• After 15+ years, we've made a big change: Android Forums is now Early Bird Club. Learn more here.

Price fixing?

VincentAnoid

Android Enthusiast
Price fixing means they all agree to sell at a certain price together. Its against the law as it discourages healthy competition.

So how do YOU justify for the hefty prices for mobiles? Most of the latest handsets cost in excess of
 
Smartphones actually are expensive to make. They may or may not be as expensive as they are made to be, but they are expensive. PC parts or laptop parts actually may be cheaper. The smaller something is, the more expensive it is. Plus you have to take into account the fact that they are also paying dues to Nokia, Motorola etc. Almost every single cellphone sold out there pays royalties to those two.
 
I sometimes wonder about that wrt a lot of products out there.

But I also know that companies will price things as high as they can get away with, often by "just trying" at first, sometimes regionally at first, then competitors will inch their prices up for a bit of a profit boom; that can have the appearance of "fixing," even though there may have been no overt agreement between the companies themselves.

It's risky, but seems to work, especially for the first six months or so of a device release. Then we see the prices drop and often dramatically.
 
Smartphones actually are expensive to make. They may or may not be as expensive as they are made to be, but they are expensive. PC parts or laptop parts actually may be cheaper. The smaller something is, the more expensive it is. Plus you have to take into account the fact that they are also paying dues to Nokia, Motorola etc. Almost every single cellphone sold out there pays royalties to those two.
I never knew that, why do phone makers have to pay royalties to Motorla and Nokia? Phones aren't still patented are they? :O Patents last for about 20 years
 
Yes price fixing is really hard to investigate, because of this. They don't know if theres an agreement or they're just happy to sell it for that price, even with small sales.

I guess thats innovation, things are really expensive when they're new and then they drop with newer technologies entering the market.
 
I never knew that, why do phone makers have to pay royalties to Motorla and Nokia? Phones aren't still patented are they? :O Patents last for about 20 years

Certain essential features are patented. Microsoft make a ton of money off Android because they own a patent that is central to it.

Here's an interesting article about it.
 
Oh right, does anyone know exactly what this technology is? I would like to see Apple pay royalties to Android for the pull down bar, and in future the face unlock feature.. :D
 
Oh right, does anyone know exactly what this technology is? I would like to see Apple pay royalties to Android for the pull down bar, and in future the face unlock feature.. :D


I don't think anything on Android is patented. Its supposed to be open source after all.

Nokia and Motorola own hardware design patents, and Samsung is now suing Apple for using the same or similar dual antenna design they have which is patented.
 
I don't think anything on Android is patented. Its supposed to be open source after all.
I remember something being said on here, "Home" tab in the banner about Android taking Apple to court over it. Seems like only a fortune teller knowing patents would rule the market
 
I think a bigger competitiveness issue that needs to be addressed is the high price of data plans. Seeing how fast the prices tend to fall on phones months from their release, I really doubt there's a price-fixing scheme going on. You should check out the profit margins Samsung is commanding--they're not that high. I believe one article pegged it at 12-15%, and that number fell during Q4 as a result of increased competition.


Apple however does maintain a vertical price control scheme which is presumptively legal in America and comparable to the same price control schemes used by the likes of Gucci and Bose.
 
We need to remember that with the initial release of any new technology, the pricing will be very high. That's because the manufacturer needs to recoup the investment in research and development. And there are also royalties, and the like, which are constants that are usually paid on a per unit basis. They want to get their money back as fast as they can just in case the product flops.

While it's true that some manufacturers gouge the market if they can get away with it, the selling prices will fall as a result of competition, cost margin reductions, and so on. I think that's one reason manufacturers are constantly releasing new products...they have effectively convinced the marketplace that high prices for the newest product equates to the best products. I have found that to be an illusion. The best is not always the newest.

Good, in depth, research goes a very long way towards filtering out the market-speak from the facts. Going with the mainstream will often result in a much less than satisfactory buying experience. Micro$oft and Apple are good examples, in my opinion. They are masters of market-speak.

I never trust only what a manufacturer says about anything!
 
Apple however does maintain a vertical price control scheme which is presumptively legal in America and comparable to the same price control schemes used by the likes of Gucci and Bose.

I find it amazing that people are willing to pay maybe $1,000-$2,000 USD for a Made in China handbag, just because it has a certain name or logo. Where I am, Apple products are certainly seen as high value, highly desirable luxury items.
 
I find it amazing that people are willing to pay maybe $1,000-$2,000 USD for a Made in China handbag, just because it has a certain name or logo. Where I am, Apple products are certainly seen as high value, highly desirable luxury items.


I don't even bother asking for justification for this. :D
 
I'm no Apple fanboy, so I will just say this: It's not just the vertical price fixing regimes (legal as mentioned in a previous post) that allow Apple to charge high prices. It's the consumers, i.e. the fanboys. Think about it. When your fanboyism elevates your psychological reactions to Apple products to a cultlike high, money is no object! :eek:
Yep I've seen loads of people with iPhones to be honest. And its getting boring, well to me anyway. Theres must be 'fanboyism' in Android as well. But to not that extent that people camp out for days to get the new release.
 
Oh right, does anyone know exactly what this technology is? I would like to see Apple pay royalties to Android for the pull down bar, and in future the face unlock feature.. :D

I don't think anything on Android is patented. Its supposed to be open source after all.

Nokia and Motorola own hardware design patents, and Samsung is now suing Apple for using the same or similar dual antenna design they have which is patented.

Just FYI, the pull down notification is patent pending.

Google Also Files For Patent On Notification Pull Down Bar – Yeah, Back In ’09 [Fun Facts]

Face unlock on the otherhand will likely be a no go, since Apple filed for a patent back in 2010.
 
What, so Apple are going to sue over the face unlock of the GNex and Android has the ability to sue Apple over the notification pull down if they are able to pass it?

Anything is possible, it all depends if the patents are approved, but also what the companies decide to do with it. Knowing Apple and their business practices a lawsuit will likely be coming if the patent is approved.
 
Anything is possible, it all depends if the patents are approved, but also what the companies decide to do with it. Knowing Apple and their business practices a lawsuit will likely be coming if the patent is approved.
That, and bribery
 
That, and bribery


In America, judges and lawyers can get disbarred for doing that kind of crap. Get caught with that and say good-bye to your law school tuition, the 3 years of sweat, blood, and tears you invested not to mention the decades of experience and reputation you built within your community. Word travels fast in the legal world. The legal profession isn't like like law enforcement. We hear about policemen "protecting their own" and covering up for each other when an automobile accident involving a reckless cop and an innocent civilian takes place. Doesn't happen in the legal profession. Lawyers are willing to cannibalize their own in a blink of an eye for a quick buck. There's always an interested party just waiting to take on the job of skewering their own as long as the pay is good and street cred is to be had. If there's even a hint of evidence that the judge was prejudiced because of outside influences, the other side can always appeal a tainted decision and commence an investigation against the involved parties.


The same probably applies to the ITC. Not just anyone can be appointed to become a judge of the International Trade Court. If you're caught for misdoing and lose your license, the whole legal community is onto you.


It's not all pretty unicorns and sunny skies.
 
Back
Top Bottom