Somebody probably got talked to about this one.

Gee, Betson is 20 minutes from my office...

Agreed!!! Why does Stern let their distributors sell their pins in the initial retail market for $2400 over MSRP? If anyone could buy directly from Stern, I wouldn't have a problem with this. But when distributors technically have a monopoly on new releases, Stern should be setting some kind of ground rules to keep them from gouging the pinball community. I'm good with whatever the secondary market sets the price at because it will have to follow the traditional rules of supply & demand of a capitalistic society.

Bet they got some inventory reduction/redirection by the hands of Stern

just out of curiosity... why are some so convinced that stern has a "don't sell above msrp policy"? anyone got something official on that? or simply supposition?

as noted earlier, map and "no lower than msrp" policies aren't uncommon*, but "no selling above msrp" policies are rare birds indeed... map/lower than msrp policies protect distributers/resellers... "no sell above" can only hurt those groups, and offers them no protection at all... distributor "a" does not need to be "protected" from distributor "b" selling over msrp...

* and even manufaturers who control their "no under msrp" rules in a draconian manner can't really control their resellers... for example, if you've ever bought a pair of grado cans, you'll find that you can get them at 15% off, even though grado will (and does) pull product from resellers who do this...

I doubt it...I called them the Friday morning when the Metallica LE was officially released for pre-orders...they told me they didn't get any alloted to them by Stern...now I know why they told me that...they're selling the allotment of 5 they DID get for $9,999 each on EBAY!!!

why do you think stern even cares what happens to the product once it leaves their hands? they have no skin in the game...

stern should not (nor should they have any desire to) concern themselves with the "gouging of the pinball community"... please... no one is forcing anyone to buy a pinball machine, and a pin isn't food, water or shelter...

if you are in a position to drop $7500 on a pin, quit whining...

got a couple nice bridges here for sale if you think the distributor in question is the only one who did this...

i said it back when many were demanding an "official explanation" from stern... the very last thing the distributors wanted was for that to happen, because then many of them would be the ones with some 'splainin to do to their customers...

Stern should care what their partners (the distributors) are doing to the the end user (the pinball community) because if they keep screwing the end user, some buyers might decide to take their money (potentially Stern's money) elsewhere. And btw, I'm not whining because I got one...just making an observation from a sense of fairness and a business perspective. Something you obviously don't get!

Of course I don't think they're the only ones that did it...which only helps to strengthen my original point that Stern needs to set some kind of ground rules for their pins entering the initial retail market.

nah, i get "business" just fine, and its not "touchy feely", regardless of what some would like you to believe... "fairness" isn't really a concern...

sorry... that's life... besides, where else are they going to take their money?

again, there's no "gouging" going on... market manipulation, yes, but not gouging... you aren't talking about a "need" here... it's a "want"...

no, you have no ground to stand on at all, other than "this is how i would like it to work"... there is no point to be made at all...

Scammer. Uncool.

Wish I was farther.

if you are calling me a "scammer", you could not be more wrong...

At the risk of boring you to death, the Federal Trade Commission has antitrust laws in place to ensure fair competition between business. Simply put, a manufacturer CANNOT under law, tell distributors what price to sell at. "Price fixing" does not ensure competition. In short these same laws allow distribution to sell you machines for less that retail price. This law allows you to price shop, if there was price fixing then all premiums would be $6999 and that's that.

When it comes to limited editions being sold out, once you own it you can ask whatever price you want for it, IE BIBLE.

http://www.ftc.gov/bc/antitrust/antitrust_laws.shtm

The distributors are already selling above MSRP . . . they are just having their buddies they gave 5 to do it for them (the ones we call speculators or flippers).

If they can't sell them by the time the games have to be paid for or flipped the distributors will take them in as regular inventory and then tell the customers they told earlier they were sold out too that they were able to get more after all; they may keep them at a high mark up though after the release unless the market forces the price down like it does on so many after the pin is released.

You've said this a few times - what proof do you have of this? I find it hard to believe most distributors are in collusion selling their LE stock under their buddies. There were only ~ 250 to be sold, a good percentage of those have already been accounted for on Pinside alone. And if this were the case, we'd see many for sale already, which we haven't seen .... just 1 or 2 here or there.

