Misplaced Pages

#774225

43-571: It was officially announced on February 7, 2012, and went on sale in late March 2012 for the suggested retail price of $ 2999.95 in the U.S. , £ 2399 in the UK , and € 2892 in the Eurozone . Shortly after the camera went on sale, Nikon's UK subsidiary increased the price of the D800 in that market by £200 to £2599, saying that the original price was due to an "internal systems error". However, Nikon honored

86-469: A price ceiling (maximum resale price maintenance). If a reseller refuses to maintain prices, either openly or covertly (see grey market ), the manufacturer may stop doing business with it. Resale price maintenance is illegal in many jurisdictions. Resale price maintenance prevents resellers from competing too fiercely on price, especially with regard to fungible goods. Otherwise, resellers worry it could drive down profits for themselves as well as for

129-517: A dealer to get paid £5 per tyre in liquidated damages if the product was sold below the list price (other than to motor traders). The House of Lords held that Dunlop could not enforce the agreement. However, this had nothing to do with the legality of resale price maintenance clauses, which was not in any question at the time. The decision was based on the doctrine of privity of contract , as retailer Selfridge had bought Dunlop's goods from an intermediary and had no contractual relationship with Dunlop. In

172-465: A discount to consumers. List price often cannot be compared directly internationally as products may differ in detail, sometimes due to different regulations, and list prices may or may not include taxes. India and Bangladesh do not use list prices but instead have a maximum retail price . In the United Kingdom, the list price is referred to as a recommended retail price or RRP. In 1998,

215-610: A distributor and seller or between two or more sellers may violate antitrust laws in the United States . In Leegin Creative Leather Prods., Inc. v. PSKS, Inc. , 127 S. Ct. 2705 (2007), the Supreme Court considered whether federal antitrust law established a per se ban on minimum resale price agreements and, instead, allow resale price maintenance agreements to be judged by the rule of reason,

258-593: A dramatic shift on how attorneys and enforcement agencies address the legality of contractual minimum prices and essentially allowed the reestablishment of resale price maintenance in the United States in most (but not all) commercial situations. During the Great Depression in the 1930s, a large number of U.S. states began passing fair trade laws that authorized resale price maintenance. These laws were intended to protect independent retailers from

301-411: A few large, efficient dealers, prevent dealers from offering essential services, and that the "maximum" price could instead become a minimum price. Meanwhile, the fair trade laws became widely unpopular among American consumers and consumer advocates during the 1973–1975 recession . They were seen as allowing retailers and manufacturers to maintain artificially high prices at a time when economic relief

344-471: A fixed price for items. The fixed prices could offer some price protection to small merchants in competition against larger retail organizations. These were determined to be in restraint of trade . Many manufacturers have adopted MSRP, a price at which the manufacturer suggests the item be priced by a retailer. The term "suggested" can be misleading because in many cases, the MSRP is extremely high compared to

387-526: A purely vertical minimum RPM agreement might be illegal. First, "[a] dominant retailer ... might request resale price maintenance to forestall innovation in distribution that decreases costs. A manufacturer might consider it has little choice but to accommodate the retailer's demands for vertical price restraints if the manufacturer believes it needs access to the retailer's distribution network". Second, "[a] manufacturer with market power... might use resale price maintenance to give retailers an incentive not to sell

430-441: A retailer reselling goods purchased from the distributor for profit, the retailer never takes possession of the goods, but receives a commission per sale. Contractually, the goods are sold directly from the distributor to the consumer although the consumer typically visits a retail showroom where the goods are displayed, often next to similar goods from other manufacturers which are sold using the resale model. The agency structure

473-419: A supplier may specify a maximum price for retail. There is an exception to this where the reseller is engaging in a loss-leading exercise. 'Rack rate' is the travel industry term for the published full price of a hotel room, which the customer would pay by just walking into the hotel off the street and asking for a room. In some jurisdictions, a customer may be entitled to overstay a reservation by paying

