Maryland Ban on Minimum Pricing Takes Effect Oct. 1

Play out the situation.  With MAP gone dealers will be able to sell prices for as low as they want to go.  As a result dealers will have to reduce overhead to meet price pressure from online and non-professional companies, resulting in things like decreased service, decreased installer education, and reduced demonstration space.  So Maryland thinks that less educated salespeople, lower skilled technicians, decreased customer service, and fewer companies with the product on display is good for the customer?  Yeah, that sounds like government.

Keep in mind this whole discussion revolves around “advertised” prices.  Dealers have always been free to sell product for whatever price they want to.

I’m curious though how consumer advocate groups believe MAP increases costs for consumers?

-

Government needs to let the market place work. As soon as you introduce government to the market place the entire system is ruined.

Ken, It does not matter what a dealer can sell the product for, it is more imoportant on what they are allowed to advertise for. Most of the manufacturers myself and a lot of other companies deal with are becasue they have MAP pricing and enforce it. I use MAP pricing guidelines with many of my customers. Like someone else said, leave it up to government to make things worse. I am really interested to see where this goes.

Keep government out of it. It’s between the sellers and their vendors.

Great, some lame brains great idea that will eventually back fire on us small business folk…. To all that are involved in coming up with this wonderful bill, your mother will be proud for giving birth to an IDIOT!!! There are alot more important issues than MAP pricing!!!

Direct quote from Sen. Herb Kohl from a press release he issued:
“In the last few decades, millions of consumers have benefited from an explosion of retail competition from new large discounters in virtually every product, from clothing to electronics to groceries, in both ‘big box’ stores and on the Internet. We have all taken for granted our ability to walk into discount retailers and buy brand name products at sharply discounted prices.  It is essential that Congress act swiftly to enact the Discount Pricing Consumer Protection Act to once again make the setting of minimum retail prices illegal.”

Why do these bills always confuse MAP with MSP?  Minimum Selling Prices are (arguably) problematic because they name a minimum SELLING price.  Minimum Advertised Pricing is simply a way to protect dealer margins from casual price shopping.  They in no way limit the seller from cutting their price to a customer - they just can’t advertise it.

Sounds like Andy & Bill stole the Amar Bose handbook.

I don’t understand any of this nonsense. Whatever happened to MSRP? Manufacturer suggest a retail price and then resellers can sell it for whatever they want?

Let consumers buy from whoever they want. They can feel like a moron when crazy stu and his discount electronics super ebay store wont answer their phone calls.

Why the hell is the government involved in this anyway?

What the state governments REALLY need to do is come up with a way to charge sales tax on Internet orders. This will at least be a small step towards helping protect legitimate brick-and-mortar dealers from the “no tax discount”. It will also help them protect their tax dollars, which must be in short supply now given the high unemployment, lower property values and all-around reduced spending.

Call this “anti competitive legislation.”

With this the big box stores can really run independent resellers out of the market.

Also this gives an unfair advantage to online retailers who already dictate market prices as it is.

Our store is trying to take advantage of this trend with a discreet service to market high end (protected) <a href=“http://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20090819005483/en”>home theater</a> lines.

Like the big guy (our owner) said, “MSRP is a suggestion, not the law.”

Speaking as a former VP of sales for a home theater equipment manufacturer, I can say that the whole concept of “protect” lines is a bit of a joke.

No one “protects” the manufacturer, least of all the dealer. As a manufacturer, we are expected to “manage” the territory (i.e., fix prices) so dealers could make full margin and consumers could not get a break. In return, dealers were supposed to be loyal and invest in training to understand (and sell the product), and handle customer issues. 

Sure, a handful of dealers will try to maintain a decent service dept. and actually read the manual, but far too many simply sick the customer onto the manufacturer.

“I need my forty points!” they whine. 

I say good riddance to any quaint custom of protecting fat dealers who milk the factory AND customers.  They’re going out of business largely because consumers are tired and too smart to paying full retail. And factories are seeing through their BS and opening up distribution. Both sides detect (rightly) that they’re being ripped off. 

Kudos to Maryland…they got it right.

If you want to make a compelling pitch to protect you margins it the tax law and not MAP or UMAP pricing that will win out.  MAP was meant to protect vendor advertising funds from being used to subvert their brands. (Subaru Vs.Some car dealer back in the late 70’s early 80’s)
Then the CE biz picked it to protect lines. Then it was Service Merchandise(gone)vs. Pionner car stereo. YOU HAVE ALWAYS BE ABLE TO SELL FOR WHAT YOU WANT; YOU JUST COULDN’T USE VEDOR FUNDS TO DO IT.
UMAP has always been dicey. It relied more on a vendors threat then actually law.
IF YOU LOBBY TO CHANGE THE TAX LAW WHERE INTERNET DEALERS HAVE THIER REAL ADVANTAGE A LOT MORE CONSUMER WOULD COME BACK TO THE LOCAL GUY IF THEY HAD TO PAY TAX ON THAT LCD

IT’S NOT BIG BOX RETAILER THAT DESTROY A MARKET. IF YOU THINK BEST BUY ISN’T MAKING 35+% ON GOODS YOUR OUT OF TOUCH. IF YOU NEED 50% ON TOP OF YOUR LABOR RATES ON HARDWARE YOUR NOT STUCTURING YOU’RE BIZ FOR TODAYS CONSUMER.  GET A GRIP!