In a message dated 5/31/00 4:06:53 PM !!!First Boot!!!, spitlist@gte.net
writes:
<< There is no argument. I cite facts, you cite theory. You have nothing to
back up your argument except, "I get better pricing if I ask
for it". Of course you do, whiners always get their way.
>>
I have yet to see an actual relevant fact from you, only your interpretation
of what are apparently limited experiences. Let me give you some facts.
First, based on your rantings, I have to assume you are speaking about the
Robinson-Patman act which governs price discrimination in interstate commerce.
As I said previously, there are cases of price discrimination, but your keen
legal opinion that if it was printed they had to stick with it is nonsense.
To quote from the article Executive Summary of Antitrust Laws:Price
Discrimination by By
Richard M. Steuer
Kaye, Scholer, Fierman,
Hays & Handler, LLP
"The Robinson-Patman Act prohibits discriminations in price between
purchasers of commodities of like grade and quality which are likely to
result in substantial injury to competition. Each of the elements is separate
and must be found before the statute is violated."
Essentially the goods have to be of like kind and quality and injury to
competition has to result.
"Injury to competition. Discrimination in sales of goods of like grade and
quality are unlawful only if they are likely to result in substantial injury
to competition. Essentially, such injury can be of two types: (1) to buyers'
competition (injury in the secondary line); and (2) to sellers' competition
(injury in the primary line).
When secondary-line injury is charged, the inquiry focuses on the competitive
harm suffered by the disfavored purchaser who pays the higher price in
relation to the favored competitor. Thus, for secondary-line injury to be
present, the discrimination must be between competing purchasers. If both
purchasers are ultimate consumers and do not compete in resale of the
product, no violation can be found. Not only must the purchasers compete
geographically, they must, as a general rule, be on the same functional
level. A wholesaler who buys at a lower price does not compete with a retail
customer of the same seller, even though a price discrimination is present."
Now those are facts. In other words the sale of parts to an individual, for
use on his LBC is NOT a violation.
Perhaps you can cite some case law to bolster your position?
|