some such. Apple must not allow this scheme either, which I suppose is why discount retailers such as Amazon use rebates to effectively lower the price of the Apple products they sell. Others Apple dealers advertise "we pay the sales tax," which is equivalent to offering a discount. BTW, just because a retailer advertises an item for a given price doesn't mean it's their lowest price. You can always ask.
 
From Wikipidia:

"Price fixing is an agreement between business competitors to sell the same product or service at the same price. In general, it is an agreement intended to ultimately push the price of a product as high as possible, leading to profits for all the sellers. Price-fixing can also involve any agreement to fix, peg, discount or stabilize prices. The principal feature is any agreement on price, whether express or implied."​

Sounds like price fixing to me. Apple does have some agreement with the retailer to stabilize prices, no? But if Apple really isn't making that much of a profit on their products (yeah, right), I guess it can be defended. Does anyone have any idea what Apple's profit margin is on some of its more popular products? For example, how much do they make on a MBP?
 
From Wikipidia:

"Price fixing is an agreement between business competitors to sell the same product or service at the same price. In general, it is an agreement intended to ultimately push the price of a product as high as possible, leading to profits for all the sellers. Price-fixing can also involve any agreement to fix, peg, discount or stabilize prices. The principal feature is any agreement on price, whether express or implied."​

Sounds like price fixing to me. Apple does have some agreement with the retailer to stabilize prices, no? But if Apple really isn't making that much of a profit on their products (yeah, right), I guess it can be defended. Does anyone have any idea what Apple's profit margin is on some of its more popular products? For example, how much do they make on a MBP?

No, it is totally not price fixing. Price fixing, as it clearly explains above, involves competitiors. Distributors are not competitors. Price fixing would be Apple and Microsoft secretly agreeing to not sell the comparable iPod and Zune models for less than a certain price. It is very common for manufacturers that also sell their products at retail to have minimum retail agreements with resellers, as has been stated above also.
 
Clearly Apple's controlling the price of its products is not illegal or they wouldn't be able to continue doing it. But the ultimate effect is the same, that is to keep the price set within a very narrow range and not allow retailers to offer discounts if they are willing to make a smaller profit for whatever reason. Somehow this doesn't strike me as being "fair" to customers. Are there any other computer manufacturers that have this kind of command over the price of their products? I see plenty of Microsoft products on sale all the time. But again, Apple is on firm ground from a strickly legal standpoint.
 
Sony also uses minimum advertised prices in many instances.

Here is a good article about the concept.
 
Might Apple be engaged in price fixing? Everywhere I look the prices are almost identical, and there are never any markdowns except for refurbished goods. Why is it that other computers go on sale but Macs never do? Is this even legal (isn't there a law against price fixing)? How does Apple get suppliers to go along with this, by threatening not to supply them with products to sell? Don't get me wrong, I love Macs and won't switch because of the price, but really ...:mad: :mad: :mad:

That comment is ( words not included so I do not get banned ). Post a picture of your Mac. I doubt you really own one. Should Microsoft be classified as a class A sexual predator? They have been raping people for years.
 
Anyone is free to charge whatever they want for their product- they're also free to require their authorized resellers to agree to an absolute minimum to which they can sell APPLES'S (that's key) product.. This is very common in every aspect of business- granted, once an industry goes down that path of giving everything away it's rare to see a company not be forced to follow, but it happens..

Apple obviously follows the logic that lowering their prices only cheapens the value of their products.. It's an excellent philosophy tp run a business by- can be difficult to achieve, but pays off very nicely when it works..
 
No, it is totally not price fixing. Price fixing, as it clearly explains above, involves competitiors. Distributors are not competitors. Price fixing would be Apple and Microsoft secretly agreeing to not sell the comparable iPod and Zune models for less than a certain price. It is very common for manufacturers that also sell their products at retail to have minimum retail agreements with resellers, as has been stated above also.

IMO it depends. Apple IS competing with many retail stores. E.g. third party chains which stock apple products compete with the Apple stores which often compete with Apple's online store.
Apple not allowing any real 'discounts' means that the stores can't compete with each other by using their profit margins. This results in apple (and the stores) making a very tidy profit on apple products.

The Wikipedia page on price fixing seems to agree with this.

"Price fixing is an agreement between business competitors to sell the same product or service at the same price."

I'm assuming that the Apple stores and the department store chains (and the other non-apple apple stores) are competing with each other, and they are selling the same product at the same price.

"In general, it is an agreement intended to ultimately push the price of a product as high as possible, leading to profits for all the sellers."


