Apple is opening itself for an antitrust case by removing competition from the store.
I would be very interested in hearing you justify that position.
We shouldn't even have validated the ridiculous comment with responses.
My sentiments exactly. Still, it’s hilarious to see all these people get all worked up over it. But that’s the whole point of a troll. He just dropped that little nugget and disappeared, lol.
"Troll"? What a ridiculous, childish post. Call someone names instead of engaging. Way to go...
Uh, sorry my comment about somebody else offended you. Please have a nice day.
Apple is opening itself for an antitrust case by removing competition from the store.
I would be very interested in hearing you justify that position.
We shouldn't even have validated the ridiculous comment with responses.
My sentiments exactly. Still, it’s hilarious to see all these people get all worked up over it. But that’s the whole point of a troll. He just dropped that little nugget and disappeared, lol.
"Troll"? What a ridiculous, childish post. Call someone names instead of engaging. Way to go...
Apparently anyone here who isn't 100% worshiping the Temple of Apple is a troll. Question something? Troll. Report you're having a problem with something Apple? Troll. Question Apple's motives? Troll.
Drop a controversial post? Ignite a contentious debate, then disappear and not participate in the very argument that resulted? Troll.
Apple is opening itself for an antitrust case by removing competition from the store.
I want McDonald's to sell my homemade burgers, should I sue?
Well, if McDonald's had been selling your homemade burgers for years and decided to remove them right as they were introducing a new burger ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ ... you might have cause to look at them sideways. That's not to say I agree with Chuck's opinion. I don't. It is to say you can't ignore the fact that the products were already being sold in Apple stores. It's not as if they asked Apple sell their stuff and were denied. Their stuff was already there and removed. Not exactly the same thing.
So the reality is that all 3rd party manufacturers pay a hefty premium to sell their wares in an Apple store or online. They all have start and end dates and sometimes they renew, sometimes they don’t. Just like you see at Costco.
The other strange thing is sometimes you will see 3rd party items on Apple’s online store, that is also in the store, but never put out on display. I asked the employees about it and they thought it was because the 3rd party company didn’t want to pay that extra money to be out on the floor.
Add how crappy this year has been for retail due to COVID-19 and it’s not hard to fathom that some companies don’t want to lose more money by trying to sell in the Apple store when they don’t sell much of them there anyway.
I'm skeptical of your argument. Why would companies be selling stuff via Apple's outlets if they lose money on it? Can you point to any evidence that "all 3rd party manufacturers pay a hefty premium to sell their wares in an Apple store or online"?
Apple is opening itself for an antitrust case by removing competition from the store.
In this particular instance there is no case against Apple because it is their store and people are aware of that when they enter. Apple could limit itself to only its own products if it chose to.
However, in this context and considering the wider situation, you are right that it is doing itself no favours when it comes to evaluating its anti competitive leanings.
“ there is no case against Apple because it is their store and people are aware of that when they enter.” Neither of those points have anything to do with antitrust. In fact if any company is sued for antitrust then the company who is sued will be the one who owns the store. I don’t see any other way. And peoples awareness or expectations of what a particular store should sell has nothing to do with it either. As far as “this context and considering the wider situation”, I don’t think this move will have any impact on anything. It’s not anticompetitive since all of those products are available at other stores, both online and physical stores.
Apple is opening itself for an antitrust case by removing competition from the store.
Absolutely and, they’re not allowed to have their own products in their own store as they’ve got inside knowledge as to how macOS functions. One operating model to rule them all.
Apple is opening itself for an antitrust case by removing competition from the store.
I want McDonald's to sell my homemade burgers, should I sue?
Well, if McDonald's had been selling your homemade burgers for years and decided to remove them right as they were introducing a new burger ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ ... you might have cause to look at them sideways. That's not to say I agree with Chuck's opinion. I don't. It is to say you can't ignore the fact that the products were already being sold in Apple stores. It's not as if they asked Apple sell their stuff and were denied. Their stuff was already there and removed. Not exactly the same thing.
Of course you can ignore the fact that the products were previously being sold at their stores. That doesn’t matter at all. Just because there was a previous business relationship doesn’t mean there has to be one going forward. Unless there is a contractual obligation, in which case they would sue for that not antitrust.
Apple is opening itself for an antitrust case by removing competition from the store.
