Viewing Thread:
"Nintendo fined for Price Fixing!!!"

That's right. Apparently, during the period 1991 to 1998, Nintendo kept prices artifically high, and have now been fined £92.1m. That's the Eternal Darkness marketing budget gone. See the full story at

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/ business/2375967.stm

I believe that the accusation is that the company has refused to allow retailers to change the price that they are selling at, whatever they believe is a fair price based upon supply, demand, trade cost and so on. Of course, they can charge whatever they like, but legally they're not allowed to tell shops that they cannot sell it below a certain price.

Tóm wrote:
> So you wouldn't be even slightly miffed if Nintendo decided they
> wanted to sell their consoles for £500, and their games at
> £150 each?
>
> I bet you wouldn't say that then.

Of course I'd be miffed. But then (from the business point of view again) have to take into consideration whether anyone would buy it at that price. That's why Microsoft are so successful (software-wise) - Windows XP and Office XP are the best by far in their fields, so they can comfortably up the price. On the other hand, no-one has to buy the software, as there are alternatives.

Tóm wrote:
> DeltaJava wrote:
> From a business point of view, the firm can charge whatever they
> like.
> I see no problem with this; after all, it's not like playing games
> is
> absolutely essential in life, like water or electricity - the
> customer
> doesn't have to buy it, do they?
> ****
> So you wouldn't be even slightly miffed if Nintendo decided they
> wanted to sell their consoles for £500, and their games at
> £150 each?
>
> I bet you wouldn't say that then.

Well of course we'd be pi*sed off, but surely Nintendo are fully in their rights to do so. It's our choice wether we choose to buy it after all.

The amount of products ridiculously overpriced today is high, I don't see them getting sued.

DeltaJava wrote:
> From a business point of view, the firm can charge whatever they like.
> I see no problem with this; after all, it's not like playing games is
> absolutely essential in life, like water or electricity - the customer
> doesn't have to buy it, do they?

So you wouldn't be even slightly miffed if Nintendo decided they wanted to sell their consoles for £500, and their games at £150 each?

I bet you wouldn't say that then.

From a business point of view, the firm can charge whatever they like. I see no problem with this; after all, it's not like playing games is absolutely essential in life, like water or electricity - the customer doesn't have to buy it, do they?

I saw this on Newsround. Nintendo are appealing against the amount of the fine.

I don't see what the fuss is about.

SNES wasn't over-priced, and the games were around £40, which considering their cartridges isn't bad.

The N64 was no more expensive at launch than both playstations have been and the X-box.

Some N64 games were ridiculously high (£70 for Turok!) but that can't have been Nintendo's fault entirely, seeing as Acclaim charged £70, but other companies were charging £40-50.

cor! what a bummer. wot do you mean by price fixing? they kept the prices too high or sumin?

That's right. Apparently, during the period 1991 to 1998, Nintendo kept prices artifically high, and have now been fined £92.1m. That's the Eternal Darkness marketing budget gone. See the full story at

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/ business/2375967.stm