A cellphone without an LCD isn't much of a cellphone. Alright, yes, there are exceptions to the rule, but generally speaking, LCDs still rule the industry, which makes it a ripe target for nefarious price-fixing schemes to take root -- something that LG and Sharp are
well-acquainted with coming off a stinging half-billion dollar verdict last year. All the talk of artificially inflated display pricing recently must've spooked AT&T, because they've gone ahead and filed a lawsuit in San Francisco today alleging that LG, Samsung, Chunghua, AU Optronics, and others all conspired to boost component prices during a period in which the carrier bought some 300 million handsets. That's a boatload of phones -- several times AT&T's total subscriber base -- and we're guessing the result could be a significant cash outlay if they're successful with the suit. Does this mean free
Mythics for everyone?
[Via
Phone Scoop]
posted Oct 21st 2009 12:32PM
+1 for Happy Fun Ball reference
Hey, it's still legal in 16 states.
Do not taunt happy fun ball.
It actually looks really cool in red.
"When not in use, Happy Fun Ball should be returned to its special cotainer and kept under refrigeration. Failure to do so relieves the makers of Happy Fun Ball, Wacky Products Incorporated, and its parent company, Global Chemical Unlimited, of any and all liability."
I LOL'd. Thanks, Engadget.
Mmm....at&t sues these guys, they win...they get millions of dollars. Now what are the odds that AT*T actually passes even 1/10 of the savings to any of the customers who bought some of the aforementioned phones. Mmm....wishful thinking
Wow At&T's been doin alot of bitchin lately...First Google now the manufacturer's than actually provide phone's for there network...
I don't want to talk to you no more, you empty headed animal food trough wiper. I fart in your general direction. Your mother was a hamster and your father smelt of elderberries. No, now go away or I shall taunt you a second time!
If Happy Fun Ball begins to smoke, get away immediately. Seek shelter
and cover head.
Happy Fun Ball may stick to certain types of skin.
Pepsi Sucks.
Do not look at Happy Fun Ball.
Picture = Win !
For certain. Same thing happened to a company I work with. Small color LCD modules went up over 50% in price from 2007 to 2008. Makes no sense.
maybe they went up in price cause AT&T was buying 300,000,000 of them...
Can someone tell me why it's not OK in AT&T's eyes for these companies to price fix, yet it's OK for AT&T to artificially raise SMS prices? $0.25/msg is a lot more than it was in 2001, and I highly doubt a 160 byte SMS message cost more to send now. Let's not forget about blocking Google Voice, Skype VoIP, etc...
Because they like receiving money but not paying out money.
Put it this way. If the price fixing really happened, then it artificially kept cell phone prices higher. Even the cheapo and free ones.
So even the cheap ones were more expensive?
@hark: subsidized phones might've come in at the same price, but we'd still wind up paying extra for service.
Best image in a LONG time. Kudos for making me smile.
Aye, as soon as I saw it I LOL'd hard.
When not in use, Happy Fun Ball should be returned to its special container and kept under refrigeration. Failure to do so relieves the makers of Happy Fun Ball, Wacky Products Incorporated, and its parent company, Global Chemical Unlimited, of any and all liability.
Best graphic ever on Engadget.com website?
You must have missed:
http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/11/ce-oh-no-he-didnt-part-lxii-steve-ballmer-publicly-ridicules/
I like this one, in conjunction with the header:
http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/25/microsoft-sucks-at-photoshop/
Even better:
http://www.engadget.com/2009/01/21/apple-on-smartphone-competition-if-others-rip-off-our-intellec/
Pot? Kettle? Black? The irony of AT&T suing others for price fixing is amazing given their(and everyone else's) rates for, say, text messaging.
+1 MILLION
Does this mean we can sue AT&T for price fixing now too?
Someone really hates Mark :D
Not just text message, but cellphone service in general. I am looking forward to T-Mobile's prospective offerings of SIM-only contracts for cheaper.
exactly, clicked the link to say the same thing. Let hell rain upon the Telco industry for their years of price fixing and ludicrous charges for SMS/MMS
You do realize there's a major difference (legally and economically) between charging high prices and agreeing with your competitors to set high prices, right?
@Le Big Mac: Yep, thus the "(and everyone else's)".
A lot of people are commenting on the irony of a cellular company suing on the basis of price fixing.
I think this is more understandable though as part of a corporate strategy on AT&T's part to improve its financial situation. It has already revealed that it doesn't turn a profit on smartphone usage until the 20th month of a contract (I'm not 100% sure on that but it was discussed recently). It is offering 3G connections on the B&N e-book reader because that device requires very limited data. In the meantime, AT&T is about to get leapfrogged in network speeds by its competitors. And they haven't said anything about an iPhone tethering plan for a while now.
All of this suggests that AT&T is struggling to some degree. I think this litigation comes out of a corporate strategy to find sources of income other than offering cell phone and notebook data contracts. Whether or not it's true is not relevant to a corporate strategy on this level. It only has to have some chance of success, i.e., in getting AT&T some cash. They're probably hoping for a settlement.
It's no wonder good cellphones have been so expensive lately! /s
So if fined, who receives the $? If I bought a phone or 2 from ATT the past couple years, do I see a penny of it?
please direct all questions regarding how the consumer is affected to a company that does not resemble the death star.
sincerely,
ralph de la mustache
now if they win the suit, does that mean consumers will see a refund? Afterall, the inflated price was paid by the consumer in the end, not ATT
As much as I hate to say it (though I'd love to be proven wrong even more, I could use a new subsidized phone), I think we all know the answer to this one.
They'll still be happy to sell the phones to you for the original price, no matter the verdict... ;)
Wow.....ridiculous.
The graphic just made my day!
When they win this lawsuit, where do i submit my address so I can recoup the money I lost when I bought my overpriced cell phone from them?
The only reason they're suing is because they didn't get the same profit from overcharging on phones. You know damn well they would still sell the phones at the same price, regardless how much they purchased them for.
A Big Happy Fun Ball of Hurt!
Something priceless about a telco complaining about price fixing.
What the hell could they need 300 million phones for!?
That's actually a good question. As far as I know, they only service the US, and the US population(according to google) is currently about 304 million, meaning almost every single person in the US would need to be one of their subscribers(and have a phone with one of these brand's screens). Then again, it doesn't say how long this period was, so if it spanned multiple 2 year periods I suppose it'd be possible, but we're talking on the order of 10-20 years for that to be true...
Now if AT&T wins this lawsiut, can the money go to the network so it can actually give me more bars in more places!?
The read link doesn't work for me FYI.
That's rich, AT&T suing someone else for Price Fixing when isn't that what the Cell Phone companies do? I mean really there's not a dimes worth of difference between any of them in terms of pricing and services. They all have 5 Gig caps for $60, they all charge about the same amounnt in cancellation fees etc. All four offer the same basic phone prices on their "exclusives." If there was true "competition," at least one company would offer real unlimited broadband or different levels like 5, 10, 20 Gig options.