Comments on: A Common Sense Approach to the MAP Price-Fixing Problem

By: This Online Seller is Ready to Rock n Roll in 2009 « TheBrewsNews

This Online Seller is Ready to Rock n Roll in 2009 « TheBrewsNews — Sat, 03 Jan 2009 14:21:10 +0000

[...] an article titled “A Common Sense Approach to the Map Price Fixing Problem” (Clik HERE for that article) where I stated my opinion that if the manufacturer has rules, such as MAP [...]

By: Mechelle

Mechelle — Mon, 08 Dec 2008 09:02:21 +0000

Thank you for being of rational mind. I cannot understand how anyone can believe that regulation of the price of goods can be a good thing. Regulation will remove the elasticity of pricing causing a never ending cycle of over pricing consumers. Without competition, which under RPM will be extinguished, the prices will never be a GOOD DEAL.

We all love sales, but RPM does not promote sales it promotes the continuance of the price commanded by the manufacturer or the large account holding retailer of the manufacturer. Sure, if the manufacturer approves a sale a retailer can match their price, but consumers aren’t getting as good of a deal as they could with this form of restraint.

What about a manufacturer who creates different price bands for different retailers? Without this restraint a retailer can compete on price even with large well known retailers. However, if the manufacturer contracts with that large retailer insisting they maintain the price of 10 dollars while contracting with other retailers with a price maintenance of 12 dollars – how will these other retailers ever compete??

They can’t and this is the juncture were consumers lose choice, option, the benefit of competition. They will have very limited options to purchase the controlled goods. Then what happens – that retailer who was able to knock competition out of the way because it benefited from preferential pricing will now enjoy big fat profit from increasing his prices effectively robbing consumers.

Anyway, it is a slippery slope to the bottom of a very costly landing.

By: Cindy

Cindy — Sun, 07 Dec 2008 23:23:03 +0000

I agree – who does win with MAP? I like the theory of MAP. No, actually – I LOVE the idea of MAP! I believe the idea is to protect the brand and set the price at a good mark-up for all. Yet, often times when I’ve been required to sign a MAP agreement – I see by researching eBay – that larger sellers are offering the same products well below MAP. So, then I start thinking – well, I guess the MAP is to keep me from being competitive with the larger, more established sellers, who the distributors seem to have turned a blind eye on. Again, it goes back to your point about building trust and relationships. I just move on and look for someone I can sell product for that treats me fairly – on eBay or anywhere else I sell.
PS: I was a little surprised this week that eBay was on Capital Hill over this issue – haven’t they looked at their own site/sellers? I can give them at least a dozen items I’ve stopped selling because others are selling below MAP on the site.

By: nadine

nadine — Sun, 07 Dec 2008 22:19:38 +0000

And I find it ironic that eBay, a company who has created more unpopular policies this year than anyone could have imagined, is leading the fight to force manufacturers to change their policies.

Ebay is impervious to irony. Their habit of mind is that of a bully; MAP is now in the way of JD’s drive to become the discount king of the Internet, so they’ll try to throw their weight around to get rid of it. Whether their new Diamond sellers like it or not. I wonder, has it occurred to eBay yet that eBay needs the Diamonds more than the Diamonds need eBay? I’m hoping that eBay’s foray onto Congressional turf will give Congress a chance to hear just how unpopular eBay has become.