Well, personally, I would not one an apple product.
Please explain how a manufacturer would go out of business without map?
+100 on that. I’d like it explained too.
I don’t think one can be pro-consumer while advocating price manipulation from manufacturer/retailer. If MAP is a requirement for most business to survive so that we will something to buy, what is the choice of the consumer then? Wait for what price that is comfortable for the retailer/manufacturer?
Obviously a very rough example with lots of ignored variables-
Five retailers sell product ‘A’ and all have reasonable turnover
One of them starts selling ‘A’ below the prices of the others, causing buyers to only buy from them.
The other four retailers cannot sell through their stock and so stop buying from product ’A’s manufacturer.
The only remaining retailer having forced the others out, can now charge whatever price they like as there is no more competition.
The Manufacturer now has less distribution channels, less product exposure, less turnover, less profits, reduced product development etc etc etc
Buyers now have less choice and few options if the only reseller has crap service/support.
Oh sorry if my original post sounded harsh, I re-read it and it does sound so.
I don’t condone price fixing by any means, however manufacturers do need a sustainable business model, and one that supports and encourages all it’s resellers to ensure growth of a brand.
so in this case why is price fixing and collusion not legal, they would have the same effects?
I personally think the arguments pro MAP are to avoid its real intent, to maximize profit by stifling competition, as it represents the closest legal method of price fixing.
That scenario is very possible….however,
isn’t it also possible that the 4 other retailers lower their prices to “price-match”, which is what should ideally happen?
If the first one can survive, the others could too.
My 2 cents…
If I want a light - I want the lowest price - obviously.
MAP exists - Manufacturers and sellers can deal with this… I don’t care.
What I do care about is manufacturers/vendors/dealers cluttering up our forum with MAP related drama. We are free to discuss prices here - if these prices violate MAP its not our problem and anyone who doesn’t like this can go to hell.
If a price discussed here violates MAP its a problem for someone…
I realize that the worst that can happen is a vendor will pull a light if they get complaints on a MAP violation… I guess its up to the vendors/sellers discretion how they chose to advertise a price and us if we decide to discuss it.
MAP isn't the best way for business and competition in the market.
In Germany most stores have the same (or similar price - maybe a small difference of 1-2€) for brand flashlights like Fenix, Olight, SWM, Nitecore etc. and if you want the flashlight in 2-3 days, 24 months warranty (every shop in Germany has to give a warranty of 24months by law) you accept the high price (I think it#s the MAP in Germany).
Of course this is good for each shop, because now the shops with good service can make the purchase. But for us as a customer who want the best price and have the knowledge to repair small defects it isn't the best. If I have to pay 20-30% less [the german prices are high for example the Fenix TK35 XM-L U2 cost 100€ + shipping (round about $130 + shipping) or the Olight M3X Triton XM-L2 109€ + shipping (round about $145 + shipping] you can do a lot for example built in a other driver. To have no warranty (to send it back to HongKong, which need 2 weeks and wait 4-8 weeks to get a repaired back) is acceptable if I can save 20-30%.
The idea that a free market will squeeze out all but one dealer who will then own the market and raise prices sky high is Mostly nonsense.
The dealer with the monopoly based on low price still has to compete with other brands with similar Products and with dealers who offer better service etc.
I have no problem with the MFG setting the price. If it's not fair? then I just don't buy it. Especially something as frivolous as a flashlight.
If a retailer agrees to MAP fully knowing they will break the agreement, then that retailer is a liar and cheat, since they knew ahead of time they would not honor the agreement. No honor among thieves is about right.
But you are not taking into account that the retailer can sell the item A for the price he wants. The retailer just can’t advertise the price. They can give you a 50% off coupon or some other discount, they just can’t advertise the final price. So there are cheaper retailers out there they just have to follow the manufactures rules to keep the other retailers happy.