SECTION 10

#1732787268775

516-663: Is different from the actual price paid to the manufacturer by the dealer, which is known as the " invoice price ". There are now numerous sources, such as online appraisal tools, that can be used to find the MSRP and invoice price. MAP, or Minimum Advertised Price, refers to the lowest price a retailer is allowed to advertise a product for sale. It's a policy that manufacturers or distributors set to maintain brand identity and to ensure that retailers do not advertise or sell their products at excessively low prices, which can lead to several issues such as: brand devaluation, price erosion and unfair competition. Fixed pricing established between

559-436: Is illegal in many countries. Retailers may charge less than the suggested retail price, depending upon the actual wholesale cost of each item, usually purchased in bulk from the manufacturer, or in smaller quantities through a distributor . The suggested price is sometimes unrealistically high, so the seller can appear to be offering a discount. Some retailers apply discount stickers over top of original prices to indicate

602-431: Is rarely found in photos (besides man-made, repeated patterns such as in architecture or textiles). The lack of low-pass filter brings about a small improvement in optical resolution in the 800E, especially in portraits with larger apertures, where diffraction is not an issue. Even minimal diffraction negates the advantage of the 800E. Nikon has advised that there are mislabelled Nikon D800E in circulation that are actually

645-478: Is unlawful per se (automatically). On June 28, 2007, in the landmark decision of Leegin Creative Leather Products, Inc. v. PSKS, Inc. , 551 U.S. 877 (2007), the Supreme Court overruled Dr. Miles and held instead that such vertical price restraints as Minimum Advertised Pricing are not per se unlawful but, rather, must be judged under the "rule of reason". This marked

688-616: The Office of Fair Trading (OFT) opened a formal investigation into allegations by an Online Travel Agent (OTA), Skoosh, of resale price maintenance in the hotel industry. The investigation focussed on agreements between OTAs and hotels which may have resulted in fixed or minimum resale prices. In September 2015, the OFT's successor, the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA), closed its investigation into suspected breaches of competition law in

731-600: The Secretary of State for Trade and Industry prohibited the placing of RRP on electrical goods under the "Domestic Electrical Goods Order", but this ruling was lifted by the Competition Commission in February 2012. In the United States, the list price is referred to as the manufacturer's suggested retail price or MSRP. Under earlier US state Fair Trade statutes , the manufacturer was able to impose

774-608: The United States Supreme Court affirmed a lower court's holding that a massive minimum resale price maintenance scheme was unreasonable and thus offended Section 1 of the Sherman Antitrust Act . The decision rested on the assertion that minimum resale price maintenance is indistinguishable in economic effect from naked horizontal price fixing by a cartel . Subsequent decisions characterized Dr Miles as holding that minimum resale price maintenance

817-489: The manufacturer's suggested retail price ( MSRP ), or the recommended retail price ( RRP ), or the suggested retail price ( SRP ) of a product is the price at which its manufacturer notionally recommends that a retailer sell the product. Suggested pricing methods may conflict with competition theory , as they allow prices to be set higher than would be established by supply and demand . Resale price maintenance —fixing prices—goes further than suggesting prices, and

860-422: The D800 model with the front cover replaced so as to appear like a D800E. A D800 modified to appear to be a D800E is not covered under Nikon warranty. Nikon advises users to "please take all necessary precautions to ensure the authenticity of a camera before purchasing one". To detect fake models the user has to display an image captured with the camera in the camera's monitor. The name of the camera used to capture

903-515: The Miller–Tydings Act). In 1968, the Supreme Court extended the per se rule against minimum resale price maintenance to maximum resale price maintenance, in Albrecht v. Herald Co. , 390 U.S. 145 (1968). The Court opined that such contracts always limited the freedom of dealers to price as they wished. The Court also opined that the practice "may" channel distribution through

SECTION 20

#1732787268775

946-553: The U.S. Supreme Court held that the repeal of Miller–Tydings implied that the Sherman Act's complete ban of vertical price fixing was again effective, and that even the 21st Amendment could not shield California 's liquor resale price maintenance regime from the reach of the Sherman Act. Thus, from the 1975 enactment of the Consumer Goods Pricing Act to the 2007 Leegin decision, resale price maintenance

989-558: The actual wholesale cost, opening the market to " deep discounters ", who are able to sell products substantially below the MSRP but still make a profit. The discount stores benefit from exorbitant MSRPs because the discount offered increases the perceived value to customers. A common use for MSRP can be seen in automobile sales in the United States. Prior to the spread of manufacturer's suggested retail pricing, there were no defined prices on vehicles, and car dealers were able to impose arbitrary markups , often with prices adjusted to what

