NVidia UMAP - Dictating Advertised Video Card Prices

[BRiT]

what if this was about text messages and cellulair operators?
"Sure, we have 5 operators, but they're all running on the same network and the "network provider" dictates that the price of a text message is 10 cents."

To carry that thought forward, it would be more like the following:

"Sure, we have 5 operators, but they're all running on the same network and the "network provider" dictates that the price of text message is said to be 10 cents, however operator 1 credits 2 cents towards your bill, operator 2 has a special buy-3-get-1 free, operator 4 credits 4.5 cents, and operator 5 has a special buy-5-get-2 free."

Nvidia is not dictating the price that's actually charged, only the price they can advertise.

 

[Davros]

so in other words nvidia wants retailers to put the wrong prices on graphics cards ?

 

[BRiT]

They merely want the cards to be sorted by their MSRP. As evident at NewEgg with nearly every other card showing "See price in cart" instead of the real price.

Yes. It's a real cluster fuck.

 

[Davros]

so why dont they tell nvidia to f** off, I would

 

[AlphaWolf]

so why dont they tell nvidia to f** off, I would

Somewhat a similar reason stores don't tell proctor and gamble to f** off when they won't pay slotting fees. You don't have much of a store if you don't carry soap. In this case if you can't carry Nvidia, you're going to lose a fair amount of customers.

 

[Pete]

Ultimately this annoys not (just) the lazy shopper but the intelligent one, who knows what he wants and where he'd prefer to buy it from, but is forced into extra work. If NV was concerned about pricing indicating comparability, they'd use a simpler naming convention and/or more explicitly advertise how their product stack compares across generations. IOW, they'd offer more information or make existing info easier to understand, not obscure existing info.

The idea that this forces ppl to learn more about their vendor is laughable. This won't force new vendor-rating tools on the marketplace--they already exist at the very price comparison engines this program is meant to subvert. It just seems like a way to make sure stores don't compete on price, which is another way of raising average selling price. I can't fault NV trying to squeeze as much profit as possible from the retail chain, but consumer-oriented this isn't. (Calling this AIB-oriented is a little strange, too. Is XFX out of luck when NewEgg starts listing cards in alphabetical rather than price order? Who does BFG complain to when a search term defaults to being sorted by "best selling" or "retailer's choice?")

That said, this isn't unique to them, it's not especially onerous (Amazon at least still sorts its TVs by price, even though you have to click to see some of them), and at least they offer good products. And this would've been fun the see implemented with the GTX-512.

In short, I thought the internet was running dangerously low on rants.

Sure and perhaps nvidia can stop online sales altogether and you'll have to walk to the store to buy their products. It'll be great for consumers because it will force them all to get some exercise.

 

[jimmyjames123]

I can't fault NV trying to squeeze as much profit as possible from the retail chain, but consumer-oriented this isn't. (Calling this AIB-oriented is a little strange, too. Is XFX out of luck when NewEgg starts listing cards in alphabetical rather than price order? Who does BFG complain to when a search term defaults to being sorted by "best selling" or "retailer's choice?")

Please explain exactly how NVIDIA will squeeze extra profit under this system? No one said anything about NV changing the price it charges to it's AIB vendors, and the e-tailers can still charge customers whatever price they want to (only the basic at-first-glance advertised price is constant). Under the old system, whoever has the cheapest advertised online price can gain a huge advantage due to online pricing tools and engines. When you have many e-tailers (and retailers) selling the same or similar type of product, of course many of them are sure to get pissed off (especially the retailers) when their prices are always being undercut by another e-tailer, even though they are selling virtually the same d@mn product. At least the UMAP policy will help prevent cutthroat advertising practices between e-tailers/retailers who are selling virtually identical products.

The point of UMAP is not that people are going to spend time to "learn" about the vendor. The point is that they are much more likely to base their purchasing decisions on something other than pure absolute rock-bottom price (be it warranty, step-up programs, vendor reliability, or whatever).

 

[AlphaWolf]

Preventing advertised lower prices is a way of discouraging manufacturers and retailers from putting products on sale. What's the point of putting a product on sale if you can't tell anyone about it? It is very much a method of price fixing.

 

[jimmyjames123]

I'm not sure there is a good way around that, because the other alternative is to go back to the old system and encourage competition based on price, which always tends to be cutthroat competition.

 

[Davros]

I'm not sure there is a good way around that, because the other alternative is to go back to the old system and encourage competition based on price, which always tends to be cutthroat competition.

which is excellent of course, and we very much want that

 

[Davros]

Somewhat a similar reason stores don't tell proctor and gamble to f** off when they won't pay slotting fees. You don't have much of a store if you don't carry soap. In this case if you can't carry Nvidia, you're going to lose a fair amount of customers.

whats a slotting fee ?

I remember a company sent us a template detailing how they would like their invoice to be formmatted,
did I tell them to f*** off - oh yes

did they stop doing business with us ? no....

 

[AlphaWolf]

whats a slotting fee ?

It's sort of off topic, but its another dirty little secret.

Basically manufacturers pay retailers to get products on the shelves. Wiki has a bit on it. A company like proctor and gamble which is completely dominant in their part of the industry (hygiene, they make most of the soaps and toothpastes) can just say no and get away with it, but most manufactures cannot so they pretty much have to play ball.

Nvidia is certainly in a position like that in the graphics industry atm. So the retailers have to cede to their wishes.

 

[shadow]

And what about the current price drop where the 9800GTX's went from 260~270$,down to the now official 199$ price point,in a single day as soon as the HD4850 was released,and IHV's and retailers bought cards at the old price?


Are they going to sell them at a loss or will Nvidia re-inburse them the difference,wich i can imagine will cost a lot of money if they do it,if you consider world wide sales and the amount of IHV's and retailers around the globe.

 

[AlphaWolf]

And what about the current price drop where the 9800GTX's went from 260~270$,down to the now official 199$ price point,in a single day as soon as the HD4850 was released,and IHV's and retailers bought cards at the old price?


Are they going to sell them at a loss or will Nvidia re-inburse them the difference,wich i can imagine will cost a lot of money if they do it,if you consider world wide sales and the amount of IHV's and retailers around the globe.

That's entirely between Nvidia and their partners, but I think its a safe bet that Nvidia will be eating a lot of that price drop although not necessarily with cash.

 

[neliz]

not necessarily with cash.

so everything else in the industry is free nowadays?

It will still cost money, one way or another.

 

[AlphaWolf]

so everything else in the industry is free nowadays?

It will still cost money, one way or another.

Never said otherwise.

 

[neliz]

Never said otherwise.

You said not necessarily with cash.. so who's going to pay for marketing, discounts etc?

 

[AlphaWolf]

You said not necessarily with cash.. so who's going to pay for marketing, discounts etc?

coupons, rebates, 2 for 1 offers etc rarely wind up costing as much as the actual cash they represent. It's really not worth arguing semantics.

 

[Sxotty]

I think with ATI er AMD's new cards out this policy may face more severe pressure.

 

[WaltC]

Preventing advertised lower prices is a way of discouraging manufacturers and retailers from putting products on sale. What's the point of putting a product on sale if you can't tell anyone about it? It is very much a method of price fixing.

What's going to happen, though, if a manufacturer starts fixing his prices? Doing so opens a door wide to his competition and invites them in. That's probably why, when asked, nV said it probably wouldn't work, etc. Now, if nV and ATi together conspired to fix prices, then *that* would be price fixing.