$860 Million In Fines Handed Out For LCD Price-Fixing 151
eldavojohn writes "Six companies have pleaded guilty to worldwide price fixing of Thin-Film Transistor Liquid Crystal Displays from Sept. 14, 2001, to Dec. 1, 2006. For violating the Sherman Act, the companies have agreed to pay criminal fines of over $860 Million. In addition, nine executives have been charged in the scandal. The pricing scam affected some of the largest companies at the time, including Apple, HP and Dell. (If you bought a TFT-LCD from them in that time frame, you may be one of the victimized consumers.) From the DOJ release, 'According to the charge, Chi Mei carried out the conspiracy by agreeing during meetings, conversations and communications to charge prices of TFT-LCD panels at certain pre-determined levels and issuing price quotations in accordance with the agreements reached. As a part of the conspiracy, Chi Mei exchanged information on sales of TFT-LCD panels for the purpose of monitoring and enforcing adherence to the agreed-upon prices.'"
Say it ain't so (Score:3, Insightful)
Corporations doing shyster deals to gain profits for share holders while braking laws and shafting the consumers? Good god whats next, corporation changing laws to punish consumers for using products in ways there were not designed to be used?
Hey hey there kid. That baseball is designed to be hit with our authorized bats. Using any unauthorized bat is prohibited and will be enforced by our "Good Consumer Police"
Re:ok what? (Score:5, Insightful)
You forgot the part where the wronged consumers get justice in the form of a $2 class action settlement check.
YOU forgot the part where the wronged consumers get a coupon worth $2 off on their next purchase as their settlement.
Re:ok what? (Score:5, Insightful)
Well let's see. The Taiwanese LCD producer Chi Mei Optoelectronics (CMO) agreed to pay $220 million for violations over 5 years (2001-2006) which comes up to $44 million per year of violations.
CMO is a publicly traded company, for 2009 their net sales up to November has been almost $30 billion dollars [cmo.com.tw].
CMO's market cap [reuters.com] is $150 billion dollars.
I think it's safe to say that $44 million dollars a year is a drop in the bucket for them.
The other $640 million is divided across 5 other companies so far, which sets them about $128 million dollars each, or $25.6 million dollars a year.
Justice is served!
Oh great (Score:5, Insightful)
Guess who is going to pay the $860 million. Don't look forward to cheaper LCD prices anytime soon.
Re:ok what? (Score:3, Insightful)
Yeah, and you forgot the part where the manufacturer tacks $2.20 onto the price to cover the $2 coupon.
Re:let me guess (Score:2, Insightful)
No, the lawyers will get 100% of the actual cash that changes hands. The "victimized consumer class" will get some bullshit "settlement" like a voucher for $50 off the list price of the next monitor they buy from the companies that did this in the first place. Of course that will work out to a much higher price than you could buy it for without said voucher... so, in effect, you get dick.
Again.
Re:Apple selling same LCDs FOREVER. (Score:3, Insightful)
How about turning out some new models that are a bleeding 4:3 aspect ratio, instead of 16:9? Nowadays it seems every LCD panel in the world is a repurposed HDTV unit. Those of us who lots of coding and document work tend to prefer monitors without a squished vertical aspect and a bunch of wasted horizontal space (especially considering 100% of the universe uses 8.5x11 or A4 paper that's taller than it is wide, and document design reflects this format).
Re:ok what? (Score:1, Insightful)
Please, Mr Corporation, rape me in the ass, please, I really really want you to!
Seriously, WTF are you smoking. Companies don't sell anything at a loss unless they're deliberately trying to undercut each other. It isn't sustainable as they'll go bankrupt obviously. I suppose you also think that the MAFIAA are only colluding because otherwise they can't recoup their costs in finding "talent" as well?
Re:"price fixing" on an optional item? (Score:3, Insightful)
Unless of course you understand it, and you just don't agree with it... in which case you should probably make that more clear.
Re:Victimized? (Score:4, Insightful)
Yes, we were victimized. There's the cost of continuing to use CRTs, which was considerable. I bought my first LCD, a 1280x1024, several years ago, for $99 after a $70 rebate. And I waited for prices to go down like they do with every other consumer electronic item, and they didn't. I was baffled, but I kept waiting, knowing it had to give some time. That there was price fixing explains much. Was 2 years before I begin to see deals equivalent to the one I got.
Meantime, I paid for owning CRTs. They use more power. They took way more room in my car, forcing me to ship more of my possessions whenever I moved. I regret having paid UPS $85 to ship a 17" CRT back in 2003. I've learned a few things about moving. Best to sell your bulky possessions cheap if you can, or even abandon them if you can't. CRTs are definitely bulky. Had there been cheap LCDs in 2003, I could have saved quite a bit of money.
Re:You'd not believe how CHEAP it is... (Score:2, Insightful)
Your tv - is essentially not much more than 2 glass plates with small cells with either gases or liquid crystals in them, and 2 plastic plates to cover it all, and then one graphics chip cpu-fpu-memory and all in one, plus a chip for digital tv-decoding and a tuner. These SMD components cost so little that you could buy a burger for what it actually cost to manufacture.
I imagine the machinery needed to assemble those small cells correctly and accurately is pretty expensive. However, I'd agree that the price isn't likely to drop once the capital costs of the manufacturing plant have been amortized.