1032-837: The case of Dunlop Pneumatic Tyre Co Ltd v New Garage & Motor Co Ltd [1915] AC 79, the House of Lords upheld the enforceability of the requirement in the resale price maintenance clause, to pay £5 damages per item sold below list price, on the basis that it was not a penalty clause (which would be unenforceable) but a valid and enforceable liquidated damages clause. In 1955, the Monopolies and Mergers Commission 's report Collective Discrimination: A Report on Exclusive Dealing, Aggregated Rebates and Other Discriminatory Trade Practices recommended that resale price maintenance, when collectively enforced by manufacturers, should be made illegal, but individual manufacturers should be allowed to continue

1075-443: The hotel industry in relation to the advertised pricing of hotel rooms. As of April 2011, this was an administrative priority of the OFT. In Australia, any sort of attempt at setting minimum advertised pricing or any retaliation against such a reseller is against the Competition and Consumer Act. It is also illegal for resellers to ask their suppliers to use recommended price lists to stop competitors from discounting. In most cases,

1118-748: The hotel online booking sector. In relation to competition, Article 101 and Article 102 of the Treaty on Functioning of the EU (TFEU) are paramount over all member states' national laws relating to competition. Both the Court of Justice of the European Union and the European Commission have held that resale price maintenance is generally prohibited. In Dr. Miles Medical Co. v. John D. Park & Sons Co. , 220 U.S. 373 (1911),

1161-796: The image will be displayed at the top right corner of the display when the overview display option is enabled in full-frame playback mode. If the correct model number is displayed, it is authentic. Nikon Z cameras >> PROCESSOR : Pre-EXPEED | EXPEED | EXPEED 2 | EXPEED 3 | EXPEED 4 | EXPEED 5 | EXPEED 6 VIDEO: HD video / Video AF / Uncompressed / 4k video   ⋅   SCREEN: Articulating , Touchscreen   ⋅   BODY FEATURE: Weather Sealed Without full AF-P lens support   ⋅   Without AF-P and without E-type lens support   ⋅   Without an AF motor (needs lenses with integrated motor , except D50 ) Suggested retail price The list price , also known as

1204-426: The manufacturer. Some argue that the manufacturer may do this because it wishes to keep resellers profitable, thus keeping the manufacturer profitable. Others contend that minimum resale price maintenance, for instance, overcomes a failure in the market for distributional services by ensuring that distributors who invest in promoting the manufacturer's product are able to recoup the additional costs of such promotion in

1247-688: The original price for all pre-orders placed before March 24, and added that no price changes would be made in other markets. The successor is the Nikon D810 – announced June 26, 2014. At the time of its release, the Nikon D800 became the Dxomark image sensor leader, replacing the Nikon D4 in the top position. The D800E is a specialized version which uses a new optical anti-aliasing filter with no low-pass filter effect (no blurring) to obtain

1290-735: The practice. The report was the basis for the Restrictive Trade Practices Act 1956 , specifically prohibiting collective enforcement of resale price maintenance in the UK. Restrictive agreements had to be registered at the Restrictive Practices Court and were considered on individual merit. In 1964, the Resale Prices Act was passed, which now considered all resale price agreements to be against public interest unless proven otherwise. In 2010,

1333-447: The price that they charge consumers. Some manufacturers also defend resale price maintenance by saying it ensures fair returns, both for manufacturer and reseller and that governments do not have the right to interfere with freedom to make contracts without a very good reason. In Dunlop Pneumatic Tyre Co Ltd v Selfridge & Co Ltd [1915] AC 847, an English contract law case, tyre manufacturer Dunlop had signed an agreement with

Nikon D800 - Misplaced Pages Continue

1376-599: The price-cutting competition of large chain stores . Since these laws allowed vertical price fixing , they directly conflicted with the Sherman Antitrust Act, and Congress had to carve out a special exception for them with the Miller–Tydings Act of 1937. This special exception was expanded in 1952 by the McGuire–Keogh Act (which overrode a 1951 Supreme Court decision that gave a narrower reading of