Can't understand why there are a lot of people dumping on this excellent observation.
There's no accounting for wishful thinking. Regardless of what the anti-antitrusters believe, this will cause a great deal of short-term problems for Apple, especially with the Congressional anti-trust on big tech expected soon. Ultimately it may resolve in Apple's favor -- or not -- but to pretend that this will not cause problems is silly.
Not even remotely true. No retailer, ever, has been forced to sell products they don't wish to sell. Does Coach sell Michael Kors bags in their stores? Did Sony stores sell Samsung TVs? Do Bose stores sell Air Pods? Do Nike stores sell Adidas? I could go on all day. Apple elects to sell complementary products. When they become direct competitors, there is absolutely no obligation to continue selling those products.
Btw, there is a larger issue here: I can't believe that Apple is concerned about a couple of minor competitors when it has the dominant product and share of the market in this space. Unless, of course, Bose and Logitech are not minor competitors. If the latter, that would be news.
Well it would seem they are worried that their products can't stand on their own vs the competition, and that advertising the competitor's products in-store would provide an all too easy unfavourable comparison toward the Apple products. If the Apple product is so good, then even in-store competition wouldn't matter. If you were in the market for smart speakers and didn't really care about sound quality but the answers given by the assistant were important, Siri would come out last every time. So if Apple had Google Home and Amazon Dot or whatever in the stores for comparison with the HomePod, the HP would lose every time for people who don't care about sound quality. Removing the competition makes direct comparison more difficult when your own product's merits are shaky.
OTOH it might be that the non-Apple audio gear barely sells. I mean why would it - it's not exclusive to Apple, and Apple never offers money off promotions in their stores, so why get a third party product that costs more in the Apple Store? That doesn't apply with Apple's own products as there's more choice and the whole "Apple experience" of buying in an Apple Store.
And what, exactly, is this “Apple experience” that you refer to? Because, my experience is that it’s nothing short of a total pain in the ass whenever I HAVE to visit an Apple Store. With 3 stores within a 30 minute drive, and 5 within a 90 minute drive, they are all exactly the same. Anyone who needed to make an actual purchase or get actual support had to wade through a thousand people with no intention of doing either. And it’s even worse now, with the pandemic protocols in place. I think this “experience” you’re talking about is a myth that is leveraged by Apple and hasn’t really existed for 10-12 years. I’d rather purchase my Apple gear from Best Buy or Amazon these days. Am I the only one?
Never had that issue myself. Even with the pandemic last time I went (with an iMac with a dead memory controller) I had no problem. 5 minutes in the queue. Not sure how Apple is supposed to reduce the popularity of their stores to alleviate your issue?
Apple is opening itself for an antitrust case by removing competition from the store.
No they aren't. 1. The other "brand" stores generally also don't carry competing products. 2. The ability to shop exclusively for a brand is why people go to these stores in the first place. I don't go to the Bose store for JBL and I don't go to the New Balance store for Nike. (For the latter since I despise Nike and will never buy their products having stores where I can buy shoes while avoiding so much as looking at them is excellent.) 3. Apple stores do not dominate any industry sector. Even sub-sectors like high end consumer electronics retail.
Locking competing app stores out of iOS is totally different from locking competing products out of your niche specialty store. Not saying that locking competing app stores out of iOS is a monopoly either by the way.
Apple is opening itself for an antitrust case by removing competition from the store.
Can't understand why there are a lot of people dumping on this excellent observation.
There's no accounting for wishful thinking. Regardless of what the anti-antitrusters believe, this will cause a great deal of short-term problems for Apple, especially with the Congressional anti-trust on big tech expected soon. Ultimately it may resolve in Apple's favor -- or not -- but to pretend that this will not cause problems is silly.
Not even remotely true. No retailer, ever, has been forced to sell products they don't wish to sell. Does Coach sell Michael Kors bags in their stores? Did Sony stores sell Samsung TVs? Do Bose stores sell Air Pods? Do Nike stores sell Adidas? I could go on all day. Apple elects to sell complementary products. When they become direct competitors, there is absolutely no obligation to continue selling those products.
Btw, there is a larger issue here: I can't believe that Apple is concerned about a couple of minor competitors when it has the dominant product and share of the market in this space. Unless, of course, Bose and Logitech are not minor competitors. If the latter, that would be news.
