Hacker News Reader

Comment by Steko | Hacker News Reader

No, this is how stores work. Wal-Mart will also not stock your game if you are selling it for half MSRP on your website.

View on HN

Walmart doesn't also have the ability to make buying the good from somewhere else inherently more difficult. It would be the equivalent of Walmart paying someone to stand in front of Target stores claiming to be an expert on the product you want to buy and saying "You know, the Target version of this product is very unsafe. You should really, really consider getting it from Walmart. I'm going to body block you from entering the store because I'm worried about you buying it from over there."

What do I mean by that? Gatekeeper.

> Walmart doesn't also have the ability to make buying the good from somewhere else inherently more difficult.

Yes they can and do regularly. The extreme example is of course an exclusive contract where the vendor agrees to make it impossible to buy the good elsewhere.

I think there is a difference, though: I'd imagine Walmart would buy a certain amount of copies of your game, and they would negotiate their purchase price, squeezing you as much as they can. Then they would mark it up and sell it on their own. If they see that you are selling it for half the price on your website, then that gives them a stronger purchasing argument to lower your price.

Apple, on the other hand, is imposing restrictions on which price you must sell it to third parties, and, that, I think, is illegal.

No, Wal-Mart will demand with it's Buyer agreement that you not sell the software elsewhere for less, using language that will look remarkably like Apple's because again this is how store's work.

Yes, but they do that as a buyer: you have to sell to them at the most favorable price. Then they will sell it at whatever price they see fit. If they want to bundle it for free with a toaster, they do not force you to do the same. Apple, on the other hand, tells you: your sales price to a third party cannot be lower than my sales price to a third party.

That's not forcing you to sell for free, that's preventing you from undercutting, they are completely different. What Apple is doing is exactly what Walmart does: you agree to not undercut the price here elsewhere.

When I worked at CompUSA 25 years ago, many software titles were sold on consignment -- they went back to the publisher. The store was really selling shelf space and got a lot of money for it.

Further, IOS developers use proprietary Apple technology to develop their apps... So with that in mind would Wal-Mart not be more guilty of anti-trust violations than Apple?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com