Read the full story here:
http://www.primalrights.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=2947
Scott at Liberty Optics has been a solid individual in this industry for many years. He takes care of people. Premier is price fixing, and calling it MAP. Well, now people can see it for what it is.
I own three premiers, and today I’m ashamed to admit it.
I am confused… why would ATI even care what another company sells it for, the dealer is given a wholesale price and then sells it on their end to make profit… so if ATI was already paid by the dealer… the price they were selling them to customers is irrelevant.
Its essentially the same as if I went and bought one myself, and then sold it to my friend… I can sell it for whatever I like… if the dealer so chooses to sell it for less than they paid, or for less of a profit margin then so be it… that sounds like a sh#tbag company
Racketeering
Scott Berish is a good man and I will spread this.
Isn’t that essentially what companies like aimpoint have also done? “Price fixing” or MAP is the reason why some dealers have gone around it by offering a QD mount with it instead of the stock mount for very little above retail of the optic alone. It sounds like Premier when beyond that though and back-stabbed a solid dealer without warning.
wow, that is really unfortunate
A LOT of companies in the firearms business have MAP pricing. The idea behind it is to allow smaller “mom and pop” stores to be able to compete with the larger retailers like Midway, Brownells, Cabela’s, etc that have much larger buying power and get better dealer prices than smaller business by capping how low they can go.
Wow… That’s Price Fixing.
I would never deal with a company that does business like that.
Sounds like it’s time to buy a Schmidt & Bender from Scott.
For clarification for those that don’t understand MAP.
MAP = Minimum ADVERTISED Price.
This doesn’t mean a dealer can’t sell it for less only that the dealer can’t ADVERTISE it for less.
I’m no business expert, and maybe I’m missing something, but I don’t see much pricing variance on Surefire and other brands. Maybe this is somewhat common on many higher end brands?
It not so much the MAP in the case…but how they went about enforcing their particular MAP in Scott’s particular case which was SHITTY as hell and low rent imho.
Google it It’s called vertical price maintenance. It’s designed to do two things: maintain established profit margins and to maintain a level playing field for all the distributors. It’s written into the distribution contract and if terms of the contract are breached the distributorship gets yanked. Rolex has historically been a prime example of very strict enforcement of such agreements.
The courts’ view of the practice has swung back and forth through the years. Currently the courts have ruled favorably toward the practice.
Regarding this case, If I were Liberty Optics, I’d be very cautious about airing dirty laundry on Internet forums. It could easily be construed as legally libelous and damaging in favor of ATI. Given ATI’s aggressive approach, I would guess they might be quick to litigate.
If only more understood this very simple concept. I will no longer support ANY brand that is using these bullshit practices to artificially increase the price of their products. Whether it be premier or anyone else.
Lifebreath, people understand all too well what the practice is. Doesn’t mean its in tune with what most of us think American values represent. The only thing it does is ensure that us, the customers, pay more for something that should and WOULD cost less. If you want to champion that argument, go ahead. I’m in Scott’s corner 100%. Premier shit the bed with this one, and I’m going to make sure every single shooter I encounter knows about it.
… and Scott can’t be sued for sharing the FACTS. Libel is if something isn’t true. This is a documented instance of ACTUAL events backed up by evidence. So they can TRY to sue all they want, it’s baseless on its face.
Ok I read your link. So a company has a MAP pricing policy and they sent out someone to make sure their dealers were following the agreement by doing a sting operation. The dealer got caught and his ability to sell for that company was pulled because he violated the agreement. I don’t see a problem. I have no dog in this race just posting what I observed.
Pat
Alaskapopo, Do you understand what MAP stands for?
Do you understand that no where in his agreements he had with ATI did it say he must sell at or above MAP?
Even if what you are saying were the case, it would seem a moot point to most Americans. Artificially inflated prices due to companies riding roughshot over dealer networks is NOT good ethics in my opinion. Scott’s ethics have been proven sound over many years. Premier, on the other hand, has been the center of much confusion and drama regarding their business practices. This, would be the straw that broke the camels back.
I respect your opinion, but I do take comfort in knowing that mine is in the majority.
…
From what I understand about the story is that the sting guy called Scott and asked for a discount. He did not see a lower than MAP price displayed. He actually called the dealer and asked for a discount. Then turned around and contacted Premier and reported him as selling below MAP… Read the whole story.
I did read the whole story. My point is any company can chose who they allow to be their distrubuters and retailers. It may not seem fair but it is what it is. If Premier did not like what a distrubuter does they have every right to not do buisness with them. If I am selling widgits and I don’t like the fact you took the widgits I sold you and sold them for less than what I want them priced at I can stop selling you any more widgits if I so chose. Just as the OP can boycott Premier its his choice and in the end of the day its just buisness.
Pat
and he has every right to make it public.
That’s right, it’s just business, and this thread is to shine light on what I (and most others) view to be bad business. No ethical person or company where money was not the soul motivation would do what premier and ati have done.
I’ve read countless threads about this on other forums and it makes me feel proud that 99% of the people are with Scott on this. It gives me a little bit of hope for our country that some people still know what ethics mean.