AMD, Nvidia Conspire to Price Fixing; Sued

[Mathos]

So basically what I can infer from those emails is that there is mutual respect between ATi and Nvidia, enough so that they share fab and production cost into with each other. Basically making it so they don't force each other to sell a product for less than what it costs to make. Which, would be considered anti competitive behavior as well.

 

[vekere]

[citation][nom]Mathos[/nom]So basically what I can infer from those emails is that there is mutual respect between ATi and Nvidia, enough so that they share fab and production cost into with each other. Basically making it so they don't force each other to sell a product for less than what it costs to make. Which, would be considered anti competitive behavior as well. [/citation]

So really what we all can understand is that all companies work a like. From auto parts makers to software and games the price is the same the -1$ +1$ is the dust in our eyes and there is the second rule of trade kill the big guy that take you cash. All of this effort is to bring Intel to his knees and leave him the server market. Maybe gaming industries is well background funded by "some" companies or the Piracy will kill them and games sell GPU and CPU. Every one knows how to download a game and every one knows how to play pirated games maybe the US laws stop 80% at 50 mil gamers thats great but what about China and Europe and Brazil no serious law enforcement no FBI just profit from GPU and CPU.

 

[addiktion]

I'd like to see them get slapped around a little.

It's not that I don't like ATI/AMD or NVIDIA, it's the fact that businesses do this kind of stuff to make extra money for less product, which in the end helps their bottom line but hurts innovation as a whole.

The point is if competitors are syncing up prices then they are ripping you off. It might not be immediately noticeable but it's there at the bottom end of the price points. Basically if they would of never synced up you would of had a better card for the same amount of money or the same card for less money. Tuanngyen said it nicely.

 

[jstall]

Competitors cannot talk to each other? As long as they do nothing illegal they can talk as much as they want, including discussing product and promoting product together if they wish, where is the discussions about fixing the price???

 

[knickle]

Someone please explain... how does personal email get in the hands of individuals? Were they obtained legally, illegally, or simply fabricated or spoofed? This sounds like a longshot to me.

 

[sheytan]

If they would not set the price range together we would had cheaper GPUs!
8800GTX and 8800GTS(640) were sold for over price for years!!

 

[bounty]

So let me get this straight.. One day AMD called Nvidia and said "I know your not making money on that 200$ video card, and we're kicking your a$$ in that segment, so we think we should both raise our prices on that segment to 300$ That way we'll have a higher margin and it'll give you a break and the respect you deserve... and we won't be kicking your a$$ anymore." There may have been a few employee's kicking around ideas, but I don't see the CEO's supporting that. I'm pretty sure Nvidia would have loved to smash ATI's face and vice versa.

What I don't see, is a graph of their profit margin during the "oligarchy" period. If it shot up, then they may have hurt consumers during that period. If not, then you're also basically saying one of them should have been destroyed under the pressure and that would have been good for us.

Looking at the chart, they're comparing card prices from different YEARS in the "pre-conspiracy" cards to show a price difference. And cards that are not even in the same performance bracket as documented here. http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-graphics-card,1987-6.html Now I don't have 3leet memory and can't say what cards existed and competed at what price points 5 years ago. I can tell you that in the last 5 years I think the GPU market has been very competitive, which is why we all flock here to follow it. It's why we love it. I only wish car technology progressed this fast. That wasn't a period of collusion... it was a period of intense competition. The reason the chart shows a difference again with the 8800GTX is because it broke the competition, not because of court proceedings, give me a break. The Nvidia 6xxx series was in close competition with the ATI Xxxx seris. And now ATI and Nvidia are competitive again, and WHOAH they have cards at similar price points, AMAZING.

You guys here have the data and equipment. You should show the comparitive performance of the listed cards, and their relative prices, that would be interesting. What was the performance delta of X1600 v.s. 7600 and average price at the time? How about Gforce3 v.s. 8500.

p.s. I also notice that 'oligarchy' accusation also comes around the time these companies number of parts exploded, so of course there are porducts at the same price points, especially when compared to when they only sold a few different models.

 

[shovelman]

"To be a member of the Class, you must have made at least one purchase of a graphics card from ATI’s or Nvidia’s website between December 4, 2002 and November 7, 2007. If you bought a graphics card during this period only from other sources (such as a retailer like Best Buy or a different website like newegg.com), you are not a member of the Class. "

To be blunt, who the fuck cares?

I don't know ANYONE who has purchased a video card from EITHER of the websites named. Hell, do they even SELL video cards from their websites? Have they ever?

I like the idea behind this case but it's useless, as I'm willing to bet that upwards of 98% of all customers of nVIDIA and ATi during the period defined probably purchased their product from a source OTHER THAN ATi and nVIDIA's respective websites.

Oh f'ing well, I say, enjoy your millions, lawyers.