Well it would seem they are worried that their products can't stand on their own vs the competition, and that advertising the competitor's products in-store would provide an all too easy unfavourable comparison toward the Apple products. If the Apple product is so good, then even in-store competition wouldn't matter. If you were in the market for smart speakers and didn't really care about sound quality but the answers given by the assistant were important, Siri would come out last every time. So if Apple had Google Home and Amazon Dot or whatever in the stores for comparison with the HomePod, the HP would lose every time for people who don't care about sound quality. Removing the competition makes direct comparison more difficult when your own product's merits are shaky.
OTOH it might be that the non-Apple audio gear barely sells. I mean why would it - it's not exclusive to Apple, and Apple never offers money off promotions in their stores, so why get a third party product that costs more in the Apple Store? That doesn't apply with Apple's own products as there's more choice and the whole "Apple experience" of buying in an Apple Store.
And what, exactly, is this “Apple experience” that you refer to? Because, my experience is that it’s nothing short of a total pain in the ass whenever I HAVE to visit an Apple Store. With 3 stores within a 30 minute drive, and 5 within a 90 minute drive, they are all exactly the same. Anyone who needed to make an actual purchase or get actual support had to wade through a thousand people with no intention of doing either. And it’s even worse now, with the pandemic protocols in place. I think this “experience” you’re talking about is a myth that is leveraged by Apple and hasn’t really existed for 10-12 years. I’d rather purchase my Apple gear from Best Buy or Amazon these days. Am I the only one?
Never had that issue myself. Even with the pandemic last time I went (with an iMac with a dead memory controller) I had no problem. 5 minutes in the queue. Not sure how Apple is supposed to reduce the popularity of their stores to alleviate your issue?
You didn’t exactly answer the question. My point is, 10 years ago my friends and I would say “Cool, let’s go to the Apple Store!” Now we’re more like “Ugh, we have to go to the Apple Store”. We’re a small sample size, but I know we’re not the only ones with that attitude as I’ve talked with several other people on here about it in the past. I was being rhetorical when I asked if I was the only one, lol. Anyway, consider yourself lucky your own experiences are still positive.
Maybe Bose will bring their lawsuit back lol. Remember they were threatening Apple but then Apple said they'd stop selling their crap? Well, now Apple stopped selling their crap.
"Beats Pill+ portable speaker."
Apple still sells these? Thought they were discontinued? Apple was dumb to not ride the popular wave of these. Everyone wanted these pre-HomePod.
I thought this was the video where they "fired" them.
Apple is opening itself for an antitrust case by removing competition from the store.
Can't understand why there are a lot of people dumping on this excellent observation.
There's no accounting for wishful thinking. Regardless of what the anti-antitrusters believe, this will cause a great deal of short-term problems for Apple, especially with the Congressional anti-trust on big tech expected soon. Ultimately it may resolve in Apple's favor -- or not -- but to pretend that this will not cause problems is silly.
You can only justify this if you can justify no monopoly action over:
Levi jeans only being sold at the Levi's store. Banana Republic shirts only being sold at the Banana Republic store. Old Navy khakis only being sold that the Old Navy store. Benetton merchandise only being sold at the Benetton Store (assuming it still exists). Pepperidge Farm cinnamon rolls not being sold at Cinnabon. Not being able to buy a Big Mac at Burger King. Ben & Jerry's not selling Haagen Daz. Bose not selling Klipsch. Jimmy Dean sausage stores (which are a thing in certain areas of the US) not selling ... well you get the picture.
And so forth and so on. This is routine commercial behaviour and going after Apple on this would disrupt a ton of companies who actually need this business model to help them build brand awareness and stay competitive. I am certain that Old Navy and Banana Republic (assuming they still exist) would much prefer having their own storefronts at malls (again increasingly a thing of the past but you get my drift) rather than forcing people who want to buy their clothes to wade through the mountain of cheaper but very similar looking merchandise at Target.
Apple is opening itself for an antitrust case by removing competition from the store.
Can't understand why there are a lot of people dumping on this excellent observation.
There's no accounting for wishful thinking. Regardless of what the anti-antitrusters believe, this will cause a great deal of short-term problems for Apple, especially with the Congressional anti-trust on big tech expected soon. Ultimately it may resolve in Apple's favor -- or not -- but to pretend that this will not cause problems is silly.
