Results 1 to 3 of 3
  1. #1
    Merchant & ABW Ambassador
    Join Date
    May 31st, 2006
    Houston TX
    Toys R Us settles lawsuits over web price pressure
    Toys ‘R’ Us settles lawsuits over web price pressure

    Toys ‘R’ Us faced two connected lawsuits alleging antitrust violations. One was a class action suit brought by consumers who claimed they had to pay more to buy products like child car seats and baby strollers because Toys ‘R’ Us pressured the manufacturers of those products not to pay to web retailers that charged less than bricks-and-mortar stores. In the other case, e-retailers Inc. and Baby Club of America sued Toys ‘R’ Us and several manufacturers saying they lost business because they were not able to sell products made by the manufacturers that succumbed to pressure from Toys ‘R’ Us, which is No. 37 in the Internet Retailer Top 500 Guide.
    Isn't that hard to prove that they lost business because they did not carry that sku? Wouldn't WalMart be a better target that Toys R us?
    Last edited by Eric Ewe; March 30th, 2011 at 11:55 AM.

  2. #2
    The Seal of Aproval rematt's Avatar
    Join Date
    November 19th, 2006
    The Windy City
    Quote Originally Posted by Eric Ewe View Post
    Wouldn't WalMart be a better target that Toys R us?
    Only if Walmart conspired with manufacturers to fix prices. I didn't see any mention of them in the article or any reference to a similar suit. I would imagine if someone has evidence of Walmart being involved in this type of "price maintenance" that a suit will be forth coming.

    "I know that you believe you understand what you think I said, but I'm not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant." - Richard Nixon

  3. #3
    ...and a Pirate's heart. Convergence's Avatar
    Join Date
    June 24th, 2005
    Surprised they got caught up in something like this.

    In a previous life and industry, manufacturers often had MAP pricing to keep everyone on a level playing field with regards to what prices were advertised for their products.

    If a manufacturer didn't "want" a particular B&M dealer, or a particular online only dealer, to be able to sell their products they simply set their purchasing requirements at a point that it wasn't feasible. IE: High Minimum Orders, Must have stocking inventory/warehouse in order to do the occasional drop ship order, and/or low discounts or discounts based on volume purchases. Furthermore, manufacturers would offer quarterly or annual rebates based on a dealer's purchases. Plenty of ways to prevent someone from selling your products.

    All in all, it looks like the settlement amounts could be considered "peanuts" and may have been agreed upon to just end the costs associated with defending any suits.

    Unless I'm missing something here...
    Salty kisses, Sandy toes, and a Pirate's heart...

  4. Newsletter Signup

+ Reply to Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts