I thought I would bring this up as it seems to be creeping into the Pro Audio industry.
I basicly involves the Australian distributor along with the product manufacturer (usualy an overseas manufacturer) setting a minimum retail price at which the item can be sold and thretening the seller that the product may be taken off their shelf's if they don't comply.
THIS IS ILLEGAL.
A recent penalty of $280,000 was awarded here
http://www.accc.gov.au/content/index.ph ... mId/758571
I was made aware of this a few weeks ago that a distributor was planning on doing this from and employee from that company and has subsuquently been warned by the Australian Competition and consumer comission against such behavior.
This issue was also brought up here.
http://melband.com.au/modules.php?name= ... 4&start=20
If anyone suspects this activity or is aware of it taking place please contact the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission
http://www.accc.gov.au
- It is currently Mon Jul 27, 2026 1:42 pm • All times are UTC + 10 hours [ DST ]
Resale Price Maintenance
Moderators: rick, Mark Bassett
17 posts
• Page 1 of 1
Resale Price Maintenance
by David W » Tue Aug 22, 2006 11:02 pm
-
David W - Regular Contributor
- Posts: 268
- Joined: Sat May 07, 2005 8:08 pm
- Location: Wagga Wagga NSW
by smash » Wed Aug 23, 2006 4:03 am
Personally I don't think a manufacturers setting a minimum sell price is a bad idea...
I work for a company that sells products that have a fairly low markup, A price movement of 3% is considered signifigant. The Australian distributor does reward us in the form of cash bonus' based on our sales though...
Because of this we are able to sell based on our product and indusry knowledge, and exceptional pre and post sales support. Subsequently we are the one of the highest selling stores internationally, and yet still have the most consistantly happy client base.
Supercheap, backshed type operators who sell at at a long term loss, in the end are hurting the industry, the consumer, and the reputation of the brand.
Not good for anybody.
I work for a company that sells products that have a fairly low markup, A price movement of 3% is considered signifigant. The Australian distributor does reward us in the form of cash bonus' based on our sales though...
Because of this we are able to sell based on our product and indusry knowledge, and exceptional pre and post sales support. Subsequently we are the one of the highest selling stores internationally, and yet still have the most consistantly happy client base.
Supercheap, backshed type operators who sell at at a long term loss, in the end are hurting the industry, the consumer, and the reputation of the brand.
Not good for anybody.
- smash
- Regular Contributor
- Posts: 443
- Joined: Tue Jun 07, 2005 12:49 am
- Location: Northern Beaches, Sydney
by David W » Wed Aug 23, 2006 8:38 am
[quote="smash"]Personally I don't think a manufacturers setting a minimum sell price is a bad idea...
[/quote]
I'ts not a good idea ................. it's illegal.
And if you think it is a good idea it will cost you $280,000 just to remind you.
Justifying this is like a drug addict justifying his/her crimes to feed their addiction. Just because your finding it hard to survive in the marketplace dosn't justify resorting to illegal activity.
[/quote]
I'ts not a good idea ................. it's illegal.
And if you think it is a good idea it will cost you $280,000 just to remind you.
Justifying this is like a drug addict justifying his/her crimes to feed their addiction. Just because your finding it hard to survive in the marketplace dosn't justify resorting to illegal activity.
-
David W - Regular Contributor
- Posts: 268
- Joined: Sat May 07, 2005 8:08 pm
- Location: Wagga Wagga NSW
by Kris » Wed Aug 23, 2006 10:38 am
Heading into very grey waters here...
What if this was deemed illegal when setting prices for one's services?
Manufacturer's have to be able to set a minimum price for their goods or everyone would go bust. If the re-seller is an authorised agent of the manufacturer, say for instance like Apple computer shops, then they have every right to set whatever price they like. The public will vote with their feet if it's too pricey.
Having said all of that.... I can get you a 17 inch macbook pro for $3,700 brand new if you like. That's $800 cheaper than the apple store. Just got one myself. International warranty and everything. Damn it's one sexy machine.
What if this was deemed illegal when setting prices for one's services?
Manufacturer's have to be able to set a minimum price for their goods or everyone would go bust. If the re-seller is an authorised agent of the manufacturer, say for instance like Apple computer shops, then they have every right to set whatever price they like. The public will vote with their feet if it's too pricey.
Having said all of that.... I can get you a 17 inch macbook pro for $3,700 brand new if you like. That's $800 cheaper than the apple store. Just got one myself. International warranty and everything. Damn it's one sexy machine.
- Kris
by Howard Jones » Wed Aug 23, 2006 10:57 am
Just because it is illegal does not automatically make it a bad or wrong idea. In fact, you have not presented any counter-argument other than to wave the big stick.
What is missing from the regulatory environment is any acknowledgement whatsoever that people can and do import products themselves and in so doing may undercut the authorised importer with his established cost structure. Such activities have previously been quoted on this forum in approving terms.
This is particularly obnoxious in the case of RF products such as radio mics where the Australian importers of the respective brands have to pay a fortune - and I am talking in the high tens of thousands of dollars - for compliance testing and certification with local authorities only to see clone brands on sale in places like eBay where such products have not been certified for compliance. How is an importer who is paying around $80,000 for CE testing supposed to establish a price structure that can compete against a grey importer who is not paying this? Such testing is also mandatory and it is illegal for product to be sold without it but we do not see $280,000 fines being levied against grey importers.
No importer with whom we at Studio Solutions have contact has ever mentioned retail price maintenance and, in fact, many of them make mention during the course of conversation that they are specifically unable to prevent a reseller from selling product at whatever price they choose. I am sure that most if not all are well aware of the regulatory environment in which they operate and the fines to which they would expose themselves if they defied the law.
Conversely, it would be good to see the mandarins in the Canberra ivory tower acknowledging that there are other serious issues that should be addressed in this area and legislating accordingly.
What is missing from the regulatory environment is any acknowledgement whatsoever that people can and do import products themselves and in so doing may undercut the authorised importer with his established cost structure. Such activities have previously been quoted on this forum in approving terms.
This is particularly obnoxious in the case of RF products such as radio mics where the Australian importers of the respective brands have to pay a fortune - and I am talking in the high tens of thousands of dollars - for compliance testing and certification with local authorities only to see clone brands on sale in places like eBay where such products have not been certified for compliance. How is an importer who is paying around $80,000 for CE testing supposed to establish a price structure that can compete against a grey importer who is not paying this? Such testing is also mandatory and it is illegal for product to be sold without it but we do not see $280,000 fines being levied against grey importers.
No importer with whom we at Studio Solutions have contact has ever mentioned retail price maintenance and, in fact, many of them make mention during the course of conversation that they are specifically unable to prevent a reseller from selling product at whatever price they choose. I am sure that most if not all are well aware of the regulatory environment in which they operate and the fines to which they would expose themselves if they defied the law.
Conversely, it would be good to see the mandarins in the Canberra ivory tower acknowledging that there are other serious issues that should be addressed in this area and legislating accordingly.
- Howard Jones
- TRM Endorsed
- Posts: 401
- Joined: Sat May 14, 2005 9:11 pm
- Location: Sydney
by David W » Wed Aug 23, 2006 11:20 am
[quote="Kris"]Heading into very grey waters here...
What if this was deemed illegal when setting prices for one's services?
Manufacturer's have to be able to set a minimum price for their goods or everyone would go bust. If the re-seller is an authorised agent of the manufacturer, say for instance like Apple computer shops, then they have every right to set whatever price they like. The public will vote with their feet if it's too pricey.
Having said all of that.... I can get you a 17 inch macbook pro for $3,700 brand new if you like. That's $800 cheaper than the apple store. Just got one myself. International warranty and everything. Damn it's one sexy machine.[/quote]
Not very grey at all.
Price fixing is a very serious crime.
This law is in place for a good reason which is to reduce anti-competitive behavior. Due to this law we now enjoy cheeper phone services, banking groceries and other goods and services.Society benifits as a hole.
Should a Pro Audio distributor be alowed to run a buissines in this way yet enjoy the benifits this law brings to reducing overhead costs ie phone bills,interest rates, rent and fuel. Not to mention govenment support with importation tax's etc...
I don't think so.
Just plain greed and if your to use the excuse that you cant run a bussiness profitably this way then try another job.
What if this was deemed illegal when setting prices for one's services?
Manufacturer's have to be able to set a minimum price for their goods or everyone would go bust. If the re-seller is an authorised agent of the manufacturer, say for instance like Apple computer shops, then they have every right to set whatever price they like. The public will vote with their feet if it's too pricey.
Having said all of that.... I can get you a 17 inch macbook pro for $3,700 brand new if you like. That's $800 cheaper than the apple store. Just got one myself. International warranty and everything. Damn it's one sexy machine.[/quote]
Not very grey at all.
Price fixing is a very serious crime.
This law is in place for a good reason which is to reduce anti-competitive behavior. Due to this law we now enjoy cheeper phone services, banking groceries and other goods and services.Society benifits as a hole.
Should a Pro Audio distributor be alowed to run a buissines in this way yet enjoy the benifits this law brings to reducing overhead costs ie phone bills,interest rates, rent and fuel. Not to mention govenment support with importation tax's etc...
I don't think so.
Just plain greed and if your to use the excuse that you cant run a bussiness profitably this way then try another job.
-
David W - Regular Contributor
- Posts: 268
- Joined: Sat May 07, 2005 8:08 pm
- Location: Wagga Wagga NSW
by David W » Wed Aug 23, 2006 11:32 am
[quote="Howard Jones"]
What is missing from the regulatory environment is any acknowledgement whatsoever that people can and do import products themselves and in so doing may undercut the authorised importer with his established cost structure. Such activities have previously been quoted on this forum in approving terms.
[/quote]
If I remember correctly at this time their were some outlandish price discrepencies between US and AU prices.
I have noticed that in several Melbourne stores Awave and Factory Sound that prices for stocked items are very reasonable and their would be no benifit in importing from OS legaly.
This is a good sign but was a different case several years ago.
My concern here is that in may become a practice here in Australia and there have been some signs if intent.
Because of the very fact that a consumer can purchase goods directly from overseas then an increase in price here due to price fixing will only encourage this and tension between seller and distributor.
What is missing from the regulatory environment is any acknowledgement whatsoever that people can and do import products themselves and in so doing may undercut the authorised importer with his established cost structure. Such activities have previously been quoted on this forum in approving terms.
[/quote]
If I remember correctly at this time their were some outlandish price discrepencies between US and AU prices.
I have noticed that in several Melbourne stores Awave and Factory Sound that prices for stocked items are very reasonable and their would be no benifit in importing from OS legaly.
This is a good sign but was a different case several years ago.
My concern here is that in may become a practice here in Australia and there have been some signs if intent.
Because of the very fact that a consumer can purchase goods directly from overseas then an increase in price here due to price fixing will only encourage this and tension between seller and distributor.
Last edited by David W on Wed Aug 23, 2006 11:41 am, edited 1 time in total.
-
David W - Regular Contributor
- Posts: 268
- Joined: Sat May 07, 2005 8:08 pm
- Location: Wagga Wagga NSW
by chris p » Wed Aug 23, 2006 11:39 am
[quote]Just because it is illegal does not automatically make it a bad or wrong idea.[/quote] - Howard
True, Howard - many industry people across Australia do not see the great evil in RPM, but economists assure us that any form of anti-competitive conduct is damaging. There are plenty of theses on this if you need references.
[quote]What is missing from the regulatory environment is any acknowledgement whatsoever that people can and do import products themselves ... This is particularly obnoxious in the case of RF products such as radio mics where the Australian importers of the respective brands have to pay a fortune - and I am talking in the high tens of thousands of dollars - for compliance testing and certification ... it would be good to see the mandarins in the Canberra ivory tower acknowledging that there are other serious issues that should be addressed in this area and legislating accordingly.[/quote]
Spot on. If the Government is so keen on stamping out anti-competitive conduct, it has a whole stable of its own to clean out first.
[quote]Heading into very grey waters here... What if this was deemed illegal when setting prices for one's services?[/quote] - Kris
The Trade Practices Act doesn't control how you set your price, but it does prohibit any agreement or understanding between competitors as to price (hence the petrol company probes), as well as generally prohibit arrangements between competitors aimed at reducing, preventing or eliminating competition. So you cannot talk to competitors about setting any particular rate.
[quote]Manufacturer's have to be able to set a minimum price for their goods or everyone would go bust. If the re-seller is an authorised agent of the manufacturer, say for instance like Apple computer shops, then they have every right to set whatever price they like. [/quote] - Kris
Manufacturer's can set their own price - the prohibited RPM is where the manufacturer tries to set the retailer's price.
True, Howard - many industry people across Australia do not see the great evil in RPM, but economists assure us that any form of anti-competitive conduct is damaging. There are plenty of theses on this if you need references.
[quote]What is missing from the regulatory environment is any acknowledgement whatsoever that people can and do import products themselves ... This is particularly obnoxious in the case of RF products such as radio mics where the Australian importers of the respective brands have to pay a fortune - and I am talking in the high tens of thousands of dollars - for compliance testing and certification ... it would be good to see the mandarins in the Canberra ivory tower acknowledging that there are other serious issues that should be addressed in this area and legislating accordingly.[/quote]
Spot on. If the Government is so keen on stamping out anti-competitive conduct, it has a whole stable of its own to clean out first.
[quote]Heading into very grey waters here... What if this was deemed illegal when setting prices for one's services?[/quote] - Kris
The Trade Practices Act doesn't control how you set your price, but it does prohibit any agreement or understanding between competitors as to price (hence the petrol company probes), as well as generally prohibit arrangements between competitors aimed at reducing, preventing or eliminating competition. So you cannot talk to competitors about setting any particular rate.
[quote]Manufacturer's have to be able to set a minimum price for their goods or everyone would go bust. If the re-seller is an authorised agent of the manufacturer, say for instance like Apple computer shops, then they have every right to set whatever price they like. [/quote] - Kris
Manufacturer's can set their own price - the prohibited RPM is where the manufacturer tries to set the retailer's price.
-
chris p - Frequent Contributor
- Posts: 882
- Joined: Tue May 10, 2005 6:15 pm
- Location: Sydney, NSW
by Howard Jones » Wed Aug 23, 2006 12:53 pm
"I thought I would bring this up as it seems to be creeping into the Pro Audio industry.
I basicly involves the Australian distributor along with the product manufacturer (usualy an overseas manufacturer) setting a minimum retail price at which the item can be sold and thretening the seller that the product may be taken off their shelf's if they don't comply."
You thought this, did you? You have condemned a whole industry and on what evidence? The example you have cited relates to the consumer electronics industry, not the pro audio industry. I say the opposite: that RPM has long gone from pro audio and if you feel differently, you should state some clear evidence before you condemn ALL importers. You have also stated that the Australian importer colludes with the product manufacturer - this is probably an even bigger claim, one that you again give no evidence for and one that may not even be in contravention of Australian law (I wouldn't know). I do not believe there is even one case of a local distributor accepting price setting by a product supplier.
I think you should get off your high-horse before slagging off the whole industry.
"If I remember correctly at this time their were some outlandish price discrepencies between US and AU prices.
I have noticed that in several Melbourne stores Awave and Factory Sound that prices for stocked items are very reasonable and their would be no benifit in importing from OS legaly."
Who defines "outlandish discrepancies"? The end purchaser, I suppose. But, turn this around and look at it another way - maybe these differences were not indicative of price maintenance but of the Australian retail channels taking the price they were charged, adding their margin and thus arriving at the final selling price. There may be many reasons why the US prices might be cheaper - why do you rush to the assumption that Australians are engaging in illegal activities as the answer to this question? If you have noticed that you can purchase at what you find to be reasonable prices at Awave and Factory Sound, then go make your purchases there.
"True, Howard - many industry people across Australia do not see the great evil in RPM, but economists assure us that any form of anti-competitive conduct is damaging. There are plenty of theses on this if you need references."
I wasn't making a statement one way or the other about my personal beliefs on RPM. I was making a philosophical argument that all wisdom does not automatically lie with the legislators. As for economists... I am old enough to remember when RPM was the law, legislated for some industries in this country. Clearly, the legislators and economists of 30 years ago thought this was a good idea for Australia and if you went back you would find theses supporting RPM for certain market sectors. Free trade is all the rage now but, 30 years ago, protectionism was pretty much the accepted wisdom. So much for economists.
ACCC is a particular worry. I think that their remit is so narrow, failing to take into account questions of the greater good of the country, that some of their decisions have left us the poorer. I am not saying that in general ACCC are not a good thing. I am not saying that any manufacturer should indulge in illegal activities. (As a sidebar, I would say that pro audio companies are far less likely to do this following some high profile - and very expensive cases - in the 90s). I am, however, saying that blanket condemnation of our industry is a poor substitute for reasoned argument supported by actual examples of wrong doing.
I basicly involves the Australian distributor along with the product manufacturer (usualy an overseas manufacturer) setting a minimum retail price at which the item can be sold and thretening the seller that the product may be taken off their shelf's if they don't comply."
You thought this, did you? You have condemned a whole industry and on what evidence? The example you have cited relates to the consumer electronics industry, not the pro audio industry. I say the opposite: that RPM has long gone from pro audio and if you feel differently, you should state some clear evidence before you condemn ALL importers. You have also stated that the Australian importer colludes with the product manufacturer - this is probably an even bigger claim, one that you again give no evidence for and one that may not even be in contravention of Australian law (I wouldn't know). I do not believe there is even one case of a local distributor accepting price setting by a product supplier.
I think you should get off your high-horse before slagging off the whole industry.
"If I remember correctly at this time their were some outlandish price discrepencies between US and AU prices.
I have noticed that in several Melbourne stores Awave and Factory Sound that prices for stocked items are very reasonable and their would be no benifit in importing from OS legaly."
Who defines "outlandish discrepancies"? The end purchaser, I suppose. But, turn this around and look at it another way - maybe these differences were not indicative of price maintenance but of the Australian retail channels taking the price they were charged, adding their margin and thus arriving at the final selling price. There may be many reasons why the US prices might be cheaper - why do you rush to the assumption that Australians are engaging in illegal activities as the answer to this question? If you have noticed that you can purchase at what you find to be reasonable prices at Awave and Factory Sound, then go make your purchases there.
"True, Howard - many industry people across Australia do not see the great evil in RPM, but economists assure us that any form of anti-competitive conduct is damaging. There are plenty of theses on this if you need references."
I wasn't making a statement one way or the other about my personal beliefs on RPM. I was making a philosophical argument that all wisdom does not automatically lie with the legislators. As for economists... I am old enough to remember when RPM was the law, legislated for some industries in this country. Clearly, the legislators and economists of 30 years ago thought this was a good idea for Australia and if you went back you would find theses supporting RPM for certain market sectors. Free trade is all the rage now but, 30 years ago, protectionism was pretty much the accepted wisdom. So much for economists.
ACCC is a particular worry. I think that their remit is so narrow, failing to take into account questions of the greater good of the country, that some of their decisions have left us the poorer. I am not saying that in general ACCC are not a good thing. I am not saying that any manufacturer should indulge in illegal activities. (As a sidebar, I would say that pro audio companies are far less likely to do this following some high profile - and very expensive cases - in the 90s). I am, however, saying that blanket condemnation of our industry is a poor substitute for reasoned argument supported by actual examples of wrong doing.
- Howard Jones
- TRM Endorsed
- Posts: 401
- Joined: Sat May 14, 2005 9:11 pm
- Location: Sydney
by David W » Wed Aug 23, 2006 2:03 pm
[quote="Howard Jones"]
You have condemned a whole industry and on what evidence? The example you have cited relates to the consumer electronics industry, not the pro audio industry.
Howard............. I have raised concern not condemned.
Once again due to a direct conversation with an employer who expressed his companys intentions.I have it on very good assurance that the cited example does relate to the Pro Audio industry as well as consumer electronics.
It is actualy my impression that the person involved was under the assumption that this practice would soon be legalised which is why I thought I would bring it up.
You have condemned a whole industry and on what evidence? The example you have cited relates to the consumer electronics industry, not the pro audio industry.
Howard............. I have raised concern not condemned.
Once again due to a direct conversation with an employer who expressed his companys intentions.I have it on very good assurance that the cited example does relate to the Pro Audio industry as well as consumer electronics.
It is actualy my impression that the person involved was under the assumption that this practice would soon be legalised which is why I thought I would bring it up.
-
David W - Regular Contributor
- Posts: 268
- Joined: Sat May 07, 2005 8:08 pm
- Location: Wagga Wagga NSW
by Howard Jones » Wed Aug 23, 2006 2:36 pm
"Once again due to a direct conversation with an employer who expressed his companys intentions.I have it on very good assurance that the cited example does relate to the Pro Audio industry as well as consumer electronics.
It is actualy my impression that the person involved was under the assumption that this practice would soon be legalised which is why I thought I would bring it up."
The cited example relates purely to the named company Cambur Australia. I went and looked at their website and they import & distribute homewares - not a Pro Audio product in sight.
The Melband link you posted is a place where you basically already raised this issue so it reads like you are quoting yourself in order to support yourself. The discussion there relates to Mesa, again not a Pro Audio product but an MI product.
And lastly, we have an impression based on an assumption. No hard evidence anywhere here. As you have pointed out so forcefully, RPM is illegal and isn't about to be made legal anytime soon that I know of...
It is actualy my impression that the person involved was under the assumption that this practice would soon be legalised which is why I thought I would bring it up."
The cited example relates purely to the named company Cambur Australia. I went and looked at their website and they import & distribute homewares - not a Pro Audio product in sight.
The Melband link you posted is a place where you basically already raised this issue so it reads like you are quoting yourself in order to support yourself. The discussion there relates to Mesa, again not a Pro Audio product but an MI product.
And lastly, we have an impression based on an assumption. No hard evidence anywhere here. As you have pointed out so forcefully, RPM is illegal and isn't about to be made legal anytime soon that I know of...
- Howard Jones
- TRM Endorsed
- Posts: 401
- Joined: Sat May 14, 2005 9:11 pm
- Location: Sydney
by smash » Wed Aug 23, 2006 2:58 pm
[quote="David W"][quote="smash"]Personally I don't think a manufacturers setting a minimum sell price is a bad idea...
[/quote]
Just because your finding it hard to survive in the marketplace dosn't justify resorting to illegal activity.[/quote]
Actually, if you re read the post - we're not finding it hard to survive in the market place. The company that I work for is the most sucessfull in the country, and also the highest selling in the world, after a population index has been supplied.
The reason - a very tight pricing structing has meant that we win our contracts based on knowledge, service and support.
[/quote]
Just because your finding it hard to survive in the marketplace dosn't justify resorting to illegal activity.[/quote]
Actually, if you re read the post - we're not finding it hard to survive in the market place. The company that I work for is the most sucessfull in the country, and also the highest selling in the world, after a population index has been supplied.
The reason - a very tight pricing structing has meant that we win our contracts based on knowledge, service and support.
- smash
- Regular Contributor
- Posts: 443
- Joined: Tue Jun 07, 2005 12:49 am
- Location: Northern Beaches, Sydney
by smash » Wed Aug 23, 2006 3:06 pm
We actually did have a rival distrubitor begin underpricing us recently...
We the customers needed support, the distrutor were unable to comply.
We became the default service and support offerer for their clients.
We charged them $180.00 oer hour. Our clients we supported for free.
The difference in price between our original product, and the cheaper version was about $100.00
Whose customers do you think are better off? Our Customers, or the customers of the below cost distrubutor who incurred the several thousand dollar service fees?
We the customers needed support, the distrutor were unable to comply.
We became the default service and support offerer for their clients.
We charged them $180.00 oer hour. Our clients we supported for free.
The difference in price between our original product, and the cheaper version was about $100.00
Whose customers do you think are better off? Our Customers, or the customers of the below cost distrubutor who incurred the several thousand dollar service fees?
- smash
- Regular Contributor
- Posts: 443
- Joined: Tue Jun 07, 2005 12:49 am
- Location: Northern Beaches, Sydney
by rob » Wed Aug 23, 2006 4:50 pm
with all due caution, i think it's reasonable if i throw in a few things to consider.
One of my occasional activites is to 'number crunch' the entire pricing structure of one of Australia's larger pro-audio distributers. There is currently nearly 400 products in the list from 20 different manufacturers.
I have recently completed a complete review of all pricing for this distributer. It takes a 1 meg excel file to crunch all the data.
For the first time for any Australian distributer we have taken a unique approach to determine the retail price. Our starting point was not, as is usually the case, to look at our distributer buy price, but rather to look at the realistic "street price" you could purchase that item for from the US.
We then added the cost that you'd pay to ship the unit here, with insurance, customs fees and GST and a very small percentage margin to cover the technical and user support you'll get from us.
We have called this the "price". We have said to retailers "here's a price that is competative with US online shops, you shouldn't feed pressured to sell it for less".
What any retailer sells it for is their call. We understand that entirely.
Most US manufacturers are dispensing with RRP or list pricing. They are adapting to the change in the market regarding online purchasing. Thus they suppy a MAP, this is the Minimum Advertised Price. Under US law they CAN enforce this by stopping supply if someone advertises a price below MAP. An advertised price may not be not always equal what someone will ultimately pay, however increasingly most retailers are sticking very closely to MAP prices.
We have thus taken on OS online sales directly, no-one should need to buy from OS to save money.
Of course you might buy cheaper from the US if:
The price is stupidly low and unsustainable ( try getting tech support from an ebay seller in a years time )
You don't insure the unit for shipping ( ever seen what happens to a massive passive when the courier drops it?)
You win the great customs lottery and escape having to pay customs fees and GST. ( well, good fortune to you, but strictly you have broken the law, and this is one area where the application of the law should be tightened up for the sake of fair play )
So, what we have done is all in purchasers favour and generally retail prices have come down. We make less margin ( profit ) but are prepared to wear this to support the Australian industry.
We had a complaint laid against us by someone to the ACCC ( could this be you David ?? ). This was laid entirely on the basis of a misunderstanding that arose from one phone call to us.
We have spoken with the ACCC, there is NO issue.
So now you have the scoop on a revolution in pro audio retail pricing!
It has nothing to do with pricing fixing or restricting trade.
It has everything to do with making our industry sustainable in the world of the internet and credit card. Ultimately serving (you) the purchaser of pro audio gear with the best pricing possible.
Any complaints? .... Questions?
:) Rob
One of my occasional activites is to 'number crunch' the entire pricing structure of one of Australia's larger pro-audio distributers. There is currently nearly 400 products in the list from 20 different manufacturers.
I have recently completed a complete review of all pricing for this distributer. It takes a 1 meg excel file to crunch all the data.
For the first time for any Australian distributer we have taken a unique approach to determine the retail price. Our starting point was not, as is usually the case, to look at our distributer buy price, but rather to look at the realistic "street price" you could purchase that item for from the US.
We then added the cost that you'd pay to ship the unit here, with insurance, customs fees and GST and a very small percentage margin to cover the technical and user support you'll get from us.
We have called this the "price". We have said to retailers "here's a price that is competative with US online shops, you shouldn't feed pressured to sell it for less".
What any retailer sells it for is their call. We understand that entirely.
Most US manufacturers are dispensing with RRP or list pricing. They are adapting to the change in the market regarding online purchasing. Thus they suppy a MAP, this is the Minimum Advertised Price. Under US law they CAN enforce this by stopping supply if someone advertises a price below MAP. An advertised price may not be not always equal what someone will ultimately pay, however increasingly most retailers are sticking very closely to MAP prices.
We have thus taken on OS online sales directly, no-one should need to buy from OS to save money.
Of course you might buy cheaper from the US if:
The price is stupidly low and unsustainable ( try getting tech support from an ebay seller in a years time )
You don't insure the unit for shipping ( ever seen what happens to a massive passive when the courier drops it?)
You win the great customs lottery and escape having to pay customs fees and GST. ( well, good fortune to you, but strictly you have broken the law, and this is one area where the application of the law should be tightened up for the sake of fair play )
So, what we have done is all in purchasers favour and generally retail prices have come down. We make less margin ( profit ) but are prepared to wear this to support the Australian industry.
We had a complaint laid against us by someone to the ACCC ( could this be you David ?? ). This was laid entirely on the basis of a misunderstanding that arose from one phone call to us.
We have spoken with the ACCC, there is NO issue.
So now you have the scoop on a revolution in pro audio retail pricing!
It has nothing to do with pricing fixing or restricting trade.
It has everything to do with making our industry sustainable in the world of the internet and credit card. Ultimately serving (you) the purchaser of pro audio gear with the best pricing possible.
Any complaints? .... Questions?
:) Rob
-
rob - TRM Endorsed
- Posts: 1011
- Joined: Tue May 10, 2005 9:16 pm
- Location: Adelaide
by Peter Knight » Sat Aug 26, 2006 2:49 pm
I wish there was a bit of resale price maintenance (on the topside) on Tool tickets! Both the Sydney and Melbourne gigs sold out yesterday in about an hour. It seems that hardly any hardcore fans got tickets, but that most of them went to scalpers (there was no limit on how many tickets you could buy apparently).
Scum.
Scum.
- Peter Knight
- Registered User
- Posts: 119
- Joined: Sat May 07, 2005 1:02 pm
- Location: Perth
17 posts
• Page 1 of 1
Return to The Turtlerock Forum
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 17 guests