oliphant
I Have 8 Boobies
Premium
join:2004-11-26
Corona, CA
| Predatory pricing is a Federal Crime
It's predatory pricing plain and simple and could be considered a violation of the Robinson-Patman Act.
»assembler.law.cornell.edu/uscode···00-.html
said by The Act:
TITLE 15 > CHAPTER 1 > § 13
§ 13. Discrimination in price, services, or facilities
Release date: 2004-05-18
(a) Price; selection of customers
It shall be unlawful for any person engaged in commerce, in the course of such commerce, either directly or indirectly, to discriminate in price between different purchasers of commodities of like grade and quality, where either or any of the purchases involved in such discrimination are in commerce, where such commodities are sold for use, consumption, or resale within the United States or any Territory thereof or the District of Columbia or any insular possession or other place under the jurisdiction of the United States, and where the effect of such discrimination may be substantially to lessen competition or tend to create a monopoly in any line of commerce, or to injure, destroy, or prevent competition with any person who either grants or knowingly receives the benefit of such discrimination, or with customers of either of them
The main exception being where the price difference is justified due to the cost of delivery or manufacture, meaning in Alaska where it costs more to deliver goods, or where labor may be more expensive a higher price may be justified, but when comparing prices here with say 80 miles away, they'd have a hard time proving that there is a significant cost difference.
And according to a different section of the act, it may even be illegal to receive the discounted price.
said by The Act:
(f) Knowingly inducing or receiving discriminatory price
It shall be unlawful for any person engaged in commerce, in the course of such commerce, knowingly to induce or receive a discrimination in price which is prohibited by this section.
What it comes down to is the Act means to stop predatory pricing so that everyone gets the same 'deal' based on what it costs the seller to produce and deliver the goods. In Comcast's cast the Act would justify a nationwide pricing mandate (the similar mandate that DirecTV and Echostar agreed to when they tried to merge that would have protected consumers in rural areas against predatory pricing).
--
Don't get it, demand it! The Anime Network www.theanimenetwork.com |
|
Blackened
Your Freedom Fries Are Stale
join:2003-09-29
| While I agree 100% with you, what do you think our corporate-backed government will do about it?
It's sad. When I moved to this town we had roughly 5 video stores, all mom-and-pop. Then in came Blockbuster. I watched them first-hand (as a blockbuster employee in high school) cut prices way below their average prices and way below the competition's. Soon after the other video stores folded, and not surprisingly, the prices on rentals skyrocketed, literally. It went from $3 per rental to $6 in the span of a few months. Now being the ONLY video store in town, they have been free to charge whatever the hell they want to those too paranoid to rent online.
I probably shouldn't mention the shady contracts that a phone and cable company have with this town to be the sole provider of their mediums.
Sufficed to say these corporations are supposed to be following laws which oliphant elaborated on, yet are not and anyone with a grasp of the obvious can see they aren't being forced to. What happened to capitalism in this country? |
|
oliphant
I Have 8 Boobies
Premium
join:2004-11-26
Corona, CA
| said by Blackened  :While I agree 100% with you, what do you think our corporate-backed government will do about it? Depends. If the muni files a federal complaint then they'll get investigated and Comcast would most likely settle rather than have too much attention drawn to it.
--
Don't get it, demand it! The Anime Network www.theanimenetwork.com |
|
calvoiper
join:2003-03-31
Belvedere Tiburon, CA
| Meeting competition with a like or lower price has long been an acceptable difference in price, not held to be "predatory" automatically.
The full legal inquiry turns on how "appropriate" the responsive price is, and whether someone can show that the intent of the price is to create a monopoly or to drive a competitor out of business, as opposed to the perfectly permissible intent of attracting and retaining customers.
Sound complex? It is. Fighting one of these cases, from either side, could be an employment boon for the legal profession.
calvoiper
--
VoIP--the death knell of remaining voice monopolies! |
|
ropeguru
Premium
join:2001-01-25
Bridgeport, WV
clubs:
 ·VOIPo
| And part of determining "how "appropriate" the responsive price is" should be the past history of the way Comcast has lobbied AGAINST all the times a muni has tried to start up their own systems. This adds to the picture how Comcast and all the other monopolies will do anything they need to in order to have it their way. |
|
calvoiper
join:2003-03-31
Belvedere Tiburon, CA | Agreed. That type of conduct would probably be included in the evidence.
calvoiper
--
VoIP--the death knell of remaining voice monopolies! |
|
