Quote:
Originally Posted by The Monkey  And that's the exact situation that RPM proponents want to avoid. The free rider benefits from the pre-sales information and/or service, but undercuts the conforming retailer. Manufacturers do not want that. Nor do conforming retailers.
RPM critics likely would say, so what if the free rider undercuts. Competition on price is good. The RPM supporter response likely would suggest that RPM yields a net consumer benefit because the consumer is paying a higher price for higher service. Therefore, while retailers would not compete on price, they would compete on service, which would be a benefit to the consumer. This point has been compelling to pro-RPM courts. Manufacturers likely also would argue that RPM allows them to maintain the integrity and quality of their brands, which is particularly applicable in situations--as here--where a manufacturer is launching a flagship product. Senn does not want the brand (and profits) diluted by discounters and free riders...............................
|
Thank you for the response.
A retailer who offers a discount has their advantages just as a retailer who offers service has theirs. But why would I want to pay $1400 to Amazon who has no service when I could pay $1400 to TTVJ and get great service? This is the other side of the coin. This supports the small guy but then eliminates the need for the big guy if the big guy is not allowed to trade high price for quality of service & support. Yet Sennheiser still sells to Amazon and J&R. That tells me that Sennheiser doesn't
really care as much about the little guy offering better service or about product integrity as they do about their profits; sure, they might care a little, but not if it comes at the expense of profiting on this product. That's how 99.9999% of successful businesses think because if they didn't, they wouldn't be in business.
