Three Firms Guilty of LCD Price Fixing

[fitbabits]

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Three major electronics manufacturers have agreed to plead guilty to a price-fixing conspiracy and pay $585 million in criminal fines for their roles in the pricing of LCD display panels, the Justice Department said Wednesday.

The department announced the charges following a settlement with Sharp Corp. of Japan; LG Display Co. of South Korea and Chunghwa Picture Tubes of Taiwan.

The charges were filed in U.S. District Court in San Francisco, Calif., and announced by the assistant attorney general for antitrust at the Justice Department in Washington.

"These price-fixing conspiracies affected millions of American consumers who use computers, cell phones and numerous other household electronics every day," said Barnett. He declined to estimate losses stemming from the price fixing, but said he expected to provide some measure of the damages when the corporations are sentenced.

The Justice Department said LG Display Company, previously LG Philips, will pay by far the largest fine - $400 million, the second highest criminal fine ever imposed for price-fixing. The firm agreed to plead guilty to participating in a conspiracy from 2001 to 2006 to set the price of LCD panels worldwide.

Chunghwa will pay a $65 million fine for participating with LG and other unnamed co-conspirators during the five-year period.

Sharp agreed to pay a $120 million fine for three separate conspiracies with unnamed partners who sold LCD panels with artificially inflated prices to Dell (DELL (http://money.cnn.com/quote/quote.html?symb=DELL&source=story_quote_link), Fortune 500 (http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune500/2008/snapshots/1053.html?source=story_f500_link)) for computer monitors and laptops, Motorola (MOT (http://money.cnn.com/quote/quote.html?symb=MOT&source=story_quote_link), Fortune 500 (http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune500/2008/snapshots/288.html?source=story_f500_link)) for panels in Razr mobile phones and Apple (AAPL (http://money.cnn.com/quote/quote.html?symb=AAPL&source=story_quote_link), Fortune 500 (http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune500/2008/snapshots/670.html?source=story_f500_link)) for panels used in iPod portable music players.
Barnett said only the three corporations are charged, but stressed the investigation is continuing and did not rule out possible charges against individuals from the three firms or from other firms. If charged and convicted, individuals could face a sentence of up to 10 years.

Justice Department officials said Sharp reported $6.8 billion last year in revenue from LCD sales out of $34 billion in total revenue. LG Display Co. reported $15.3 billion in revenue last year. Chunghwa reported $4.8 billion in revenue. The worldwide LCD market is estimated at $70 billion annuallyA just and timely verdict, methinks.

[Schnoogs]

Why is this illegal again?

[TheFlyingOrc]

Why is this illegal again?

In the US we outlaw price fixing among multiple firms to keep competition alive in the free market.

[itchyeyes]

Why is this illegal again?
Erm, because it undermines the foundation of a capitalist economy?

[Schnoogs]

In the US we outlaw price fixing among multiple firms to keep competition alive in the free market.

That's only three companies out of dozens. People can still choose to either buy someone elses product or not buy at all. Thus price fixing = fail.

Again I ask...why is this illegal?

[Schnoogs]

Erm, because it undermines the foundation of a capitalist economy?

It does? How does it do that? Does this somehow prevent the consumer from choosing to buy something else or not buy at all?


Plus if 90% of the people buy Sharp the other companies will say fuck this and drop out of the price fix arrangement.

Capitalism for the win.

[PathMaster]

A just and timely verdict, methinks.

Just? Yes. Timely? Maybe not so much. Cartel action allegedly only took place from September 2001 to June 2006. Over two years they stopped those activities.

Question is, how will consumers pay for this? Will they slow down the decrease in screens for a few months extra?

[Ancalagon]

That's only three companies out of dozens. People can still choose to either buy someone elses product or not buy at all. Thus price fixing = fail.

Again I ask...why is this illegal?

I thought you liked capitalism?

Althought its not clear from the OP, I wonder whether they were fixing prices of consumer goods - the finished monitors, including panels and stands. Or... if they were fixing prices to business customers, because a lot of LCD screens contain panels manufactured by other people.

Its illegal because competition is an important market force that acts in the interests of consumers. It drives innovation and keeps prices elastic, and hopefully low. By allowing companies to reach agreements on pricing, they have little incentive to lower prices, because higher prices obviously earn them more money, and they dont have to worry about competitive forces keeping prices down, since they know their fellow businesses will also not drop prices. Basically, they dont have to worry about being undercut.

Essentially, it gives them carte blanche to make lots of money. So the consumer has choice, does he? Yes he does, but his options are now bad options because of price fixing. Hes paying more for the same thing than he should. They may only have caught 3 of them, that doesnt mean more werent involved.

I think the problem with things like this, is that the punishment never fits the crime. Half a billion in fines? Please, they likely made more than that in the 5 years this scam was running, a lot more. They should be forced to take out full page newspaper ads explaining how greedy they are, and being forced to redress their wrong to the very people they hurt - the customer. Either through rebates or mandatory price reductions for future products for a period of time. Yeah, its harsh punishment, but I get sick and tired of these companies getting away with it. If you think fraud is cool, be prepared to pay for it. Currently companies still do it because even if you get caught, you just pay a little fine.

[Schnoogs]

I thought you liked capitalism?.

Still waiting to hear how this isn't. :confused:

And can you spare me the meaningless, blanket statements.

[Schnoogs]

Its illegal because competition is an important market force that acts in the interests of consumers. It drives innovation and keeps prices elastic, and hopefully low. By allowing companies to reach agreements on pricing, they have little incentive to lower prices, because higher prices obviously earn them more money, and they dont have to worry about competitive forces keeping prices down, since they know their fellow businesses will also not drop prices. Basically, they dont have to worry about being undercut.

Poor logic...first off this isn't every company so competition is still alive. Second off the consumer can always choose to not buy seeing as LCDs aren't up there with food, air and water. Then the companies will be forced to lower their prices.

Capitalism for the win.

[itchyeyes]

It does? How does it do that? Does this somehow prevent the consumer from choosing to buy something else or not buy at all?


