That does not grant them the right to block regular people from selling used Apple stuff.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
FTC Looking Into Impact of Apple's Sales Agreement With Amazon on Independent Resellers
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Who is Apple blocking? I sell my used Apple devices all the time. My local Craigslist and Kijiji are filled with businesses selling used Apple devices.
They would be blocking unauthorized sellers who want to put their stuff on Amazon.
And they are 100% in their right to do so. There are lots of other markets resellers can use if they wish or *gasp* they can create their own website.
But it’s hard to scam people when you run a small business with your own custom website. People will be leery of spending $$$ on Apple devices from some private company they haven’t heard of. Much easier to get on Amazon and use their reputation to assist your business.
If you want access to a market (Amazon) you need to follow their rules.
Amazon is not acting as a neutral marketplace. If they were not dominant, maybe they could get away with it.
I agree with that.
Apple does that the ability to restrict inventory, licensing and parts and instructions to outlets of their choosing, however.
What law states Amazon has to behave like a neutral marketplace? There is none. Their store, their rules.
If they don't sell on Amazon, they (and Amazon) are accused of monopolism. You can find lower prices on Amazon. I've seen lower, but Amazon is there ALL the time. The third-party sellers? I've never seen a deal on Apple products that was very good. Might be wrong, but I've never seen it.
[doublepost=1564850348][/doublepost]
Used, absolutely. That no longer belongs to Apple. If they used to sell refurbed Apple products and they no longer do, then that's wrong.
[doublepost=1564850348][/doublepost]
Used, absolutely. That no longer belongs to Apple. If they used to sell refurbed Apple products and they no longer do, then that's wrong.
Apple doesn't release numbers so you are making up numbers when you say those refurbished iPhones account for less than 1 % of total sales.
Maybe antitrust does.
[doublepost=1564851900][/doublepost]
Right to repair
There is a lot of made of stuff on these boards, and it's up to us (the posters/readers) to separate the wheat from the chaff.
I don’t need to make up numbers to know your original post had absolutely zero truth to it.
I quoted the MacRumors summary which quoted theverge. Zero truth? Lol.
You just need some common sense to realize that if apple is able to sell x amount of refurbished iPhones, they are having x amount of iPhones returned.
Last edited:
Only if Amazon applied specific restrictive practices to ALL vendors.
Right to Repair is not a “free for all” whereby anyone is allowed access to parts or instructions to perform a repair. Manufacturers can limit who gets to do repairs and what procedures must be followed to perform those repairs.
They are discriminating against some vendors.
Right to repair is precisely about allowing anybody to fix their own devices.
There’s no discrimination. They created a specific set of rules vendors need to follow to sell their products. The requirement to purchase a minimum amount of product (in this case $2.5 million every 90 days) is a VERY common practice in retail.
Not really. Nobody can force a company to give away intellectual secrets or proprietary information about how their devices work, for example. And manufacturers are well within their rights to specify procedures to be followed or tools to be used (very common in the automotive industry).
No you didn’t. You posted:
I don’t recall either MR or The Verge say anything about there being “so many problems with iPhones.....”. They simply posted the purchase requirements.
You just need common sense to know the return rate for electronics is well over 1% (even for Apple). This is normal and doesn’t indicate there are “problems” with iPhones. Last quarter Apple sold $26 billion worth of iPhones. At only 1% that’s still $260 million in iPhones, or 104x the $2.5 million limit. Plenty of iPhones to go around just from “normal” returns.
I wouldn’t buy phones that are “seller refurbished”. It pretty much means nothing. I also discovered that some third party displays will render the proximity sensor unusable. The sensor is actually fine but either it can’t see through the glass or a little electronic chip on the screen is missing or preventing it from working.
TLDR I’ve decided to let Apple fix my screen if I ever break it. I just wish consumers could get legit parts.
I don't know what that means. "Right to repair." Is it just a catch phrase that is supposed to mean something?
Apple has the right to restrict their manuals and who they sell their replacement parts to.
Nobody is being deprived of a "right to repair."
You might not be able to have the repair done the way you want it done for the cost you want to pay, but that doesn't mean you can't take it to Apple or an authorized repair center and have it fixed.
I have a late model, British car. If I have an engine problem, I cannot take it down the street to "Joe's Auto Repair Shack."
I have to take it to the dealer or an authorized service shop, because my vehicle brand restricts who has access to the diagnostic tools and parts.
They don't do this because they are "greedy, evil corporations." They do this because they sell expensive products and they understand, rightly or wrongly, people will associate a bad experience with their product and NOT Joe's Auto Repair Shack.
Apple does the same thing. They tightly control it the experience from purchase to use to repair.
People like Louis Rossman and iFix it and OWC scream and scream about "right to repair" and the lambast the closed nature of the products.
That's because their business suffers when they cannot sell parts.
And consumers whine because they can't fix things cheaply.
There is no higher principle---it's all about money.
[doublepost=1564876718][/doublepost]
Yes, agreed. And as I've said time and time again, customers will equate a bad experience with Apple and not the shady seller. Apple has to be able to protect its brand.
There are plenty of Windows machines out there if you don't like it.
I'm talking about Amazon rules, not Apple rules.
Laws can force companies to comply with arbitrary rules if they want to do business in the jurisdiction.
[doublepost=1564878156][/doublepost]
Right to repair laws are being discussed.
It means if you sell parts or manuals to authorized shops, you have to let anyone be able to buy those parts or manuals. You can't restrict them.
If you don't sell to authorized partners, you don't have to sell to the public.
I disagree with that. Ford motor company is not forced to sell Ferrari parts.
Apple should be able to work with the retail partners is chooses to work with; they shouldn't be forced to do business with shops they don't want to do business with.
After all, you can't just walk into any store you want to buy a Mac.
Apple will just end around these "rights" with software & hardware locks---they've already done this with the T2 security chip.
Anyway, I know I will get TORCHED for this in the comments because my views are unpopular, but whatever.
I kinda agree. Everyone has the “right” to tinker with their own devices.
Apple is simply under no obligation to make it easy for you to do so.
No one is asking for that.
When someone says they are in favor of right to repair laws, they arent saying they want to force apple to design their products to be easier to fix. It means they want to be able to buy the same parts and training manuals apple sells to authorized repair partners and for the warranty to not be void just because you repaired your own property.