That’s where we come in. We can discuss the final price. But as others already mentioned that was some how against the rules to. You can post a great deal on a item all over the internet for millions to see, explaining how you get the good deal. You just cant post the final price. Makes no sense to me, how many people do you think are not going to add that item to the cart and apply the code just to see what the price is. I do it ever time, It gets me curious just to find out what the final price actually is. So it may actually work against the MAP policy sometimes.
I used to use a MAP, but I find the GPS much better.
What?…….Oh, never mind!
one could argue they are acting like robin hood, thats not my opinion, i’m just throwing it out there
I think its because some dealers buy in bulk and can sell for less than other dealers can buy their stock for. That means only the sellers with the most money will be making more money because the others can’t compete and might as well close down, then the when the big sellers are the only ones left they can charge high prices because they have no competition.
For most of my flashlight purchases I have contacted the seller and negotiated a price that we are both happy with which is usually way under MSRP
Of course I don’t like high fixed prices but its nothing a a email or coupon code can’t fix.
If you view the advertised price as the the starting point for negotiation then 90% of the time you will get a better deal.
MAP is not price fixing. The acronym stands for Minimum Advertised Price.
You can sell it for whatever you want to, just don’t advertise below a certain number. The problem is, it leads down a path of temptation towards antitrust (true price fixing).
Any supplier-retailer MAP (or non-MAP) agreement should be in writing and up front, and carefully written. Retail Price Maintenance is illegal in some countries.
On this and any other forum, we can post reseller advertised prices until the cows come home. The MAP-bound price is on the seller’s site, not BLF.
We can post after-coupon prices as well, although this may lead to the seller getting heat from the supplier. Even though they did not post the price, it is now advertised somewhere.
My suggestion is to post the advertised price and mention the coupon and discount percentage.
Some examples given above are not that realistic and are more-or-less taking place in a vacuum (assumes only one manufacturer). A single manufacturer may try to fix it’s prices, but another can take the opportunity to walk in and undercut them with their own product. Note that selling below cost with the intent to drive a competitor out of the market is illegal as well.
MAP-Minimum Advertised Price
GPS-Get Price the Same
What.
I agree. Manufacturers have MAP, I don’t care. It just shouldn’t be our problem.
If forum members talk about a low price offered (but not explicitly advertised) by one dealer, another dealer shouldn’t take that and go crying to the manufacturer about it. It was a forum discussion, not an advertisement.
In the past, I thought that not disclosing prices was a small price worth paying to keep good sellers like IS out of trouble. But I’ve come around. MAP shouldn’t be our problem. We should be free to discuss what we want here.
I totally agree.
I don’t see how they can threaten with the MAP agreement upon a retailer, when one of us has posted the price here.
Looks like legally that would be a preach of contract on the manufactures part, if they pulled there products from the retailer for our actions.
I re-read my posts, i was not suggesting that MAP is price fixing, but that its the closest legal relative, it attempts to keep prices high, but is not the aforementioned illegal price fixing.
This is perhaps one of the biggest flaws in capitalism, you can get big enough to drive competitors out of business (through many practices, not just “competition”) until you have a monopoly situation and then charge whatever you want and keep new entrants from succeeding in the marketplace, Oligopolies can operate similarly through collusion, gentleman’s agreements and so forth
Let’s go back to the original premise of this thread, and I will add why it came about: FT publishes a net price of about $49 for its SWM D40A. Some are not comfortable with the announcement for the possible backlash of the MAP thing. To simplify matters, again, like what happened to the Crelant and Fenix brands, do we allow now, from the buyer’s perspective, any manufacturer/wholeseller to put the brakes again?
Why can’t they just allow the retailer to publish whatever price he intends, instead of having go through coupon codes, etc. of which not all of us has information about? If after the coupon code the final amount received by the seller is the same, with or without the MAP, what then is the logic of this MAP thing?
In my eyes, its like telling the retailer. “Ok you can give a few people a discounted price. Just don’t tell everyone or we will come for you.”