 

[geok1ng]

Every single time on the last 2 years that a new mid/high end card was launched the market adjusted prices for the competion at the same price/performance range: the 2900XT lowered 8800GTS prices, the 3850 lowered 8800GT prices and the 4870, well, they forced NVIDIA to cut margins to the bone on the 260s. there are worst markets on the PC world- memory factories anyone?

 

[Chazwuzzer]

Meh.... If all they have are those emails and some pricing charts, the claim will flop - or more likely AMD and NVidia will settle out - typical civil extortion.

I find it ironic that this suit comes so shortly after AMD delivered a vicious punch in the gut to NVidia's pricing with the 4800 line. Something tells me that there was not so many emails going back and forth with that one.

 

[DJ_Jumbles]

[citation][nom]taiso[/nom]ok, ok so making business makes you an evil minded corporation? sure it was behind closed doors, but does that make it dishonest? (if you revealed ALL your business strategies to the public, the competition would eat you alive) [/citation]
Are you people really this dense when it comes to this stuff?
Umm... hey Genius! The "Competition" that would eat them alive didn't exist in 2005-2006!!! The only two players in the market were colluding to fix pricing, marketing strategies, and to lessen Intel's ability to execute their integrated video chipsets. Now, am I all for slaying the dragon (Intel)? Absolutely!!! Is this the right or legal way to do it? Nope!

 

[Evolution2001]

[citation][nom]shovelman[/nom]"If you bought a graphics card during this period only from other sources (such as a retailer like Best Buy or a different website like newegg.com)"
I don't know ANYONE who has purchased a video card from EITHER of the websites named. Hell, do they even SELL video cards from their websites? Have they ever?[/citation]
Who/What is BestBuy or NewEgg? Seriously...that's a joke, right?

 

[shqtth]

Why are they bitching about it?

If you cant adord a graphics card, then don't buy one.

I suffered no damages.

And if I wanted to play vide games, then i played a video game console.

PC games isn't that big of a maket compared to Video Game consoles.


Some people are just after money. Pure greed.
Its funny how there is always someone trying to make money off the backs of someone else.

I thought the video game market was pretty competitive, always new cards comming out every 2-6 months, and prices always comming down.

Nothing seemed price fixed to me.

For video cards there always seemed to be a supply problem to meet the demand, newer cards were always harder to get, and thus always more expensive longer then cheaper cards. HOw can they claim price fixing when you can buy a really good video card for under $200? and a decent one for around $100. Imagine all the r&d and drive updates etc that goes into the product, and video cards are more expensive to make then cpus, so less money is to be made, yet video cards can be bought at good prices.

People knew what they were getting into when they played PC games, and they knew it was a more of an expensive platform, and in the end the user had the choice. So in the end no one was hurt and no damages.

 

[tuannguyen]

[citation][nom]ShqTth[/nom]Why are they bitching about it?If you cant adord a graphics card, then don't buy one. I suffered no damages.And if I wanted to play vide games, then i played a video game console.PC games isn't that big of a maket compared to Video Game consoles.Some people are just after money. Pure greed.Its funny how there is always someone trying to make money off the backs of someone else.I thought the video game market was pretty competitive, always new cards comming out every 2-6 months, and prices always comming down.Nothing seemed price fixed to me.For video cards there always seemed to be a supply problem to meet the demand, newer cards were always harder to get, and thus always more expensive longer then cheaper cards. HOw can they claim price fixing when you can buy a really good video card for under $200? and a decent one for around $100. Imagine all the r&d and drive updates etc that goes into the product, and video cards are more expensive to make then cpus, so less money is to be made, yet video cards can be bought at good prices.People knew what they were getting into when they played PC games, and they knew it was a more of an expensive platform, and in the end the user had the choice. So in the end no one was hurt and no damages.[/citation]

Are you serious?

Why are they bitching about it?

If you cant adord a graphics card, then don't buy one.

I suffered no damages.

-- They would have been able to afford card A if card A's price wasn't artificially stuck at a predetermined price set by the two main competitors in the market space.

Some people are just after money. Pure greed.
Its funny how there is always someone trying to make money off the backs of someone else.

-- What? Okay, so lawyers are after money. David Boies and his firm is the one handling this case, and was the same one who was heading the Microsoft vs. DOJ case and many other high profile tech related anti-trust cases. There's a reason why anti-trust laws exist. So CONSUMERS don't get gouged into buying products with inflated prices.

So what if the lawyers make money? That's their job. The end result is that if they WIN, then AMD/ATI and NVIDIA have to be watched under stringent anti-trust restrictions, and when they compete like they are suppose to compete, the consumer wins.

You're the consumer. Don't you want LOWER prices for stuff? So you're happy that you got PRODUCT A for $$$$$ price. Great. I think I speak for everyone else when I say I'd rather have that same thing for $$ instead of $$$$$ that you are relatively happy with.

