Slashdot Mirror
SCOTUS Case May End Sale Prices
An anonymous reader writes "If you own a mom & pop store and can't get rid of some of your inventory, you can always clear out some shelf space by holding a sale. If the Supreme Court sides with business interests in a case they heard today, however, such sales may no longer be possible. Since 1911 it has been illegal for manufacturers to force retailers into setting a price floor for products — individual retailers get to decide how much they sell products for. But today the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in a case seeking to overturn this longstanding rule. Should the Court do so, it would drive up consumer prices across the board. This case is particularly salient in the era of Internet shopping: consumers are now easily able to shop around to multiple retailers to find the best price. The Court could wipe out this advantage." From the article: "Should the Court abandon the... rule against minimum resale price maintenance... it would send a signal that the Roberts Court will continue to narrow the application of the antitrust laws and that the Court may disregard settled precedent and Congressional will in other areas of the law as well."
It is bad because it drives out retailers that might offer better service and support. It drives down prices to the point where only the superbig high-volume retailers can exist.
As a side effect, it makes it possible for the "New York Photo Shop Scam" to exist where they advertise an item at an incredibly low price (grey market, of course) but then you are required to purchase something else to get the price. You find this all the time doing price searches for photo and electronics gear. Good thing? I don't think so, but that is what Internet price searches thrive on - low prices.
It is difficult to filter results with price searches by anything except low price - you see the same item listed for two prices both from web sites that you know nothing about. Maybe you can go to the trouble of figuring out that one of them is charging 3x or 4x real shipping costs to make up for it, but by then you have to go back through the whole process again to find the next lowest price.
Or, they charge you "sales tax" when you have no way of knowing they aren't paying tax.
Yes, this could be a new business model, but the model comes down to destruction of the environment. You start with looking for low prices and end up getting a series of sub-prime sellers each one trying to make up on shipping and phony sales tax what they are losing on item margins. It creates an environment of distrust and suspicion. It is also just a race to the bottom with the consumer hoping someone can afford a couple of ethics when they reach it. It is absolutely WalMart wins, Mom & Pop lose.
It used to be you would know when someone offered you a product on the street for 10% of the retail price that it was not legitimate. Today, there is virtually no protection for the consumer. The Internet retailer doesn't have a BBB rating or a writeup in a local newspaper - they have low, low, low prices and Froogle delivers hits.