Plus if 90% of the people buy Sharp the other companies will say fuck this and drop out of the price fix arrangement.

Capitalism for the win.
These aren't allegations over consumer product prices, these are allegations over the actual panels sold to manufacturers like Apple, Nintendo, Dell, etc... specifically small panels used in devices like the DS, cellphones, and ipods. For these uses these companies have a much larger combined market share. Also for these kinds of uses price isn't the only factor. A company like Apple for example needs a massive amount of LCD panels. It's little consolation for a competitor to offer a cheaper product if they can't supply them in the quantities that Apple needs. The price fixing scheme tied up massive amounts of small LCD panels at a higher price point, which gave companies like Apple and Motorola few, if any other choices but to buy at a higher price point.

[Ancalagon]

Poor logic...first off this isn't every company so competition is still alive. Second off the consumer can always choose to not buy seeing as LCDs aren't up there with food, air and water. Then the companies will be forced to lower their prices.

Capitalism for the win.

itchyeyes addresses your first point rather well.

Secondly, when you get 1680 x 1050 on your coke bottle, let me know.

[Schnoogs]

itchyeyes addresses your first point rather well.

Not really seeing as there are still manufacturers not involved in this agreement and whom are free to compete.

Still...regardless of that...people can refuse to buy the product. At the end of the day they can only set the price to what people are willing to pay.

Meanwhile DLP and plasma manufacturers are catering to disenfranchised consumers.

Capitalism works well.

[itchyeyes]

Not really seeing as there are still manufacturers not involved in this agreement and whom are free to compete.

Still...regardless of that...people can refuse to buy the product. At the end of the day they can only set the price to what people are willing to pay.

Meanwhile DLP and plasma manufacturers are catering to disenfranchised consumers.

Capitalism works well.
I would replace that last sentence with simply "capitalism works". True, price fixing cannot set the prices beyond what someone is willing to pay, but they more or less set them at the maximum that they are willing to pay. The essential idea behind the whole concept of capitalism is that it's a system where both producer and consumer serve each other out of their own interest. In efficient markets producers compete to drive costs down, not just the cost to the consumer but the cost to manufacture the goods themselves. Price fixing removes much of this incentive, resulting in a market that while not as bad as it could be, does not serve society as well as it is capable of.

In other words, a market where price fixing is allowed is a net loss for society compared to a market where all producers compete with each other. The laws against price fixing are not there because it causes any particular societal ills, but because it impedes societal gains.

[Goronmon]

Not really seeing as there are still manufacturers not involved in this agreement and whom are free to compete.
If I'm not mistaken, Sharp and LG make up a significant portion of the LCD manufacturing companies in the world.

Still...regardless of that...people can refuse to buy the product. At the end of the day they can only set the price to what people are willing to pay.

Meanwhile DLP and plasma manufacturers are catering to disenfranchised consumers.Interesting...I did not know devices such as PSPs and laptops had optional plasma and DLP screens. Where might I find these products?

[Dukefrukem]

could i have a link to that article please.

[Schnoogs]

I would replace that last sentence with simply "capitalism works". True, price fixing cannot set the prices beyond what someone is willing to pay, but they more or less set them at the maximum that they are willing to pay. The essential idea behind the whole concept of capitalism is that it's a system where both producer and consumer serve each other out of their own interest. In efficient markets producers compete to drive costs down, not just the cost to the consumer but the cost to manufacture the goods themselves. Price fixing removes much of this incentive, resulting in a market that while not as bad as it could be, does not serve society as well as it is capable of.

In other words, a market where price fixing is allowed is a net loss for society compared to a market where all producers compete with each other. The laws against price fixing are not there because it causes any particular societal ills, but because it impedes societal gains.

I still don't see anything wrong with this.

All video games cost the same thing new...is that price fixing? Technically no because they didn't all secretly collude with each other. Has it killed competition? Hardly.

[fitbabits]

could i have a link to that article please.
Sure (http://money.cnn.com/2008/11/12/news/international/pricefixing/index.htm?postversion=2008111216).

It's since been fleshed out (the article, that is).

[Ancalagon]

Not really seeing as there are still manufacturers not involved in this agreement and whom are free to compete.

Still...regardless of that...people can refuse to buy the product. At the end of the day they can only set the price to what people are willing to pay.

Meanwhile DLP and plasma manufacturers are catering to disenfranchised consumers.

Capitalism works well.

You still dont get it? There arent as many LCD panel manufacturers as you think. This isnt the consumer section, this is the business section. There are only a few LCD manufacturers, and they sell panels to everyone, to Samsung, Apple, etc. Apple doesnt make their own LCDs.

And.... as itchyeyes said, what if Apple needs 3 million of a certain kind of LCD, with certain qualities, and a certain quality guarantee. Now, assuming the existence of other LCD manufacturers, who knows if they can fulfil the order? If these guys, probably the biggest, can, they all charge the same price. LG wont undercut Sharp, and Sharp wont undercut the other guy (cant remember name). So Apple has to pay whatever price is demanded of them. And they (potentially) have no other choices.

But lets go with your suggestion, lets assume their is a manufacturer, that can supply Apple's needs, and isnt in the agreement (and again, we arent sure if others werent guilty but got away scot free. Virgin airways, for example, got off scot free by telling on BA). So now, assuming the 4th manufacturer is willing to undercut the other 3, we arent sure whether they can, due to economies of scale. But lets assume it does anyway. Can you see a logical reason for the other 3 to keep their agreement in that case, given that they would lose sales and thus profit? Is it reasonable to assume then, that if they kept the agreement for 5 years, it must have been good for them? Is that a stretch of logic? Do you think if it sucked and cost them money, that they wouldnt have ditched it long ago?

And if it did bring them business, by artifically keeping prices high, you think thats a good thing?

[Schnoogs]

If I'm not mistaken, Sharp and LG make up a significant portion of the LCD manufacturing companies in the world.

Interesting...I did not know devices such as PSPs and laptops had optional plasma and DLP screens. Where might I find these products?