You say "How can they claim price fixing when you can buy a really good video card for under $200"

Did you not read the quote in the email from Dan Vivoli saying:

"Both of us have spent the last three years trying to bring the perceived value of our products up to the level of Intel. The "GPU" category is clean and has served us well that way. We both have increased the price of our high end product several fold over the last 4 years."

?????

So I REALLY can buy the same stuff I got today at 1/4 the price ? I'll take that! The problem is their marketing, positioning, product placement and product categories have INFLUENCED YOU, to PERCEIVE (straight from the horses mouth) a HIGHER VALUE/WORTH, than it is REALLY worth.

Open your eyes.

/ Tuan

 

[kenster1998]

"In violation of the federal antitrust laws, Nvidia and ATI conspired to fix, raise, maintain and stabilize prices of graphics processing chips and cards."

What violations?

With lawyers spawning like cochroaches, why are they still allowed to charge $500/hour so your ex's $500/hour lawyer can try to overturn your prenup in the court, which was drafted by another lawyer who charged you $500/hour? Talking about price fixing.

Let's see:
Judges' salary = taxpayers
Court clerk = taxpayers
Court baliff = taxpayers
Court overhead = taxypayers

$500 million class action lawsuit settlement = $100 million goes to lawyers, and $400 million goes to 20 million end users==> $20 for each of us

I know it's fuzzy math but numbers just don't add up, whether it's supply and demand or social justice

 

[Guest]

See...everyone who thinks that there are "really great deals in the GPU market right now" has played into exactly what the GPU makers wanted, thinking that GPU performance is several times more expensive than CPU performance... read the letter, it states how they have been able to INCREASE, SEVERAL FOLD, the price of their high end...inflation has not been SEVERAL FOLD, increases in production have not been SEVERAL FOLD....if this happened in the automotive industry, we would be paying over 200k for a caddy or lexus.
Wouldn't it have been nice for the RELEASE cost of the GTX280 to be what they are today? Instead of the overly inflated price they were? The lawsuit is for the simple fact that the two companies were coordinating launches(would anyone have bought a 260/280 if the 4850/70/70x2 were launched at the same time???) and setting minimal prices, that's not fair competition and it's not legal in the US....now...if we could only get a class action against the oil companies, who are doing shady things as well.....

 

[tomc100]

How exactly is having a gpu a necessity? This isn't like something that is required like say GAS. That's like suing McDonald's and Burger King because you think their Big Mac and the Whopper is too expensive. Take your fat ass somewhere else.

 

[kenster1998]

The bottom line is, a lot of these anti-trust/pro-consumer (or pro-lawyer) laws were enacted back in the Upton Sinclair "jungle" days when 12yo boys toiled 20hrs in the sweat shops and if you lose your footing in the meat-packing factory, you might end up in the cans of Campbell beef stew.

Things have changed a lot. There are more women than men in American colleges now. We have a 44yo woman running for vice-president. UCLA is university of caucasian lost among asians. Lawyers sue because they can and they are allowed to. It's time that we stop allowing lawyers to run the country.

 

[spartanii]

even if they are conspiring with prices just look at how much a fairly good GPU cost...150 to under 100 bucks...high end GPU's have always been expensive its nothing new and shocking but on the flip side ive never seen such good entry level gpu's for such a low price. a 3850 for under 100 dollars thats a steal... you can build a gaming rig for for 500 dollars, so what if they are fixing prices it seems to be paying off for the consumer except for maybe high end users and you know what I dont care about high end users if they can afford to buy the latest and greatest graphics card every year then they can suck it up and pay for there hobby

 

[customisbetter]

as chris312 was saying, i think costs are due to inflation as well as new technologies and materials. NOT price fixing.
I disagree with this lawsuit because the cost of the suit i feel has a larger impact on the cost of the products than the supposed "fixing" had.

 

[Guest]

Bertrand Competition (wikipedia entry) easily explains the reasoning for this whole debacle, and truthfully, under economic principles, ATI (still a separate legal entity from AMD) and nVidia are prospectively agreeing to cooperate at setting prices of their lower-end discrete GPUs at prices higher than their marginal cost to produce (the costs to produce each additional GPU).

Under an oligopoly market structure, if nVidia lowered all its prices, they grab the whole market. Likewise, ATI will then lower its prices below nVidia's to recapture the whole market. Both companies will keep lowering prices until Price = Marginal Cost. Hence, zero profit. Cooperating to price lower-end cards removes zero economic profit while higher end cards are purely driven by market forces. I really don't see any price fixing here, only cooperation.

 

[hannibal]

Hmmm... the price of 280 was 650$. When ATI release 4700 series the price did drop to 450$. I call it competition. If there would have been some price fixing, the 280 should have been cheaper from the beginning... or?
But in anyway it's good thet these things get investigated.

 

[Guest]

>>Taiso

Lol n00b