3 Firms Confess To Fixing LCD Prices, Agree To Pay $585M Fine 417
Oldyeller89 writes "LG, Sharp, and Chunghwa Picture Tubes pleaded guilty to charges of price fixing in violation of the Sherman Antitrust Act. They fixed the prices on LCD screens used not only in their products but also in other products such as Apple's iPods. The three companies agreed to pay $585 million in fines. Perhaps this will cause the price of our TVs to drop?" The New York Times also has a story on the outcome of this case.
Plasma? (Score:5, Interesting)
Lol... (Score:3, Interesting)
And $50 says the CEO's won't be taking a dip in their salaries to compensate for the fine; nope, chances are they'll lay off some people and give pay cuts out to everyone that just does their job without trying to find a way to make a quick buck.
Re:Hmmmm (Score:3, Interesting)
Since its a fine imposed by the Justice Department, I would imagine the government gets the money (in part to defray the expense of filing and prosecuting the case).
Irony of irony, the advert displayed below the story was for the new Samsung HD TVs. :)
Re:Plasma? (Score:2, Interesting)
Plasmas seem to have become a new sort of discount category, with large, low priced plasmas saturating the market (like 40+" for $700). The downside is that they're 1024x768 usually, and are usually off-brands. And the whole burn-in thing makes me completely put off plasma altogether.
Is this related? (Score:4, Interesting)
Does this have anything to do with the ridiculous inability of the laptop LCD screen market to put out 1920x1080 screens?
It's as though they're keeping the market for TV screens expensive by not allowing the format to bleed into laptop realm, wherupon cheap computers become high-quality televisions, killing the TV screen market.
Re:No price drop for you! (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:So how much did they make? (Score:3, Interesting)
Of course screwing over others shouldn't be a crime if it interferes with corporate profits. Say, how come with all this price fixing, someone else didn't step in and offer LCDs for a lower price? That would have been proof that the free market works. Yet that never, ever seems to happen.
Ahhh, look! There's a 'world's smallest political quiz' link! Spoiler alert: you are a libertarian. I am a libertarian. Everyone who takes that quiz is secretly a libertarian.
If you start off with the assumption that anyone can do whatever the hell they please without regard to the consequences for others, you are a libertarian. If you want civilization without paying for it, you are a libertarian. If you believe that a government set up only to protect property rights can be anything except an oppressive regime designed to protect the rich from the poor, then you are definitely a libertarian. Libertarianism: if you think 'nyah nyah nyah! You're not the boss of me!' is a good philosophy, it might just be for you.
More reason (Score:3, Interesting)
To shop more intelligently.
I *JUST* swapped out my CRT monitor after 8 years of solid, reliable use. I picked up a used LCD screen from my company for dirt cheap. I was never a beta tester for slow response-rate, burned out pixels and shoddy construction LCD screens.
I realize basic economics tells us, that there is a maximum profit point on the two line graph of units sold vs cost per unit, but dare I say they could have actually LOST money by charging too much, and forcing cheaper consumers out of the market.
meh, their loss.
I was wondering why LCD prices weren't at $350 (Score:2, Interesting)
Normally, in the tech product cycle, as I learned in business school, you'd expect a 40 to 42 inch HDTV set to be running around $399 with rebate down to $350 at this point (1080p), but I'd been puzzled that prices were up to $200 higher than expected.
That explains it.
Mystery solved.
If the price fixing is broken, we should see 40 to 42 inch LCD HDTVs in the 1080p resolution selling for around $300 around Presidents Day 2009.
Re:Plasma? (Score:3, Interesting)
What are their clients viewing the graphics work on? Paper? or a LCD?
Serious question. Assuming they are better, does it really matter if your clients arent using them? I cant think of what media they could be publishing for where an LCD would be inferior /to the output/
Re:CRTs for gaming? (Score:3, Interesting)
Bullet spray in counter strike is directly affected by your frame rate.
The colt and ak just arent the same on 60 fps vs 100 fps.
I pull out the ol 21 inch CRT when i want to play CS. The technology still has its uses, but beyond that I would never go back to a CRT for normal every day use.
Re:So how much did they make? (Score:3, Interesting)
Because the people who need it might not be able to afford it.
I understand that a little bit of deprivation is necessary to goad people to participate in the labor market. But the insurance model just won't fly as a true safety-net.
Re:Plasma? (Score:3, Interesting)
Modern high-contrast LCD screens use much more power than equivalent CRTs.
Re:Plasma? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Plasma? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Price drop (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:The Invisible Hand (Score:3, Interesting)
So the invisible hand was Adam Smith's belief that an Englishman would buy English products produced in England, or start a manufacturing company in England for English consumers.
That is not what is implied by Adam Smith's statement that you quoted. His statement implies that when a person makes business decisions based on whats best for him or his company, rather than his country, he will likely be benefiting his country in the long term. Conversely, if you make decisions based primarily on what you think is best for your country you will likely not be benefiting you or your country. This is due to the "invisible hand."