Agreed. In fact, I think Stern is trying to help out their distributors here with METLE for past flops that they still are holding inventory for.

I tell you what, my relationship with my local distributor has been pretty damaged over this METLE thing. He guilted the heck out of me when I bought XMen from JJ so I referred him some business (four of my buddies bought games from him this year) and I was going to buy at METLE from him.

I won't go into the details of my meeting with my local guy or even say who he is as I and my friends still have other games under warranty from him and I go to his place periodically, but he told me he was out but currently has one listed on his website as available with a "call for pricing". Won't be doing any more business or referring any more business to that guy and should have just placed my order with JJ as all his orders got filled and it doesn't seem like he held back extra inventory.

I showed some of my text message chains with some of the local Lake Charles pinsiders; that's really the only "hard evidence" I have. They agreed with me after reading them.

Other than that, I don't have any proof, just the fact that I know I spent several hours on a Tuesday a few weeks back on the phone with as many distributors as i could call and several of them said (paraphrasing here): "look, I'm totally sold out but my good friend bought a couple extra for some buddies of his and they have back out on him, why don't you give him a call, here's his number" and then the good friend wanted to sell the game to me at large mark ups over MSRP while assuring me the game would be shipped straight to me and the warranty would remain intact direct from Stern.

Take from the above what you will; for me it was crystal clear what was going on and though the extra $1,800 or whatever is really no sweat off my back to come up with I decided not to reward such behavior . . . I just made a list of distributors I wouldn't do business with in the future unless I had no other choice. I'm really disappointed in the local one I mention in the post above since I had sent him so much business.

Been there. I have seen the texts. TigerLaw is no drama queen nor is he a conspiracy theorist. He is legitimate.

I guess what I was trying to say I have a hard time believing this is a common occurrence versus an isolated incident.

I can't speak to how common it is myself actually, only that it occurred more than once. I'm not even sure how many distros I called now. Maybe ten or twelve. Three of them had this story that I am calling pure BS on.

What's not a common occurrence ? Selling out all the LEs that fast. that is a first. Everyone was surprised.

Now here is the question for the flippers - sell now on the bird in the hand theory, or hold out? Several collectors here have already sold on the bird in hand theory. That is a first also, big markups and sales made prior to delivery. I am seeing most of the flippers attempting to cash in right now - we all get that, I mean it could have issues after it is opened and the price could adjust down.

Conclusion has to be dump it now, and get yourself a premium. Smart money is doing it right now check the market here and elsewhere. Of course on the other hand...if exposure once it is released increases demand especially to fringe pinball metallica fans, prices could go up. To double your profit from right now at 9995 you have to get 12,700 for it down the road. It really looks like a false supply crisis blip, I have heard some other guys refer to it referencing limited edition production in other hobbies. So take your 2700 profit now, or risk and wait (who knows how long) hoping for a further increase. Very interesting.

Me? I still have not sold a machine yet, ever. From the reviews it sounds like I will have to keep it for at least a year to get really complete software anyway. So I will risk my 2700 and even more because I will put wear and tear on it Flippers win on this title so far.

I wonder how Rolex gets away with it. Certified Rolex distributors have to sell new Rolex watches at MSRP. Anyone selling above or below MSRP is not a direct distributor or they are selling used goods.

The same is true in many women's cosmetics, accessories and even with Tiffany.

Thanks Speed. By the way, check out our friend in Texas' webpage for what he has for sell right now . . .

Yup. Stern, if you're reading this, just nix the photo translite altogether. Or sell them separately, give them away as promos, whatever. There are fans of both premium cabinets, but I can't recall a single person saying they prefer the photo translite to any of the others.

I might end up selling my LE to a friend and replacing it with a premium. Really hope I'm not stuck looking at a photograph.

On an interesting note, spoke to a smaller distributor today who was supposed to get a few LE's and sold them, and before he sold them he even spoke to Gary personally who assured him his allotment was locked in - they pulled his stock and he has already entered into litigation with Stern. Perhaps I missed it elsewhere, but this was the first time I heard that litigation has already begun.