Yeah because you don't have the option of not buying these devices. You are FORCED to pay for them regardless of the cost. (Could really use the rolls eyes icon)

Even if they were 1 billion dollars you would buy them...price fixing for the win!!!

[Schnoogs]

You still dont get it?

Perhaps there's nothing to get. Don't flatter yourself kid.

[Goronmon]

Yeah because you don't have the option of not buying these devices. You are FORCED to pay for them regardless of the cost. (Could really use the rolls eyes icon)What about the companies making the devices? Only certain manufacturers (like the ones mentioned) are capable of providing the panels. You don't see it as harmful to the market if all these manufacturers agree to set certain prices for their products?

Even if they were 1 billion dollars you would buy them...price fixing for the win!!!Classic Schnoogs right here.

Perhaps there's nothing to get. Don't flatter yourself kid.I'm not sure why you like to pretend you are such a moron. What do you gain by it?

[Schnoogs]

Classic Schnoogs right here

Yes...making fun of the stupidity of others.

[Schnoogs]

What about the companies making the devices? Only certain manufacturers (like the ones mentioned) are capable of providing the panels. You don't see it as harmful to the market if all these manufacturers agree to set certain prices for their products?

Yeah because god forbid another company starts up to compete with them.

[Goronmon]

Take Dell as an example. They can't opt out of purchasing LCD panels for their laptops. They have to buy them in order to create their own products and exist as a business. If their only options for panel providers team up to screw them over on price, there is not much they can do. They can either buy the panels at the inflated price, make significant changes to their business to remove the need for the panels, or close shop.

[Crowe]

Why is this illegal again?

Nice bait.

[Ancalagon]

I'm not sure why you like to pretend you are such a moron. What do you gain by it?

I dont know, he seems to think no one has to buy a device containing an LCD, I wonder how he expects businesses to do business or grown men to surf porn.

Really Schnoogs, you argue for the sake of arguing sometimes. Since LG and Sharp together make up most of the market, and supply just about everyone else, what choice do you think you have? Also note that Chunghwa was swatted for colluding with other unnamed partners. You dont have a choice - if you want something computer related, the price was higher than it should have been. Thats basically what this means.

Yeah because god forbid another company starts up to compete with them.

Yeah, I got $5, lets start an LCD company. Its so cheap, I dont know why other companies havent done it. Yeah, LCD manufacturing is so cheap and you dont need any technical expertize, its so cool.

Do you just troll all day?

[Goronmon]

Yeah because god forbid another company starts up to compete with them. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barriers_to_entry

[itchyeyes]

I still don't see anything wrong with this.

All video games cost the same thing new...is that price fixing? Technically no because they didn't all secretly collude with each other. Has it killed competition? Hardly.
The difference with your example is that while video game companies nearly all sell their games at the same price, they are still in fierce competition, competition to increase the value of what the consumer gets for that price. One need only look at the visual differences between the games of today and the games of a few years ago to see the effects of how that competition benefits us all.

With the LCD issue though, products are more or less all the same. Producers can't differentiate themselves by making a screen of exceptional quality, because a screen of exceptional quality doesn't differ by much from a screen of marginal quality. So price is where competition gets expressed.

[Shadowstorm]

Schnoogs is a professional troll. I don't know why some of you entertain him like this.

[Krispy]

Really Schnoogs, you argue for the sake of arguing sometimes.

Only sometimes? I think Schnoogs believes himself to be the only sane person on this message board and none of us can see it. :) Must be our 9rd grade education.

[Re3x]

Didnt they do this against AMD and Nvidia?

[Schnoogs]

Schnoogs is a professional troll. I don't know why some of you entertain him like this.

That would imply that I get paid for it...much like how your mom gets paid for blowjobs. :p

[Ancalagon]

That would imply that I get paid for it...much like how your mom gets paid for blowjobs. :p

Can we stop with the childish personal attacks?

[TheFlyingOrc]

Can we stop with the childish personal attacks?
Not if you keep being a doodiehead.

[Schnoogs]

Can we stop with the childish personal attacks?

The hilarious part is that I was just insulted by at least 4 or 5 members but you conveniently excuse their behavior.

[Crowe]

It's quite clear Schnoogs has been browsing Sherdog a little more than usual. That shit can really mess with you.

[Dukefrukem]

Can we stop with the childish personal attacks?

Just about to post that. It's pretty ridiculous.

[Schnoogs]

It's quite clear Schnoogs has been browsing Sherdog a little more than usual. That shit can really mess with you.

Sherdog will prepare you for any level of forum stupidity.

I like to train in the off season.

[Dukefrukem]

http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/1339/tcppunch0tk.gif

[Ancalagon]

The hilarious part is that I was just insulted by at least 4 or 5 members but you conveniently excuse their behavior.

Schnoogs, I dont think saying that you are trolling, or are a troll, is an insult, since it refers to forum behaviour.

Jokes about someone else's mom kinda are though.

[Schnoogs]

Yeah, I got $5, lets start an LCD company. Its so cheap, I dont know why other companies havent done it. Yeah, LCD manufacturing is so cheap and you dont need any technical expertize, its so cool.

Thank god Japan and the US didnt look at Germany and say "well we don't have $5 to start up a car company...man that looks tough".

Thank god I'm just a troll and not an idiot.

Are you really this uninformed? Do you ever wonder where new companies come from? Or do you think god gave them to us at the origin of the universe?

[Schnoogs]

Schnoogs, I dont think saying that you are trolling, or are a troll, is an insult, since it refers to forum behaviour.

Jokes about someone else's mom kinda are though.

I was just commenting on her behavior too. :p

[Ancalagon]

Thank god Japan and the US didnt look at Germany and say "well we don't have $5 to start up a car company...man that looks tough".

Thank god I'm just a troll and not an idiot.

Are you really this uninformed? Do you ever wonder where new companies come from? Or do you think god gave them to us at the origin of the universe?

Okay Schnoogs, you tell me, why has no one started a new LCD company? Come on, if its such common knowledge, if idiots like me, and businessmen like Warren Buffet and Bill Gates dont know why they dont just quickly start LCD businesses, then maybe you can tell me?