I look forward to the day you open up your own store and sell your own brand. And then the guy from across the street comes by and tells you that you have to sell his stuff or he'll sue. Your first reaction will be to laugh, and the second would be to throw him out of your store.
Apple is opening itself for an antitrust case by removing competition from the store.
I want McDonald's to sell my homemade burgers, should I sue?
Well, if McDonald's had been selling your homemade burgers for years and decided to remove them right as they were introducing a new burger ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ ... you might have cause to look at them sideways. That's not to say I agree with Chuck's opinion. I don't. It is to say you can't ignore the fact that the products were already being sold in Apple stores. It's not as if they asked Apple sell their stuff and were denied. Their stuff was already there and removed. Not exactly the same thing.
Of course you can ignore the fact that the products were previously being sold at their stores. That doesn’t matter at all. Just because there was a previous business relationship doesn’t mean there has to be one going forward. Unless there is a contractual obligation, in which case they would sue for that not antitrust.
This is exactly right. And they've done it before. It's laughable that so many of you think that there is no wording in the contract that allows Apple to remove any products that they want, and at any time that they want.
Ok I think I'm going to stop at three consecutive posts
Apple is opening itself for an antitrust case by removing competition from the store.
Can't understand why there are a lot of people dumping on this excellent observation.
There's no accounting for wishful thinking. Regardless of what the anti-antitrusters believe, this will cause a great deal of short-term problems for Apple, especially with the Congressional anti-trust on big tech expected soon. Ultimately it may resolve in Apple's favor -- or not -- but to pretend that this will not cause problems is silly.
The original comment is total BS but your response has validity because you have qualified it with the word “congressional.” Another equivalent way of saying the same thing would be to say “if you suspend logic, facts, and legal precedent” then the original comment may carry water, at least in a similar manner that a high capacity diaper is able to absorb a fair amount of moisture.
Apple is opening itself for an antitrust case by removing competition from the store.
I want McDonald's to sell my homemade burgers, should I sue?
Well, if McDonald's had been selling your homemade burgers for years and decided to remove them right as they were introducing a new burger ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ ...
Um no. Like McDonalds being nice and selling your apple pie alongside their own and then removing it as they don't have space for your apple pie anymore.
WHAT DON'T YOU PEOPLE GET?!? Apple Stores have LIMITED SPACE. They can't sell everyone's speakers, headphones and microwaves nor are they obligated to. These "Apple thinks their products suck so they're removing competitors" replies are beyond ridiculous. Do you want Apple Stores to look like a hoarders house or your local flea market/swap meet?
Apple is opening itself for an antitrust case by removing competition from the store.
I want McDonald's to sell my homemade burgers, should I sue?
Well, if McDonald's had been selling your homemade burgers for years and decided to remove them right as they were introducing a new burger ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ ... you might have cause to look at them sideways. That's not to say I agree with Chuck's opinion. I don't. It is to say you can't ignore the fact that the products were already being sold in Apple stores. It's not as if they asked Apple sell their stuff and were denied. Their stuff was already there and removed. Not exactly the same thing.
Of course you can ignore the fact that the products were previously being sold at their stores. That doesn’t matter at all. Just because there was a previous business relationship doesn’t mean there has to be one going forward. Unless there is a contractual obligation, in which case they would sue for that not antitrust.
It's really dumb logic. Apple was being nice by offering shelf space to 3rd parties at all. This is like your neighbor feeling sorry for your kid and allowing him to mow his lawn but when your neighbor hires a professional service you wanna sue because it's not fair!!
Apple is opening itself for an antitrust case by removing competition from the store.
In this particular instance there is no case against Apple because it is their store and people are aware of that when they enter. Apple could limit itself to only its own products if it chose to.
However, in this context and considering the wider situation, you are right that it is doing itself no favours when it comes to evaluating its anti competitive leanings.
Psst! Buddy, the App Store is also Apple's own Store. Apple also invented the iPhone!
Apple is opening itself for an antitrust case by removing competition from the store.
I would be very interested in hearing you justify that position.
We shouldn't even have validated the ridiculous comment with responses.
My sentiments exactly. Still, it’s hilarious to see all these people get all worked up over it. But that’s the whole point of a troll. He just dropped that little nugget and disappeared, lol.