I believe they control it by simply cutting off a distributor (not supplying them with any inventory) if they sell or advertise at a price different than what the manufacturer recommends. In that way, they are not technically forcing a distributor to sell it at a given price. And then to keep customers from buying on the grey market, they only offer factory warranty service if you buy it from an authorized dealer....

There is a rule/contract that allows retailers to sell below MSRP, or a certain percentage below MSRP, but they simply can't advertise the price. You see this a lot with online electronics ("Add to cart to see the price").

Step right up, join the expectant crowd gathering now!

Simply put, you cannot price gouge on a toy.

Rolex Distributors AGREE to sell Rolex watches at MSRP. If they do not agree to it, they do not sell new Rolex watches, simple as that.

This is my understanding as well. Additionally, I am told by Rolex dealers that, when they are inclined to come down of MSRP for really good customers, they really can only do it through allocating more money to a trade in watch than they otherwise would.

I have no idea of the accuracy of the above, just was what I have been told.

that would be a "map" policy... minimum advertised price...

which is different from the rolex example (or the grado example i used earlier)...

How do they get around the anti-trust law that prohibits manufacturers from requiring retailers to sell at their stated price only?

^^^

your guess is as good as mine, but perhaps that anti-trust legislation isn't as ironclad is we would like it to be...

"no lower than msrp price" policies are not uncommon however... so there has to be some type of a loophole there...

I decided to look up the law:

Supreme Court Overrules Ban On Minimum Price Agreements

Manufacturers invest substantial time and money building their products' brands and reputations among consumers. They often encourage retailers carrying their products to contribute to these brand-building efforts through co-operative advertising, promotions, in-store displays, customer service programs, and other efforts. High-service retailers, however, may be discouraged from doing their part if others, like Internet resellers, who do not make such investments, take business away from the high-service retailers by selling the same products at deep discounts. One way for a brand owner to avoid this problem is to set minimum resale prices. A recent United States Supreme Court decision makes it substantially easier for a manufacturer to do just that, with reduced risk of antitrust liability.

The Supreme Court recently overruled the longstanding rule that a manufacturer can never directly agree with a distributor to set a minimum price that the distributor can charge for the manufacturer's products. In Leegin Creative Leather Products, Inc. v. PSKS, Inc., the Supreme Court ordered lower courts to evaluate these minimum pricing agreements (or vertical price restraints) according to the "rule of reason" rather than strictly prohibiting such agreements. Under the new ruling, agreements that courts decide serve a pro-competitive purpose do not violate federal antitrust law. The Court's 5-4 decision, intended to bring the law into step with the thinking of today's economists, clears up years of seemingly contradictory precedent and confusing legal loopholes. Still, it remains to be seen how lower courts will determine when minimum pricing agreements will be permitted.

So why is it OK for Stern to enforce minimum prices but it's OK for some distributors to go above and beyond MSRP? Of course both policies hose the end consumers (us).

Whose the girl that ruined her body?

yes, both are legal, and both happen... the "above and beyond msrp" is a function of the marketplace due to real/perceived scarcity/rarity... it happens rarely, and it doesn't always work out well for the reseller in the end (like the ford dealers who thought they were gonna make a killing on the "new" t-bird)...

MSRP...Manufacturers Suggested Retail Price...
Suggested....Key semantics here...So this is the protected wall that Distributors have conveniently chosen to stand behind as a "legitimate" way of justifying more profit and less customer fairness.

"customer fairness" isn't relevant, it's business...

"legitimate" isn't relevant either...

So the auction has ended. Did all 5 sell that fast?

So the auction has ended. Did all 5 sell that fast?

No, none were sold through Ebay. Either they got talked to and took it down, or they had 5 quick buyers that purchased it outside of Ebay (which most do on things like this - saves the buyer money, and saves the seller fees + chargeback risk)

I am currently watching an LE ( I already have one, just want to watch the auction) he has it at $14,999.

WOW...I'm surprised there isn't a thread about this on Pinside yet?

Even though you went to FSU, I have to admit . . . that was funny as hell!

Classic!