I know where new companies come from, I'm waiting for you to tell me why there isnt a new company to challenge the Evil Alliance that was Sharp and LG. Lets hear it.

[Schnoogs]

I know where new companies come from.

The nexus of the universe.

[Ancalagon]

The nexus of the universe.

You not going to answer my question? Why hasnt another company risen to challenge LG and Sharp? You can be all tough on the Internet, but when it comes to backing up your statements, you got nothing? Thought so...

[itchyeyes]

Okay Schnoogs, you tell me, why has no one started a new LCD company? Come on, if its such common knowledge, if idiots like me, and businessmen like Warren Buffet and Bill Gates dont know why they dont just quickly start LCD businesses, then maybe you can tell me?

I know where new companies come from, I'm waiting for you to tell me why there isnt a new company to challenge the Evil Alliance that was Sharp and LG. Lets hear it.
Don't bother arguing with him anymore, it's exactly what he wants. Notice how you're not talking about price fixing anymore? That's his tactic. Any legitimate argument he either ignores, or he evades and switches topic. There's no way to win this argument. He'll just lead you from one argument to another, never acknowledging when you're right, and pounce on you when you finally slip up.

[Schnoogs]

You not going to answer my question? Why hasnt another company risen to challenge LG and Sharp? You can be all tough on the Internet, but when it comes to backing up your statements, you got nothing? Thought so...

This coming from a guy who thinks only LG and Sharp make LCDs!!! :p

Your post wasn't even worth taking seriously because it was so stupid to begin with.

We could take any industry and ask why hasn't one more company entered the fray. Who fucking cares? That's not even relevant to the argument.

If it was lucrative to do so other companies would join the mix. It's not because it's technically infeasible.

[Schnoogs]

Don't bother arguing with him anymore, it's exactly what he wants. Notice how you're not talking about price fixing anymore? That's his tactic. .

Actually he brought that up...so I guess your tactic is not even knowing whats going on :p

Like taking candy from a baby

[Ancalagon]

This coming from a guy who thinks only LG and Sharp make LCDs!!! :p

Your post wasn't even worth taking seriously because it was so stupid to begin with.



So you are admitting that you have got nothing. Yeah, as soon as you cant answer my question, because you know I'm right, and you actually dont know what you are talking about, you avoid it.


We could take any industry and ask why hasn't one more company entered the fray. Who fucking cares? That's not even relevant to the argument.

You brought it up here . You seemed to think it was important. Now its not suddenly? What gives?


If it was lucrative to do so other companies would join the mix. It's not because it's technically infeasible.

Yes, but why is it or is it not feasible. You dont know hey?

Cos, you know, you said that it would be so easy for a new company to just start. But now you say it isnt feasible? I'm confused. Which is it?

[Schnoogs]

So you are admitting that you have got nothing. Yeah, as soon as you cant answer my question, because you know I'm right, and you actually dont know what you are talking about, you avoid it?

You list two manufaturers despite their being tons more...yeah you're right! :p

What's even funnier is that you list 2 and yet this thread is about 3!!!!!! :p

[Dukefrukem]

Schnoogs you're not winning here, and in fact you're only making yourself look worse. Please just stop.

[Mr. Murphy]

What some people who talk economics seem to miss, is that the point is to create a situation where everyone can buy the things they want at a reasonable price - not create a situation where people can't buy the things they want because another party is making the maximum possible profit.

Yes, we can choose not to buy the product in question... but that sucks. People want iPods, and computers, and all the nice things that our American culture grants us access to. The majority of American citizens want a situation where they can afford those things, and price fixing does not play into that picture.

So how about, price fixing is bad because it doesn't support the majority, and the majority rules, right?

[Schnoogs]

Schnoogs you're not winning here, and in fact you're only making yourself look worse. Please just stop.

I don't care about looking good...I just care about being right whatever the cost.

I take it you too also think that ONLY LG and Sharp make the words supply of LCDs? :p

[Dukefrukem]

I don't care about looking good...I just care about being right whatever the cost.

I take it you too also think that ONLY LG and Sharp make the words supply of LCDs? :p

You may have a point somewhere that all of us have yet to see, but the snood little comments in between your posts are not helping your case.

[Mr. Murphy]

I don't care about looking good...I just care about being right whatever the cost.


Because of this, you're wrong even when you are right. Everything seems black and white to you.

I wish life were that simple for the rest of us, but we don't have your particular... advantages.

[Schnoogs]

What some people who talk economics seem to miss, is that the point is to create a situation where everyone can buy the things they want at a reasonable price - not create a situation where people can't buy the things they want because another party is making the maximum possible profit.

Yes, we can choose not to buy the product in question... but that sucks. People want iPods, and computers, and all the nice things that our American culture grants us access to. The majority of American citizens want a situation where they can afford those things, and price fixing does not play into that picture.

So how about, price fixing is bad because it doesn't support the majority, and the majority rules, right?

You contradict yourself...if noone buys the product then the company can't maximize their profit. In turn they will lower the price. No company is gonna keep the price too high. Hence why LCDs are selling like hotcakes.

That's what makes this whole argument silly...we talk about price fixing being so bad yet we all own them and the prices have been dropping like flies.

[Schnoogs]

you're wrong even when you are right. .

you probably tried that line of BS in a class once :p

[itchyeyes]

What some people who talk economics seem to miss, is that the point is to create a situation where everyone can buy the things they want at a reasonable price - not create a situation where people can't buy the things they want because another party is making the maximum possible profit.

Yes, we can choose not to buy the product in question... but that sucks. People want iPods, and computers, and all the nice things that our American culture grants us access to. The majority of American citizens want a situation where they can afford those things, and price fixing does not play into that picture.

So how about, price fixing is bad because it doesn't support the majority, and the majority rules, right?
Nice, someone who wants to discuss the actual topic. Actually, it's about more than simply setting the price at a level that is acceptable to both consumers and producers. It's about using competition and that price differential as an incentive for progress. When firms compete, any firm that can marginally improve the product or marginally reduce the price stands to gain temporarily over their competitors. This results in a slow, steady march towards maximum efficiency in any market. When firms collude on prices, however, they remove that incentive to gain over other firms since they're now working together. This results in market stagnation.

