Re: International Pricing Policy
- From: "Wayne Niddery [TeamB]" <wniddery@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2007 13:27:56 -0400
I.P. Nichols wrote:
Looks like after last Thursday's Supreme Court decision CG, will be
able to set minimum retail prices in the U.S. and not be in violation
of a 1911 decision that declared that minimum pricing agreements
always violate federal antitrust law.
http://www.timesleader.com/business/20070629_29_PRICES_BIZ_ART.html
Yes, finally one small dent in the antitrust wall. It doesn't set it aside
completely but at least to some extent gives back some control to companies
over product pricing.
"Some antitrust experts say consumers shopping on the Internet will
be hurt by abandoning the 96-year-old rule."
I guess it depends on the meaning of "hurt" (or actually "harm"). If being
able to set the price that can be charged for your product is, by
definition, a "harm" then I guess we should outlaw private enterprise
completely and go to a fully government-controlled command system - since
bureaucrats apparently know what the "correct" price of everything should
be.
--
Wayne Niddery - Winwright, Inc (www.winwright.ca)
"In a tornado, even turkeys can fly." - unknown
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: International Pricing Policy
- From: I.P. Nichols
- Re: International Pricing Policy
- References:
- International Pricing Policy
- From: Farshad
- Re: International Pricing Policy
- From: Stefan Meisner
- Re: International Pricing Policy
- From: Wayne Niddery [TeamB]
- Re: International Pricing Policy
- From: I.P. Nichols
- International Pricing Policy
- Prev by Date: Re: International Pricing Policy
- Next by Date: Re: International Pricing Policy
- Previous by thread: Re: International Pricing Policy
- Next by thread: Re: International Pricing Policy
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|