1419-629: The products of smaller rivals or new entrants." In both of these examples, an economically powerful firm uses the RPM agreement to exclude or raise entry barriers for its competition. In addition, federal law is not the only source of antitrust claims as almost all of the states have their own antitrust laws. In the UK, in September 2010, an investigation was launched by the Office of Fair Trading into breaches of competition law by online travel agents and

1462-535: The promotional efforts of full service distributors, thereby undermining the incentives of full service dealers to expend resources on promotion. Six years later, Robert Bork reiterated and expanded upon Telser's argument, contending that resale price maintenance was simply one form of contractual integration, analogous to complete vertical integration , that could overcome a failure in the market for distributional services. Bork also argued that non-price vertical restraints , such as exclusive territories, could achieve

1505-552: The rack rate. While the rack rate can be lower than the maximum rate that the hotel may be allowed to charge under local laws, it is higher than the rate most travel agents can book for their customers. Sometimes the terms "run of the house" or "walk-up rate" (in Europe usually: "walk-in rate") are used to refer to the same highest rate. The term "rack rate" is also used by travel-related service providers, such as car rental companies or travel mobile phone rental companies, to refer to

1548-507: The salesperson thought the prospective purchaser would be willing to pay for a particular vehicle. Currently, the MSRP, or "sticker price", the price of a vehicle as labeled by the manufacturer, is clearly labeled on the windows of all new vehicles, on a Monroney sticker , commonly called the "window sticker". The sticker was added as part of the Automobile Information Disclosure Act of 1958. The MSRP

1591-444: The same highest rate that customers would be charged with no prebookings. Resale price maintenance Resale price maintenance ( RPM ) or, occasionally, retail price maintenance is the practice whereby a manufacturer and its distributors agree that the distributors will sell the manufacturer's product at certain prices (resale price maintenance), at or above a price floor (minimum resale price maintenance) or at or below

1634-473: The same results. In 1978, the U.S. Supreme Court held that non-price vertical restraints, such as vertically imposed exclusive territories, were to be analyzed under a fact-based " rule of reason ". In so doing, the Court embraced the logic of Bork and Telser as applied to such restraints, opining that, in a "purely competitive situation", dealers might free ride on each other's promotional efforts. In 1980,

1677-408: The sharpest images possible. Nikon claims that possible aliasing effects ( moiré ) can be lessened by software-processing in camera or external programs like Nikon's Capture NX2. Reviewers have pointed out that although increased moiré is difficult to remove in post-processing, it is relatively easy to combat while photo-taking (such as by changing the angle, aperture or position). Furthermore, moire

1720-547: The usual standard applied to determine if there is a violation of section 1 of the Sherman Act . In holding that vertical price restraints should be judged by the rule of reason , the Court overruled Dr. Miles Medical Co. v. John D. Park & Sons Co. , 220 U.S. 373 (1911). Because the rule of reason applies, minimum RPM agreements may still be unlawful. In fact, in Leegin , the Court identified at least two ways in which

1763-521: Was again no longer legal in the United States. Resale price maintenance is prohibited federally by the Competition and Consumer Act 2010. The law is enforced by the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission . Substantial fines have been issued for violations of this law. One legal practice that is used by some Australian distributors to maintain a fixed retail price is a "chartered agency" structure. In that structure, rather than

Nikon D800 - Misplaced Pages Continue

1806-534: Was desperately needed. As a result, the Miller–Tydings Act and the McGuire–Keogh Act were repealed by the Consumer Goods Pricing Act of 1975. In 1997, the Supreme Court overruled Albrecht , in State Oil v. Khan , 522 U.S. 3 (1997). Several decades after the landmark Dr. Miles decision, scholars began to question the assumption that minimum resale price maintenance, a vertical restraint,

1849-516: Was the economic equivalent of a naked horizontal cartel. In 1960, Lester G. Telser , an economist at the University of Chicago , argued that manufacturers could employ minimum resale price maintenance as a tool to ensure that dealers engaged in the desired promotion of a manufacturer's product through local advertising, product demonstrations , and the like. Without such contractual restraints, Telser said, no frills distributors might "free ride" on

#774225