Like I mentioned earlier in the thread, price fixing laws are not put in place because of any particular harm that is being done, but because the hinder the market from producing the most efficient results.

[Crowe]

I don't care about looking good...I just care about being right whatever the cost.

I take it you too also think that ONLY LG and Sharp make the words supply of LCDs? :p

In this case, meeting the cost is beyond you.

[Mr. Murphy]

you probably tried that line of BS in a class once :p

I've never gone to school, I live in the ozarks and comunicate on a log tied to a tree stump.

It's a simple fact that you don't know everything. If you can't admit that, you're always going to be wrong about some part of what you are talking about.

You don't know all the nuances and details of the subject at hand, and yet you have decided you are right. Therefor, even your good points are drowned in your inability to accept new information. You argue against blanket statements and then say you are right... at any cost. Being right is about what's real, and there's no cost to being right, unless it's swallowing your pride and saying

"Hey, good point"

something you refuse to do... because then you wouldn't be 'right', I guess?

[Schnoogs]

I've never gone to school, I live int he ozarks and comunicate on a log tied to a tree stump.

It's a simple fact that you don't know everything. If you can't admit that, you're always going to be wrong about some part of what you are talking about.

You don't know all the nuances and details of the subject at hand, and yet you have decided you are right. Therefor, even your good points are drowned in your inability to accept new information. You argue against blanket statements and then say you are right... at any cost. Being right is about what's real, and there's no cost to being right, unless it's swallowing your pride and saying

"Hey, good point"

something you refuse to do... because then you wouldn't be 'right', I guess?

Yawn...I'll wait for a response to my counterpoints...what you just posted is 3rd rate fluff. Save it for those with low self esteem.

[Schnoogs]

In this case, meeting the cost is beyond you.

Judging by the responses I think I'm doing OK. Still waiting for some counterpoints.

[itchyeyes]

Judging by the responses I think I'm doing OK. Still waiting for some counterpoints.
Funny, you still haven't responded to my counterpoint on page 2. Nor did you post any response to my post on page 1 aside from "I still don't see anything wrong with this." and then shifted the topic.

In fact, while you seem to be just about the only one here who seems to think price fixing is ok, I've yet to see you make a coherent reason for why. All you've done so far is pick apart details in other people's arguments. Why exactly do you think price fixing should be allowed?

[muddi900]

You list two manufaturers despite their being tons more...yeah you're right! :p

What's even funnier is that you list 2 and yet this thread is about 3!!!!!! :p

This despite five bajillion posts preceding in this thread countering this argument and the fact that your arguments do not even concern the specifics of the situation shows that you haven't even read any posts in this completely. You're just quoting lines out of context and responding such that it works great as bait, is defined in the popular internet lexicon as "trolling".

Think of the children. Dont feed the troll.

As far as price fixing goes, there will be anarchy if there is no price fixing. If in the interests of fair competition, companies do not stoop low for cheap profits. If there was no price fixing, people would've been buying craptacular quality(of the product and not the content) DVD's for 3 bucks.

No price fixing = chaotic competition

Too much price fixing = fair competition

Some price fixing = Fair competition.

[Krispy]

Funny, you still haven't responded to my counterpoint on page 2. Nor did you post any response to my post on page 1 aside from "I still don't see anything wrong with this." and then shifted the topic.

In fact, while you seem to be just about the only one here who seems to think price fixing is ok, I've yet to see you make a coherent reason for why. All you've done so far is pick apart details in other people's arguments. Why exactly do you think price fixing should be allowed?

Because if it wasn't, he would be wrong and as he already stated he has to be right no matter the cost. Ergo ad hoc. :cool:

[Schnoogs]

This despite five bajillion posts preceding in this thread countering this argument and the fact that your arguments do not even concern the specifics of the situation shows that you haven't even read any posts in this completely. You're just quoting lines out of context and responding such that it works great as bait, is defined in the popular internet lexicon as "trolling".

Think of the children. Dont feed the troll.

As far as price fixing goes, there will be anarchy if there is no price fixing. If in the interests of fair competition, companies do not stoop low for cheap profits. If there was no price fixing, people would've been buying craptacular quality(of the product and not the content) DVD's for 3 bucks.

No price fixing = chaotic competition

Too much price fixing = fair competition

Some price fixing = Fair competition.

Funny how you spend half your post insulting me and lying and then you have the audacity to call me a troll. Denial and hipocrasy...two peas in a pod! :p

Oh and thanks for agreeing with me at the end..."Some price fixing = Fair competition"

this is like putting Einstein into a think tank with 5 corky's. :p

[itchyeyes]

As far as price fixing goes, there will be anarchy if there is no price fixing. If in the interests of fair competition, companies do not stoop low for cheap profits. If there was no price fixing, people would've been buying craptacular quality(of the product and not the content) DVD's for 3 bucks.

No price fixing = chaotic competition

Too much price fixing = fair competition

Some price fixing = Fair competition.
Intellectual property is a different matter entirely. Please explain how the "no price fixing = chaotic competition" line of reasoning applies to any commodity product, such as LCD panels.

[Telefrog]

You list two manufaturers despite their being tons more...yeah you're right! :p

"Tons more"? :confused:

There are literally 11 OEM suppliers of panel-quality glass in the world. Only 7 of those have global distribution through channel partners.

[Schnoogs]

Because if it wasn't, he would be wrong and as he already stated he has to be right no matter the cost. Ergo ad hoc. :cool:

Actually I did...but don't let the details of this thread get in the way :rollseyes:

[Schnoogs]

"Tons more"? :confused:

There are literally 11 OEM suppliers of panel-quality glass in the world. Only 7 of those have global distribution through channel partners.

Oh so there isn't two? :p

Thanks for completely proving my point. :p

Oh and so you don't look silly in the future "tons more" is a figure of speech. It doesn't equal 88 more. :confused:

[itchyeyes]

Actually I did...but don't let the details of this thread get in the way :rollseyes:
Perhaps you could kindly point us to which post you tell us why price fixing should be allowed, because it seems to be escaping my attention.

