Slashdot Mirror


Nintendo Fined $143m for Price-Fixing

kyz writes "The BBC is reporting that the anti-trust branch of the European Commission has fined Nintendo 146 million euros (roughly $143m) for preventing its distributors from selling games as cheaply as they are sold in other European Union countries. For example, "prices of Nintendo products were up to 65% higher in Germany or the Netherlands than in Britain". Now if only the EU could do this with Microsoft, Levi Strauss and the MPAA members..."

18 of 428 comments (clear)

  1. Good for them by Raul654 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Disclaimer: I am not one of those people you see protesting around every IMF meetings

    With that said, I swear to god, multinational cooperations have no conscience. Turn on the news, and all you see is the Enrons, Microsofts, and all these other coopertions who do everything they can to screw the consumer and their employees to make an extra penny. Good for the Europeans, bout damn time someone smacked those companies down, even if it is one with good Karma like nintendo.

    --


    To make laws that man cannot, and will not obey, serves to bring all law into contempt.
    --E.C. Stanton
    1. Re:Good for them by tswinzig · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Turn on the news

      There's your first problem... you watch the news.

      and all you see is the Enrons, Microsofts, and all these other coopertions who do everything they can to screw the consumer and their employees to make an extra penny.

      Bad news sells.

      Of course you don't hear about the plethora of companies that do good things, act humanely, have scruples, etc... they do exist, and I'd wager they outnumber the enrons of the world.

      Bad news sells.

      --

      "And like that ... he's gone."
    2. Re:Good for them by sql*kitten · · Score: 4, Insightful

      With that said, I swear to god, multinational cooperations have no conscience. Turn on the news, and all you see is the Enrons, Microsofts, and all these other coopertions who do everything they can to screw the consumer and their employees to make an extra penny. Good for the Europeans, bout damn time someone smacked those companies down, even if it is one with good Karma like nintendo.

      On the contrary, multinationals are only operating within the framework provided by national governments. When governments dismantle their trade barriers, such as import tarriffs and quotas, then price differences will simply be arbitraged away by brokers (i.e. you see something selling for $10 in country A and $5 in country B, export/import it and sell it in country A for $6 - eventually the margin will tend to zero). But that can only happen if there are no obstacles to freely moving goods and capital around.

      The biggest barrier to this is ironically the EU itself who protect manufacturers like Levi Strauss from UK retailers who source overseas and want to sell at less than Levi's MRRP. Not to mention the distortions the EU create in the market with their subsidies of inefficient industries.

      Frankly, I don't know who's worse, corrupt corporations (as distinct from well-run corporations) or corrupt politicians - and the EU isn't even democratically elected! A shareholder has far more influence on a company than a voter has on the European Commission (that's a fact).

    3. Re:Good for them by Twirlip+of+the+Mists · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I swear, the bigger a company gets, the more evil it gets.

      You're making unsupportable generalizations here, you know that? Boeing, Home Depot, Fannie Mae, State Farm, Morgan Stanley, Target, P&G, Berkshire Hathaway, Safeway... these companies are all in the Fortune 50. Please list your complaints against each, in as much detail as possible, so we can all accept your assertion that big companies are automatically evil.

      --

      I write in my journal
  2. So... by elphkotm · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If Nintendo sells units for more money in a country with less demand, it's illegal? Price-fixing? Nintendo competes in one of the fiercest markets around. *BOGGLE*

    --

    <Amanda`> I just went out to the parking lot in my bathrobe to exchange warez CDs.
    1. Re:So... by NineNine · · Score: 5, Insightful

      No, what they were doing is telling their *distributors* what they could sell 'em for. The thing is, at least with real merchandise (as opposed to say, software), when you buy something, you own it, and can sell it for whatever you'd like to sell it for.

    2. Re:So... by mccalli · · Score: 5, Insightful
      If Nintendo sells units for more money in a country with less demand, it's illegal?

      Not what the ruling's about. The ruling isn't about price per se, it's about controlling the distribution.

      What Nintendo were doing was selling a game for x in the UK, and the same game for x+5 in, say, France. Perfectly legal.

      The trouble is that they were then trying to prevent French consumers from buying in Britain and importing directly into France. Now, the EU is an internal free-trade area, so controlling imports between member states is a big no-no.

      That's the case. Not the price as such, but the control of distribution across member state boundaries.

      Cheers,
      Ian

  3. Nothing new for Nintendo by shepd · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Nintendo has only loved the pocketbooks of their users, nothing more.

    People have already mentioned their price fixing the NES, but how about their security chips and their rabid hate of Tengen? And then there's the Game Genie and how Nintendo did their best to put Camerica out of business.

    Nintendo just ain't cool when it comes to anything that lowers their share of pocketbook abuse. Always has been, always will be.

    --
    If you could be told what you can see or read, then it follows that you could be told what to say or think - BoC
  4. I wonder when... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    They will fine the DVD consortium for region coding. I'm sure that it's cheaper to buy american DVDs than the the euro ones that are likely released much later.