Well that's pretty much what's happening. There's no discounting for competition, meaning... the price is as high as possible.
 
Snack Cakes

Little Debbie has been involved in price fixing for years. And they must have half of the justice department on the payroll, because they blatantly put the price right on their packaging to prevent retailers from changing it!

:)

OK - that wasn't as much fun as I thought. Sometimes, in the case of Kraft at least, narrowing the allowed price range (or printing a specific price directly on your packaging) is actually meant to keep retailers from raising the price too high (which they might want to do to get people to buy another brand for which they get a higher markup). Kraft did it to stop stores from raising the price to encourage people to purchase their store-owned brands.

If profit margins are as low as the folks above say they are, then who knows? Apple specifying the price range may, in fact, be helping to keep the prices down. Though Apple having their own retail outlets would probably help to keep everyone in line.
 
As far as business goes, (not someone's personal feeling of how this should be) Apple online, Apple physical stores, and the various re-sellers are NOT competitors in this sense. Apple and Dell are competitors. See the difference? Apple is the manufacturer. They sell their products to the online and physical stores, who in turn, sell the products at retail. Apple the manufacturer does not lose a sale if you buy a Mac from a re-seller or at an Apple store. Apple loses a sale if you choose a Dell instead of a Mac.

Price fixing would be if Apple, Dell, HP, etc. all got together and set their prices for similar machines higher than the market is bearing now.
 
IMO it depends. Apple IS competing with many retail stores. E.g. third party chains which stock apple products compete with the Apple stores which often compete with Apple's online store.
Apple not allowing any real 'discounts' means that the stores can't compete with each other by using their profit margins. This results in apple (and the stores) making a very tidy profit on apple products.

The Wikipedia page on price fixing seems to agree with this.

"Price fixing is an agreement between business competitors to sell the same product or service at the same price."

I'm assuming that the Apple stores and the department store chains (and the other non-apple apple stores) are competing with each other, and they are selling the same product at the same price.

"In general, it is an agreement intended to ultimately push the price of a product as high as possible, leading to profits for all the sellers."


Well that's pretty much what's happening. There's no discounting for competition, meaning... the price is as high as possible.

Read the article WildCowboy linked to. It does a good job of explaining price fixing and minimum advertised pricing.

Apple, Dell, Gateway, and Compaq/HP getting together and saying, "Hey, we should all agree to not sell a computer for less than $1000" is price fixing. Apple telling retailers, "Hey, this iPod sells for $399 period" is not.


Lethal
 
Clearly Apple's controlling the price of its products is not illegal or they wouldn't be able to continue doing it. But the ultimate effect is the same, that is to keep the price set within a very narrow range and not allow retailers to offer discounts if they are willing to make a smaller profit for whatever reason. Somehow this doesn't strike me as being "fair" to customers. Are there any other computer manufacturers that have this kind of command over the price of their products? I see plenty of Microsoft products on sale all the time. But again, Apple is on firm ground from a strickly legal standpoint.

who says a business has to be fair? they're in business for one reason....um... to make money. how they decide to do it and whether or not customers accept it is up to us...the customers.

from a channel perspective, Apple knows full well that resellers make their money on being apple certified repair shops and the fact that the apple world is full of third party add-ons - hard drives (both internal and external), ram, input devices, monitors etc..etc.. SO, while not having large margins with apple's products, resellers have other ways to make their money. i don't know for sure, but i imagine apple might have some sort of rebate program for the resellers where if they sell x amount of y, they receive a larger/smaller rebate.

Having strict reseller margins also ensures x % of folks decide to go direct with Apple b/c there isn't a big discount dealing with a reseller. Now, this isn't exactly good for the resellers obviously, but for Apple, it's golden. Anytime you have a product sold directly, you immediately increase your profit margin on that product. Why pay someone else 5% or 10% when you don't have to?

I think your post is very emotion driven which is completely fine, but some education on business models is needed.

Cheers,
keebler
 
Huh?

From Wikipidia:

"Price fixing is an agreement between business competitors to sell the same product or service at the same price. In general, it is an agreement intended to ultimately push the price of a product as high as possible, leading to profits for all the sellers. Price-fixing can also involve any agreement to fix, peg, discount or stabilize prices. The principal feature is any agreement on price, whether express or implied."​

Businesses can require their resellers to not charge below a certain price, it's done all the time.

Damnit, don't use wikipedia as a direct, reliable source. It never has, nor will it ever be, absolutely correct. It's meant as a jumping off point.

