How much of it is really Canon and how much of it is the retailer using it as an excuse to raise their price and shifting the blame to Canon?
This is what I could find on MAP
What is an Internet Minimum Advertising Price Policy? A MAP or an IMAP, as they are commonly called on the internet, is a contractual arrangement that requires a retailer to display a minimum advertised price despite the actual selling price. So, in short, this is a control on the advertised price, but not on the actual price of the product.
Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but even if the advertised priced is, eg. $3300, it doesn't mean the actual price is $3300. That means you can still contact the retailer and negotiate the real price right?
jorkata wrote:
Hmm. I guess you've missed Canon's last quarterly results.
DSLR sales were down for the quarter as compared to 2011 (with overall company profit down 42.2%).
And Canon feels that now is the time to enforce the MALs.
That would surely stop the bleeding. Right.
I misdescribed my thought, sorry. You are right. Sales went down. I did not miss the quarterly results. But I am still waiting for those of the competitors. I am pretty sure their results are equal. Imo this is more the result of the general world wide economics. And photography gear, we are talking about is pure high end luxorius. Nobody (really) needs new gear. Some might do a better job. But most just feel better, owning the newest stuff. Those stop to spend their money easily. At least they realised that they can buy a great used car for the price of a modern mid class camera.
The map offers an advantadge: Beeing advertised less "cheap" the fast customers get the fealing this gear has an higher value. And "good" dealers might be able to earn same money in selling less. The result would be that they would promote this gear even more as long as the ballance is not pulled over (imo). If you keep the price of your midrange equipment stable, it supports making even more money with your entry level stuff (6D is comming soon). If Nikon dealers would be sure, stuff is successful sold by features, they would not have had to reduce D600 price about 15% from first sales day (here in germany), to grow the price difference to D800 synthetical. Imo Canon is just trying to hinder this.
Wahoowa wrote:
No, Nikon and Sony have done it for years.
One term that many misused it though is that Canon doesn't "raise" or "increase" their prices. We have been spoiled with how retailers sold Canon products way below MSRP.
Well, Pentax is going the other way. Personally, I always coveted the yellow K-01 with the 40/2.8 so maybe now's the time? Go Pentax Go!
Happy shooting,
Yakim.
Nov 02, 2012 at 03:10 AM
Lars Johnsson Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: Off
n0b0 wrote:
How much of it is really Canon and how much of it is the retailer using it as an excuse to raise their price and shifting the blame to Canon?
Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but even if the advertised priced is, eg. $3300, it doesn't mean the actual price is $3300. That means you can still contact the retailer and negotiate the real price right?
Yes you can still buy it for $ 2800 or @ 3000 if the seller like that
MAP sets the lowest advertized price and how a retailer can tell you what the real selling price is. Nikon USA, Sony USA, Pentax USA have established unilateral prices which set the lowest selling price.
Regarding Canon prices -- MAP doesn't limit the selling price but it may limit how (or even if) we can show the selling price. Phone us (800.606.6969 / 212.444.6615) or email [email protected]. We may be able to accommodate you.
"The practice of resale price maintenance on advertised prices damages consumers because it prevents competition on prices," Acting ACCC Chairman, Mr Peter Kell, said. "Wholesalers must understand that they cannot constrain the freedom of retailers to advertise and sell their products at prices determined by the retailers."
Not that it matters since we're still getting shafted with every imported goods. For some reason, our currency strength have little to no effect on its buying power. lol
henryp wrote:
MAP sets the lowest advertized price and how a retailer can tell you what the real selling price is. Nikon USA, Sony USA, Pentax USA have established unilateral prices which set the lowest selling price.
Regarding Canon prices -- MAP doesn't limit the selling price but it may limit how (or even if) we can show the selling price. Phone us (800.606.6969 / 212.444.6615) or email [email protected]. We may be able to accommodate you.
That's all nice and dandy (phoning in). But it defeats the purpose of on-line shopping. Today (or more precisely, last month), users, anywhere in the world, are able to browse to your web site, and check price they would pay. Unless you intend to prominently display "call for price", you are going to lose potential customers. Not everyone reads forums like this one.
Second issue are web sites that collect prices over web for comparative purposes. They will not show prices that reflect reality either. Of course, someone can say, it's better that way. But users got accustomed to such services before they spend money.
753951 wrote:
Second issue are web sites that collect prices over web for comparative purposes. They will not show prices that reflect reality either. Of course, someone can say, it's better that way. But users got accustomed to such services before they spend money.
Yeap, I use website like ShopBot and StaticIce all the time, especially for computer parts. I'd be pissed if I can't get an accurate pricing and having to contact individual retailer for the actual selling price. It's like this MAP thing is designed to slow down internet retail business.
Once again I thank God it's still illegal in Australia.
n0b0 wrote:
That means you can still contact the retailer and negotiate the real price right?
Quite right but this presumes the shopper knows the price the retailer is forced to display is the MAP price and not the lower selling price.
Yakim Peled wrote:
Well, Pentax is going the other way. Personally, I always coveted the yellow K-01 with the 40/2.8 so maybe now's the time? Go Pentax Go!
mmurph wrote:
Under the new Canon guidelines, will you still be able to use the "Please add to cart to see price" method to offer a lower price online?
I believe not. I believe our buyers and brand manager are struggling with Canon USA in an effort to make their policies more friendly to the end-user. I am not confident of success.
henryp wrote:
I believe our buyers and brand manager are struggling with Canon USA in an effort to make their policies more friendly to the end-user. I am not confident of success.
Thanks, Henry.
The way I'm reading this, Canon's MAP is actually the lowest selling price ... disguised as a MAP.
This way, only Canon controls discounts and rebates (and eBay deals?).
jorkata wrote:
The way I'm reading this, Canon's MAP is actually the lowest selling price ... disguised as a MAP.This way, only Canon controls discounts and rebates.
NO! The MAP is the lowest price we can advertize. Phone or email for the selling price, as I said earlier.
Frys Electronics kind of gets around it in their ads by showing the advertised price and then showing pictures of the in-store discount. They show a 5DIII advertised for $3299, but then show 4 - $100 bills usually representing the in-store discount, which would total of $2899, plus tax. I will verify if this still holds true the next time I'm in the store.
I'm curious, Henry. Let's say the new Sigma 35mm 1.4 lens is released at $1,000 and you have to advertise the 5DIII at $3,500. Will you then be able to advertise the pair at $4,000, for example?
curious80 wrote:
Setting a MAP is not price fixing. If it is anything like other MAP schemes, the retailers can still sell it for less than MAP. They just cannot list the price of the item as below MAP. Instead they have to say that the price is MAP, but we are offering you a discount.
The other strategies I have seen is selling the camera with a lens /and/or with other accessories (memory, extra batteries, camera bag, etc) and giving a big discount on the combination. This gets around the MAP limitations.
Mike K
.