[Telefrog]

Oh so there isn't two? :p

Thanks for completely proving my point. :p

Oh and so you don't look silly in the future "tons more" is a figure of speech. It doesn't equal 88 more. :confused:

Funny. I'd say it's silly to say that "tons more" equals 4 viable competitors that did not collude, but whatever. I know how you so love arguing semantics and quibbling over minutiae.

[Schnoogs]

Funny. I'd say it's silly to say that "tons more" equals 4 viable competitors that did not collude, but whatever. I know how you so love arguing semantics and quibbling over minutiae.

Coming from the guy who quibled over "tons more" to begin with.

You really walked into that one face first...towel for the egg?

[Wackman3000]

So I came into this thread hoping to hear that LCD prices were going down, instead I got a barrage of immaturity and bickering.

So, ignoring pages 1-4 of this thread, is this conviction going to eventually lead to a reassessment of LCD prices and thus lead to cheaper panels?

That's all I really care about in this, because I've had my eye on a 42'' Aquos lately.

[Mr. Murphy]

Yawn...I'll wait for a response to my counterpoints...what you just posted is 3rd rate fluff. Save it for those with low self esteem.

I was never making a counterpoint, I don't know enough about the topic at hand to talk about it. I do, however, know why nobody considers your points valid - and it's because you don't consider any of theirs valid. The way you see it, if you never admit you are wrong, you are never wrong. To the rest of us, it's just another out-of-touch person refusing to acknowledge anything they don't want to think too deeply about. Hell, I thought you made good points and had a valid argument at first, but you quickly destroyed it with your inability to have a civilized conversation (mothers and blowjobs? Really?).

"Right at any cost"... that statement invalidated anything you could ever say to me, because you care more about being seen as right than about facts, or other peoples opinions, or the myriad little details that you don't have the capacity to address with anything other than snark.

It's all good tho, it's not like your opinions are affecting anything, just don't pretend like they matter, and don't expect us to all to stop laughing at you everytime you declare that you are right.

[itchyeyes]

So I came into this thread hoping to hear that LCD prices were going down, instead I got a barrage of immaturity and bickering.

So, ignoring pages 1-4 of this thread, is this conviction going to eventually lead to a reassessment of LCD prices and thus lead to cheaper panels?

That's all I really care about in this, because I've had my eye on a 42'' Aquos lately.
No. First of all, the suite is over infringement that took place between 2001 and 2006, so the manufacturers are already no longer colluding on prices. Secondly, the suit is in regards to the manufacture of small LCD's such as those used in cell phones, it has no relevance to LCD TV's.

[Telefrog]

Coming from the guy who quibled over "tons more" to begin with.

You really walked into that one face first...towel for the egg?

No thanks. I'll just sit here and read you constantly spouting on a subject you really know nothing about seeing as I actually deal with four of these OEM LCD panel suppliers on a weekly basis.

Please continue. :D

[muddi900]

Intellectual property is a different matter entirely. Please explain how the "no price fixing = chaotic competition" line of reasoning applies to any commodity product, such as LCD panels.

I wasn't talking about IP, but the physical qualities of the disc itself. Most movie studios can sell you the "super mega collectors edition" for 7 bucks if they compromise there quality of the physical product it self. When competition goes bad, all parties involved go so low that they're fighting for pennies, and the 7$ LE happens. Every shmuck sees how cheap the business is, jumps in saturates the market and the competition.

Big companies price-fix out of mutual-interest. It is the only way for people with long term plans to actually compete with each other. Its a catch-22

[Schnoogs]

No thanks. I'll just sit here and read you constantly spouting on a subject you really know nothing about seeing as I actually deal with four of these OEM LCD panel suppliers on a weekly basis.

Please continue. :D

Which thus makes you an expert on Price Fixing :p

That's like saying my company issues stock therefore I'm an expert on investment banking.

Scratch the towel...someone get this guy a hose. :p

[Dukefrukem]

Funny, I'm the fourth person to say "Funny" when starting a sentence.

[Spacetronaut]

Why is this illegal again?

Artificially high prices create dead weight loss, which is essentially consumption activity that would have occurred if the prices had not been inflated. This is generally considered bad for society, hence illegal.

[Schnoogs]

Artificially high prices create dead weight loss, which is essentially consumption activity that would have occurred if the prices had not been inflated. This is generally considered bad for society, hence illegal.

How are they artificial? These companies could have still chosen the same prices regardless of the price fixing. We see this all the time with products.

Also we've seen significant price drops with LCDs AND more importantly if I got to Frys I don't see the same price across the board.

[itchyeyes]

I wasn't talking about IP, but the physical qualities of the disc itself. Most movie studios can sell you the "super mega collectors edition" for 7 bucks if they compromise there quality of the physical product it self. When competition goes bad, all parties involved go so low that they're fighting for pennies, and the 7$ LE happens. Every shmuck sees how cheap the business is, jumps in saturates the market and the competition.

Big companies price-fix out of mutual-interest. It is the only way for people with long term plans to actually compete with each other. Its a catch-22
And this is bad how? If the rate of DVD defects are acceptable to consumers at that price point, then the more competition the better. And if the rate of DVD defects is not acceptable then consumers will choose to buy from more expensive manufacturers who produce more reliable products. Either way consumers get what they want, without price fixing. You see chaos. I see the beauty of open markets.

[Shrinn]

I was just commenting on her behavior too. :p

Come on now. You led him right to this.

I'd come in here and argue with Schnoogs and try to prove him wrong or shut him up or whatever, but he's just so good at pissing you guys off. And you let him!

Funny how you spend half your post insulting me and lying and then you have the audacity to call me a troll. Denial and hipocrasy...two peas in a pod! :p

Oh and thanks for agreeing with me at the end..."Some price fixing = Fair competition"


It's not hypocrisy to agree with your point and still think you're trolling. Right or wrong, you're still inciting flames.