  5. Re:Rights by mccalli · · Score: 4, Insightful
    After all, can't the German customer just call up someone in Britain and have them buy it for him and ship it to Germany, and pay him the $50 plus a bit for his troubles?

    No - not if no-one's willing to sell it to them. And Nintendo were using their clout with retailers to ensure that no-one was.

    That's the entire point of the case.

    Cheers,
    Ian

  6. Doesnt make sense by ramzak2k · · Score: 4, Insightful

    not that i am a big fan of nintendo, how could the EU enforce a rule that the price of anything sold has to be the same across the EU states. In that article they compare the price of cubes sold in Britain & Germany. Does this essentially mean that the services (shipping, handling etc)would invariably cost me the same in germany & Britan ?

    More over, there could always be the additional language barrier & translation costs for the cubes or any other product. Wouldnt it be a valid argument for price hike from nintendos side ? (although 65% is a little too much)

    --

    Siggy Say, Siggy Do
  7. Re:Basic rights by lamz · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It seems like it has more to do with the open trade policies within the EU than it does with Nintendo.

    You're absolutely right. Unfortunately, it has lately become fashionable to hate corporations. Personally, I find it mind-boggling that someone can hate a corporation but NOT hate government for the same reasons. My government takes 55% of my income EVERY year. Compared to that, Nintendo isn't even a minor concern.

    --

    Mike van Lammeren
    It will challenge your head, your brain, and your mind.

  8. Re:$143 million dollars? by Directrix1 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Lets see, they just lost $143 million dollars? So now, is this going to make them drop the prices in the other countries or raise the prices in the countries that were getting the games at good rates. I wonder.

    --
    Occam's razor is the blind faith in the natural selection of least resistance and in universal oversimplification. -- EF
  9. Re:No surprise by Sentry21 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    While I know that prices in the UK are usually high, the figures quoted are irrelevant for a simple reason: if you're going to compare, compare against one country, and take things into account. The UK taxes cigarettes far more than most countries do (as I recall) - are taxes an issue? Germany is famous for its beer - is the beer in both situations made by the same company, so that you're having a fair comparison of products? If so, what about shipping costs and so on?

    Even here in Canada, you can get a pre-cooked shrimp ring for about $9.99 in BC, $8.99 in Saskatchewan, and $4.99 in New Brunswick, all the same brand. You can also get $10 shrimp rings in New Brunswick from more widely known (i.e. larger, better) brands. Is this because people in BC get 'screwed', or because it costs a lot of money to ship refrigerated shrimp ten thousand kilometers?

    If you're going to compare, you have to take more factors than just the price into account - local economy, shipping, VAT, local taxes, and so on. Is the US getting screwed because a BK Whopper costs more there than here? No, we just have cheaper beef, and a lower (but stronger) economy, so prices are less. It's good sense, and sensible economics.

    --Dan

  10. Re:Rights by mccalli · · Score: 4, Insightful
    In a free market, there will always be someone willing to provide such services.

    No.

    Nintendo were leaning on the retailers to ensure that anyone supplying to a cheaper country suddenly got their supply of Nintendo games cut off. There was no-one willing to do this. The second you did, you lost all rights to sell Nintendo stuff.

    If people are unable to do so, then that is the case because EU laws/tarrifs/regulations/etc. are the problem.

    Exactly the opposite. The EU has laws that enable people to do so and these laws have been used against Nintendo, who were trying to prevent it.

    Cheers,
    Ian

  11. Re:$143 million dollars? by macdaddy357 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Nintendo will begin a series of pay cuts and layoffs that will save them $143 million this fiscal year. It won't hurt the bosses who violated anti-trust laws one bit. When they fine corporate robber barons, it always gets passed on to the little guy. They need to throw them in prison.

    --
    How ya like dat?
  12. Re:Basic rights by theLOUDroom · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Let me just say, damn I wish I was in your tax bracket. And no I don't feel sorry for you at all. People need to pay taxes so we have things like roads and schools.
    I hate monopolies, I love competition. Certain types of price fixing is a crime. Criminals suck. The gov't is not a bunch of criminals for taking your money. They are doing things that benefit society with that money. Ever drive on a public road?
    You tax rate is prorably so high because your income is high and whatever country you live in was wise enopugh to institute some sort of progressive tax system. If you don't like having a gov't you should find a place where you can live among fellow anarchists. You can grow your own food and carry a gun everwhere you go, while watching you standard of living go to shit.
    I personally believe that at some level of income, the tax rate for individuals should become 100%. No one person should have a billion dollars, it's impossible for a democaracy to exist when people do. The economy would still function just fine under this system, since indiviuals could still pool their money by creating corporations.

    --
    Life is too short to proofread.
  13. Re:Nintendo never changes by Vrallis · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You got better than we did. The AG here in Texas just completely blew it when he won our suit against Nintendo. Every Nintendo owner in Texas received a nice shiny new COUPON for $5 off your next PURCHASE of yet another overpriced game.

    This is like telling a murderer that they are free to go, but have to give the police a 5-minute warning before the next time they kill someone.