Someone here on AI once said:
A troll drops a turd then disappears. Everyone else walks up to it smelling it and poking it with a stick.
So the reality is that all 3rd party manufacturers pay a hefty premium to sell their wares in an Apple store or online. They all have start and end dates and sometimes they renew, sometimes they don’t. Just like you see at Costco.
The other strange thing is sometimes you will see 3rd party items on Apple’s online store, that is also in the store, but never put out on display. I asked the employees about it and they thought it was because the 3rd party company didn’t want to pay that extra money to be out on the floor.
Add how crappy this year has been for retail due to COVID-19 and it’s not hard to fathom that some companies don’t want to lose more money by trying to sell in the Apple store when they don’t sell much of them there anyway.
I'm skeptical of your argument. Why would companies be selling stuff via Apple's outlets if they lose money on it? Can you point to any evidence that "all 3rd party manufacturers pay a hefty premium to sell their wares in an Apple store or online"?
Ask companies like Tech21 and Speck. I don’t have access to confidential info, but if you ask some of the companies that are very popular and used to sell their products in a Store or online and don’t now, pay strict attention to their answer. Just like if you see products that are online and in the store but not on the floor, ask those companies why and they might tell you, but it would be subtle, so they don’t anger Apple if they find out. Twelve South is a great example. Apple carries a lot of their stuff, most of it in the stores, but you never see most of it.
The stores actually have a lot of 3rd party products that they never put out on the floor, even if they have room for it.
Comments
One operating model to rule them all.
1. The other "brand" stores generally also don't carry competing products.
2. The ability to shop exclusively for a brand is why people go to these stores in the first place. I don't go to the Bose store for JBL and I don't go to the New Balance store for Nike. (For the latter since I despise Nike and will never buy their products having stores where I can buy shoes while avoiding so much as looking at them is excellent.)
3. Apple stores do not dominate any industry sector. Even sub-sectors like high end consumer electronics retail.
Locking competing app stores out of iOS is totally different from locking competing products out of your niche specialty store. Not saying that locking competing app stores out of iOS is a monopoly either by the way.
"Beats Pill+ portable speaker."
Apple still sells these? Thought they were discontinued? Apple was dumb to not ride the popular wave of these. Everyone wanted these pre-HomePod.
I thought this was the video where they "fired" them.
Levi jeans only being sold at the Levi's store.
Banana Republic shirts only being sold at the Banana Republic store.
Old Navy khakis only being sold that the Old Navy store.
Benetton merchandise only being sold at the Benetton Store (assuming it still exists).
Pepperidge Farm cinnamon rolls not being sold at Cinnabon.
Not being able to buy a Big Mac at Burger King.
Ben & Jerry's not selling Haagen Daz.
Bose not selling Klipsch.
Jimmy Dean sausage stores (which are a thing in certain areas of the US) not selling ... well you get the picture.
And so forth and so on. This is routine commercial behaviour and going after Apple on this would disrupt a ton of companies who actually need this business model to help them build brand awareness and stay competitive. I am certain that Old Navy and Banana Republic (assuming they still exist) would much prefer having their own storefronts at malls (again increasingly a thing of the past but you get my drift) rather than forcing people who want to buy their clothes to wade through the mountain of cheaper but very similar looking merchandise at Target.
Ok I think I'm going to stop at three consecutive posts
Um no. Like McDonalds being nice and selling your apple pie alongside their own and then removing it as they don't have space for your apple pie anymore.
WHAT DON'T YOU PEOPLE GET?!? Apple Stores have LIMITED SPACE. They can't sell everyone's speakers, headphones and microwaves nor are they obligated to. These "Apple thinks their products suck so they're removing competitors" replies are beyond ridiculous. Do you want Apple Stores to look like a hoarders house or your local flea market/swap meet?
It's really dumb logic. Apple was being nice by offering shelf space to 3rd parties at all. This is like your neighbor feeling sorry for your kid and allowing him to mow his lawn but when your neighbor hires a professional service you wanna sue because it's not fair!!
Psst! Buddy, the App Store is also Apple's own Store. Apple also invented the iPhone!
Someone here on AI once said:
A troll drops a turd then disappears. Everyone else walks up to it smelling it and poking it with a stick.
They've opened themselves up to an anti-trust case!
Of course, a turnip on a plate is open to an anti-trust case, too, but the turnip would win.