Like I mentioned earlier in the thread, price fixing laws are not put in place because of any particular harm that is being done, but because the hinder the market from producing the most efficient results.

This is what I came to post. If you can produce the same quality item cheaper, you will do so and sell it for the same price (or slightly under your competition). Then the competition will try to find a way to sell cheaper than you and keep a better profit than you, otherwise your company will get ahead of theirs in R&D funding.

By fixing the prices, there's no incentive to produce better, or cheaper, because you have to sell at the same price.

[Schnoogs]

Come on now. You led him right to this.

I'd come in here and argue with Schnoogs and try to prove him wrong or shut him up or whatever, but he's just so good at pissing you guys off. And you let him!.

It's a skill.



It's not hypocrisy to agree with your point and still think you're trolling. Right or wrong, you're still inciting flames.

It's hypocritical to insult me and then take the moral high ground and accuse me of trolling. No offense but it's not like after the first trolljob everyone else gets a free pass.

[KingGorilla]

What qualifications on International Trade law and American Business law do you bring to the table?

[Schnoogs]

What qualifications on International Trade law and American Business law do you bring to the table?

I work for a company that has purchased 4 types of LCDs(17",19",20" and 24")....so that makes both Telefrog and myself EXPERTS in regards to economics. :p

[itchyeyes]

This is what I came to post. If you can produce the same quality item cheaper, you will do so and sell it for the same price (or slightly under your competition). Then the competition will try to find a way to sell cheaper than you and keep a better profit than you, otherwise your company will get ahead of theirs in R&D funding.

By fixing the prices, there's no incentive to produce better, or cheaper, because you have to sell at the same price.
So we're in agreement?

[muddi900]

And this is bad how? If the rate of DVD defects are acceptable to consumers at that price point, then the more competition the better. And if the rate of DVD defects is not acceptable then consumers will choose to buy from more expensive manufacturers who produce more reliable products. Either way consumers get what they want, without price fixing. You see chaos. I see the beauty of open markets.

It never works that way. High-quality products are a niche market and do not compete with the mass market. At 3 bucks a pop, any rate of defect is acceptable!

But lets move away from DVD's, lets say company A manufactures a product for cost X and B manufactures it for X+.1%. When there is no price-fixing, A would lower its price X+1%, B would lower it to .09%. there would be a time when both of them would reach their cost and they would compromise on quality. Lower production costs attracts people with no long term plan, saturates the market. Instead of a free market, you have a "free for all market". This is not a rhetorical argument, this is what I've seen with my own eyes.

Also, what these companies were doing with their OEM LCDS should be called price hiking. Price fixing sets the minimum. Price hiking increases the maximum.

If you wanna discuss this further, please PM me as I'm going to sleep and there's not gonna be real discussion in this thread in the morning. It's been thrown out to the troll... I mean wolves. Wolves!:)

[Shrinn]

It's hypocritical to insult me and then take the moral high ground and accuse me of trolling. No offense but it's not like after the first trolljob everyone else gets a free pass.

It's my opinion that his only insult was calling you a troll. (Edit: As opposed to "Insult" and then "I'm better than you because you're trolling" situation that you're suggesting.) I also didn't seem to insinuate any sort of belief of holding a moral high ground from his post. But if you want to make an argument based on moral high grounds, you're trolling/insulting more people in more posts than him, therefore he's above you (but still not quite high...). Then again, neither am I, as I'm getting involved as well.

So we're in agreement?

Yes. (You don't disagree with a Brock Samson avatar and live to tell the tale.)

[Schnoogs]

It's my opinion that his only insult was calling you a troll.

yeah I forgot...being called a troll is a good thing...silly me

[MagGnome]

Secondly, when you get 1680 x 1050 on your coke bottle, let me know.

Huh? This sentence doesn't make any sense to me. :confused:



I wish that the DoJ would investigate the airline industry. It's been obvious for sometime now that the competition there is laughable at best.

[Spacetronaut]

How are they artificial? These companies could have still chosen the same prices regardless of the price fixing. We see this all the time with products.

Also we've seen significant price drops with LCDs AND more importantly if I got to Frys I don't see the same price across the board.

We can assume they are artificial because the three companies plead guilty to artificially fixing the prices.

But to get at the heart of the question this is bad because if the three companies have an agreement to price their products the same then they act as one company in the market, as far as price taking vs price setting goes, and gain more leverage. Smaller companies act as price takers and follow the lead of the large, price setting, company. This raises prices throughout the market above equilibrium price, which decreases consumption, which is bad.

[Shrinn]

Huh? This sentence doesn't make any sense to me. :confused:


I think by "Coke bottle" he means CRT televisions. Meaning "If you want HD, you need to buy LCD or plasma."

[KingGorilla]

Originally Posted by Ancalagon View Post
Secondly, when you get 1680 x 1050 on your coke bottle, let me know.
Huh? This sentence doesn't make any sense to me. :confused:


It is grammatically correct.

[Schnoogs]

We can assume they are artificial because the three companies plead guilty to artificially fixing the prices.

Groan...a price is a price. It's not like the prices now become "real"

[Schnoogs]

I think by "Coke bottle" he means CRT televisions. Meaning "If you want HD, you need to buy LCD or plasma."

HD is actually obtainable through CRT,LCD, OLED, SED, Plasma, DLP, etc.

But hey the price fixing between these 3 vendors is just gonna fuck up the whole damn market. :p

[Talon]

Is Texas Instruments and Casio next?

[Schnoogs]

Is Texas Instruments and Casio next?

Next it will be Ford and GM.

Noone will give a shit since we all buy from their competitors anyways.

[Telefrog]

Which thus makes you an expert on Price Fixing :p

That's like saying my company issues stock therefore I'm an expert on investment banking.

Scratch the towel...someone get this guy a hose. :p

No, but it certainly makes me familiar with the collusion practices of the three suppliers in this scenario. It makes me intimately familiar with the collusion laws they violated. It also gives me insight into the OEM customers' complaints against them.

Keep trying. :p

[Schnoogs]

No, but it certainly makes me familiar with the collusion practices of the three suppliers in this scenario. It makes me intimately familiar with the collusion laws they violated. It also gives me insight into the OEM customers' complaints against them.

