MobileRead Forums - View Single Post

brecklundin · 10-21-2009, 03:49 AM

Astak should not be pointing out ANYONE's mistakes.

And yes you are correct, in The Big Thread (I think but could have been another one) Astak made comments on what Fry's actually paid for the devices, that is a huge breach of the most fundamental NDA business ethics around. Plus it is just, well, not very classy to comment in public. Better to handle those things in private.

Also, it is not legal to set a minimum selling price. A recent, as in this past year, new law in Maryland prohibits ANY company doing business with residents who reside in Maryland from restricting selling prices. It's an interesting law as it's the first to apply to internet sales.

I am too worn out to really explain why MAP is also wrong and anti-competitive/consumer as well. But it is and there do exist laws, both federal and state, which address this/these issue(s). The Maryland law actually simply closed a big loophole in the existing laws/regulations.

Here is a quick Google for the Maryland law:

http://www.google.com/search?sourcei...+minimum+price

If you read some of the articles (they are actually quite interesting and I learned a lot from a few of them) but the whole idea is to stop large companies from actually inhibiting or directly manipulating the pricing behavior of a free market (not that we really have much of one these days, but that is a whole different rant...errrr, discussion....hehehehe).

I also understand too that smaller companies who are just getting going NEED to keep a certain margin just to remain afloat let along turn a profit. What they really need is to form relationships with large retailers and get the products out there. People will STILL buy from the mfg, I mean lots of folks buy direct from Sony even though their devices can be found for less elsewhere.

I appreciate how difficult it can be for a small company/business when it's trying to insinuate itself into a market. When I started my network design and support company back in the early 90s it existed in a spare bedroom and my head. I was happy to get a $35k contract and thrilled when I got my first $100k contract. Sounds like a lot of cash, huh? Heck no...included in those numbers was hardware. I made all of $100 on a PC that I would build myself...I based profit only on my time for the week not anything else. And even then it was just $50/hr....where I made the money was on support over time, not from the initial design and installation. Small businesses MUST work that way.

That is why Astak needs it's bookstore up and running. The money just cannot be made selling device, it has to be made selling the books. In the mean time they have positioned themselves as competing with their customers for sales. Has to be frustrating because a business like Fry's can sell at say a $3 markup and still win because few folks walk out with only that device. Astak can't survive on that...hence their desire for MAP and MRP agreements. But those can easily be ruled in violation of anti-consumer laws once reported...it's a very fine line many companies are toeing.

But to say Fry's made a mistake selling too low is just laughable, could it not also be said that Astak made the mistake in selling to Fry's at too low a price?

I DO appreciate the position Astak is in as of right now. And how fragile their ability to grow into a larger business is as well. Every mistake/mis-statement can cost them $1000s (or even 10x that)...all at a time when they can least afford it.

Fry's has been doing "it" longer and better than any other electronics retailers around. Look at all those companies Fry's has out lived? Then again, these days they could close the doors tomorrow like so many others.

Am off to snooze now...I will leave with -- even though Maryland law does not hold true in other states, there were something like 20 other states that had similar legislation on the books when the Maryland law passed. So, it will be easy to see this expand to a Federal level or spread at state levels in short order.

Oh, I am not certain agreements can limit the frequency of sales either...it depends on the state and federal laws governing such agreements.

Oh, btw, I will add something, ever wonder why we are seeing more and more "Add to Cart to see lower price" buttons on web sites? Because that is the retailers way around MAP agreements companies are forcing retailers to sign in order to get product. here is a link the what Hoya has done in the camera lens filter market which is what got me reading about MAP/MRP (Minimum Advertised Price/Minimum Retail Pricing) laws and regulations. It's really interesting and confusing as well...

http://www.2filter.com/hoya/HoyaHDpricemarketing.html

BTW, looking forward to reading about the blue case from the new batch of readers. It's a cool blue and I truly hope they finally have it fixed...one can get dizzy in here, if you get my meaning.