If Apple, Dell, HP and Alienware colluded to charge a certain price for EVERY computer sold, THAT would be price fixing. Apple's policy is clearly not.

Don't want to pay the premium for a Mac? Understandable, but don't assume it's illegal for them to set a certain price.

Please do a little more research on the topic next time.
 
Of course Apple indulges in price fixing. What else do you think happens behind the scenes? Do you genuinely believe we get hardware updates because the costs they are paying to Intel et al saw a corresponding decrease?
 
Businesses can require their resellers to not charge below a certain price, it's done all the time.

Damnit, don't use wikipedia as a direct, reliable source. It never has, nor will it ever be, absolutely correct. It's meant as a jumping off point.

If Apple, Dell, HP and Alienware colluded to charge a certain price for EVERY computer sold, THAT would be price fixing. Apple's policy is clearly not.

Funny, how you guys like to say "Oh, Macs use Intel processors and all the same innards as PeeCees nowadays, but they are still not PeeCees", and suddenly you turn around and band Apple with other PC manufacturers in your little example?

Apple has a monopoly on Apple branded computers. Only Apple branded computers are sold by Apple. Hence Apple = the entire market or what have you when it comes to the OS X platform, and yes, they can be said to be "price fixing" for all we care.
 
Here's something from the Department of Justice Website:

http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/eousa/foia_reading_room/usam/title7/ant00008.htm

Read through the previous pages to understand more. It's all relevant to the discussion but I don't feel like dumping a bunch of text nor do I think you want to read it all:

Identifying Price-Fixing Activities: Price fixing generally involves any agreement between competitors to tamper with prices or price levels, or terms and conditions of sale (e.g., interest rates for consumer credit), for commodities or services. Generally speaking, price fixing involves an agreement by two or more competing producers of a specific commodity, or competing providers of a particular service, in a defined geographic area, to raise, set or maintain prices for their goods or services. It may take place at either the wholesale or retail level and, although it need not involve every competitor in a particular market, it usually involves most of the competitors in the particular market.

In its most common form, price fixing is an agreement to raise the price of a product or service to or by a specific amount, e.g., all widget manufacturers agree to a 5 percent increase in price effective June 1. Other manifestations of price fixing include the following:

1. Agreements to establish or adhere to uniform price discounts;

2. Agreements to eliminate discounts to all customers or certain types of customers;

3. Agreements to adopt a specific formula for the computation of selling prices;

4. Agreements on terms and conditions of sale, including uniform freight charges, quantity discounts, or other differentials that affect the actual price of the product; and

5. Agreements not to advertise prices or to refuse to sell the product through any bidding process.

The fact that all competitors charge the same price, or use the same terms of sale, is not, by itself, evidence of a price-fixing conspiracy because similar prices may in fact be the outcome of competition. However, where price increases are announced by all competitors at the same time, or prior to a uniform effective date, there is a substantial likelihood of collusion.

Further, the fact that all prices are not identical does not indicate the absence of a conspiracy. For example, one company may have traditionally sold at a price lower than the others and, when a general increase in price occurs, the company with the lower price may adopt the same percentage or absolute increase as the others.

Records of changes or prices, including price lists, price-change notices and company memoranda relating to price analysis, are all helpful in determining the existence of a conspiracy. In addition, evidence of competitors' meetings or telephone conversations raise the possibility of collusion, and such evidence usually comprises the most effective circumstantial form of proof in price-fixing cases. Antitrust conspiracy cases, however, like other conspiracy cases, generally require testimony from a member of the conspiracy.
 
From Wikipidia:

"Price fixing is an agreement between business competitors to sell the same product or service at the same price. In general, it is an agreement intended to ultimately push the price of a product as high as possible, leading to profits for all the sellers. Price-fixing can also involve any agreement to fix, peg, discount or stabilize prices. The principal feature is any agreement on price, whether express or implied."​

Sounds like price fixing to me. Apple does have some agreement with the retailer to stabilize prices, no? But if Apple really isn't making that much of a profit on their products (yeah, right), I guess it can be defended. Does anyone have any idea what Apple's profit margin is on some of its more popular products? For example, how much do they make on a MBP?

An example of price fixing is if a group of hard drive manufacturers get together and decide to set a very high price on hard drives (regardless of how much it costs to produce them) universally, removing all competition and causing the manufacturing costs to be irrelevant.


Apple drops prices on Macs routinely as new hardware comes out, and are in direct competition with other manufacturers which they have no agreements with to fix prices (Dell, Gateway, IBM, Lenovo, etc).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.