Keep trying. :p

Sure it does buddy...using your logic anyone at any company is an expert on all laws becuause their company deals with other companies.

My company was found guilty once...I guess anyone who bought our product is now an expert.

Keep trying :p

[Spectre-7]

It is grammatically correct.

As Noam Chomsky rather famously argued, a sentence can be 100% grammatically correct and still not make any sense. His chosen example was, "Colorless green ideas sleep furiously." ;)

[MagGnome]

As Noam Chomsky rather famously argued, a sentence can be 100% grammatically correct and still not make any sense. His chosen example was, "Colorless green ideas sleep furiously." ;)

Thank you. :)

[KingGorilla]

Buffalo Buffalo Buffalo Buffalo Buffalo Buffalo Buffalo.

[OrangePulp]

Nice to see companies actually convicted of this shit. It's just too bad that it really isn't much of a punishment to them.

Also, epic Schnoogs beatdown

[Schnoogs]

Also, epic Schnoogs beatdown

http://www.assassinworks.com/laugh.gif

Thanks for the good laugh!

[squirrelTactics]

http://www.assassinworks.com/laugh.gif

Thanks for the good laugh!


Hey guys! I use the internet!

[Spacetronaut]

Groan...a price is a price. It's not like the prices now become "real"

By artificial I mean that the price is not the price dictated by the market. Prices that are higher than equilibrium price may create more profit for the supplier, but they usually result in a net loss for society.

[Telefrog]

Sure it does buddy...using your logic anyone at any company is an expert on all laws becuause their company deals with other companies.

My company was found guilty once...I guess anyone who bought our product is now an expert.

Keep trying :p

In almost any other case, you'd be right. Too bad for you that my job directly involves anti-collusion bidding and certification on government IT contracts. ;)

[Schnoogs]

By artificial I mean that the price is not the price dictated by the market. Prices that are higher than equilibrium price may create more profit for the supplier, but they usually result in a net loss for society.

People still have the option to not buy them...the companies will respond...especially when people flock to DLP, etc.

The market still has a say.

[Schnoogs]

In almost any other case, you'd be right. Too bad for you that my job directly involves anti-collusion bidding and certification on government IT contracts. ;)

Sure it does....and I'm a chinese test pilot.

[MalReynolds]

hey i have an LG phone and TV do i get any of that money ?

[Spacetronaut]

People still have the option to not buy them...the companies will respond...especially when people flock to DLP, etc.

The market still has a say.

The profit maximizing price for the seller is not the market equilibrium price. Even though demand is lower at the higher price, the company still makes more money overall, if there are few or no alternatives. In this case there are alternatives, but those are limited by the collusion and as I said before smaller companies will tend act as price takers and match the prices of the larger company (the three companies acting as one in this case).

[Ancalagon]

Huh? This sentence doesn't make any sense to me. :confused:


Schnoogs was saying that no one is forced to buy LCDs, they can spend their money on food and water instead. While true, as I tried to point out, it completely misses the point.

[Xerxes]

http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/1339/tcppunch0tk.gif

Amen. Change punch to beat. :(

[muddi900]

I said I wouldn't come back but I did. The fact that Schnoogs has not for one of his billion posts actually addressed the relevant OEM LCD's that are not even sold at consumer level,and are not used in HDTV's, not only proves that he's good, but makes you guys look like complete idiots.

Listen children, feeding the troll is unsafe for you and bad for them!

[Ancalagon]

I said I wouldn't come back but I did. The fact that Schnoogs has not for one of his billion posts actually addressed the relevant OEM LCD's that are not even sold at consumer level,and are not used in HDTV's, not only proves that he's good, but makes you guys look like complete idiots.

Listen children, feeding the troll is unsafe for you and bad for them!

No, I think it makes him look like a sad little child who has nothing better to do in his day than be argumentative. So yeah, I actually pity him, because I'm glad that I have better things to do than troll.

[RandoM51]

Always amazing to see how many pages people will spend playing the Schnoogs game.

[ClannerDelta]

Always amazing to see how many pages people will spend playing the Schnoogs game.

Yeah, he's like some bastard that chainsaws you even though you punch him in the face.

I call forum H4X and host advantage.

[TrackZero]

The hilarious part is that I was just insulted by at least 4 or 5 members but you conveniently excuse their behavior.

Heh, while I'd say you did bait them, you're right. They're breaking policy by directly insulting you and you haven't done the same back (or reported them).

Don't bother arguing with him anymore, it's exactly what he wants. Notice how you're not talking about price fixing anymore? That's his tactic. Any legitimate argument he either ignores, or he evades and switches topic. There's no way to win this argument. He'll just lead you from one argument to another, never acknowledging when you're right, and pounce on you when you finally slip up.

It's a bang on tactic that some people love to use. Good to see you can see it. ;)

[MagGnome]

Schnoogs was saying that no one is forced to buy LCDs, they can spend their money on food and water instead. While true, as I tried to point out, it completely misses the point.

Okay, thanks for clearing that up.

[opsin]

Yea, not worth it...

[Telefrog]

Sure it does....and I'm a chinese test pilot.

You're certainly welcome to check my post history on EvAv in which I discussed my occupation. (I don't recall mentioning it here yet.) If I'm making it up, I did so years ago which seems to be quite a long time to prep for this thread. :D

At any rate, the upside to this is that these distributor/suppliers were judged to have colluded. Beyond this outcome, I guarantee that there will be further fines and restitution demanded from separate entities that signed deals with them for similar contracts during the same time period. They will use this court ruling as precedence in their complaints.

[Bad Buddha]

Where's the ignore function?

[Schnoogs]

Good to see you can see it. ;)

Only he's dead wrong because we're still talking about price fixing...perhaps if you and him had actually read the thread you would know that :p

[Schnoogs]

Always amazing to see how many pages people will spend playing the Schnoogs game.


This coming from Public Enemy #1 :p

[pheriannath]

I'm all for a good forum argument, but this thread just needs to go away.