10-21-2009, 03:49 AM	#209
brecklundin Banned Posts: 1,906 Karma: 15348 Join Date: Jun 2007 Device: mine	Astak should not be pointing out ANYONE's mistakes. And yes you are correct, in The Big Thread (I think but could have been another one) Astak made comments on what Fry's actually paid for the devices, that is a huge breach of the most fundamental NDA business ethics around. Plus it is just, well, not very classy to comment in public. Better to handle those things in private. Also, it is not legal to set a minimum selling price. A recent, as in this past year, new law in Maryland prohibits ANY company doing business with residents who reside in Maryland from restricting selling prices. It's an interesting law as it's the first to apply to internet sales. I am too worn out to really explain why MAP is also wrong and anti-competitive/consumer as well. But it is and there do exist laws, both federal and state, which address this/these issue(s). The Maryland law actually simply closed a big loophole in the existing laws/regulations. Here is a quick Google for the Maryland law: http://www.google.com/search?sourcei...+minimum+price If you read some of the articles (they are actually quite interesting and I learned a lot from a few of them) but the whole idea is to stop large companies from actually inhibiting or directly manipulating the pricing behavior of a free market (not that we really have much of one these days, but that is a whole different rant...errrr, discussion....hehehehe). I also understand too that smaller companies who are just getting going NEED to keep a certain margin just to remain afloat let along turn a profit. What they really need is to form relationships with large retailers and get the products out there. People will STILL buy from the mfg, I mean lots of folks buy direct from Sony even though their devices can be found for less elsewhere. I appreciate how difficult it can be for a small company/business when it's trying to insinuate itself into a market. When I started my network design and support company back in the early 90s it existed in a spare bedroom and my head. I was happy to get a $35k contract and thrilled when I got my first $100k contract. Sounds like a lot of cash, huh? Heck no...included in those numbers was hardware. I made all of $100 on a PC that I would build myself...I based profit only on my time for the week not anything else. And even then it was just $50/hr....where I made the money was on support over time, not from the initial design and installation. Small businesses MUST work that way. That is why Astak needs it's bookstore up and running. The money just cannot be made selling device, it has to be made selling the books. In the mean time they have positioned themselves as competing with their customers for sales. Has to be frustrating because a business like Fry's can sell at say a $3 markup and still win because few folks walk out with only that device. Astak can't survive on that...hence their desire for MAP and MRP agreements. But those can easily be ruled in violation of anti-consumer laws once reported...it's a very fine line many companies are toeing. But to say Fry's made a mistake selling too low is just laughable, could it not also be said that Astak made the mistake in selling to Fry's at too low a price? I DO appreciate the position Astak is in as of right now. And how fragile their ability to grow into a larger business is as well. Every mistake/mis-statement can cost them $1000s (or even 10x that)...all at a time when they can least afford it. Fry's has been doing "it" longer and better than any other electronics retailers around. Look at all those companies Fry's has out lived? Then again, these days they could close the doors tomorrow like so many others. Am off to snooze now...I will leave with -- even though Maryland law does not hold true in other states, there were something like 20 other states that had similar legislation on the books when the Maryland law passed. So, it will be easy to see this expand to a Federal level or spread at state levels in short order. Oh, I am not certain agreements can limit the frequency of sales either...it depends on the state and federal laws governing such agreements. Oh, btw, I will add something, ever wonder why we are seeing more and more "Add to Cart to see lower price" buttons on web sites? Because that is the retailers way around MAP agreements companies are forcing retailers to sign in order to get product. here is a link the what Hoya has done in the camera lens filter market which is what got me reading about MAP/MRP (Minimum Advertised Price/Minimum Retail Pricing) laws and regulations. It's really interesting and confusing as well... http://www.2filter.com/hoya/HoyaHDpricemarketing.html BTW, looking forward to reading about the blue case from the new batch of readers. It's a cool blue and I truly hope they finally have it fixed...one can get dizzy in here, if you get my meaning. Last edited by brecklundin; 10-21-2009 at 04:20 AM.