Quotes from earlier in this thread, from folks who mistakenly believe that being a libertarian should allow entire industries to abuse citizens, and then hide behind armies of white-collar crime lawyers who justify all actions within their entirely self-regulated industry:
"If you support this Maryland law, you are supporting further intrusion by the government into formerly private affairs."
"...minimum pricing policies is expanding government control, not reducing it, under some wackadoo argument that expanding government control will in some way result in greater free enterprise."
...it is nonsense to claim it [laws against price-fixing] is part of our grand tradition of individual liberty."
WOW, some folks on this thread obviously missed elementary school civics (not you, Canadians).
Ahem...
"Class, who was Teddy Roosevelt?
ANSWER: "A Republican president who was called the
Trust-Buster over 100 years ago"
HERE'S AN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL LESSON PLAN, OR...
...the remedial version:
YouTube Trust-Buster!
To argue that price-fixing occurs in a vacuum of other corrupting forces in the marketplace, whether the dive industry or across all industries, is cunning
sophistry, worthy of
Elmer Gantry.
It has been proven, over and over, that without antitrust laws, reliance upon the civil legal system "to enforce contracts and punish fraud, theft, etc.,"
after the horses are out of the barn, does not work; judges get bought-off, etc. Weak antitrust laws inevitably and repeatedly encourages
more collusion between participants. The drafters of the Sherman Act saw, irrefutably, that price fixing was inexorably linked to both collusions and malfeasances. The motivation to innovate is reduced (i.e. why compete among friends, we're all fat and happy, let's keep the government, representing consumer interests, OUT). Industries became
cartels, controlled by
oligarchies.
To examine price-fixing's impacts on the dive industry in a vacuum, ignoring other facts, is
a bald-faced ploy to obfuscate years of fraud. We're not talking about the cost of high-fashion leather purses (i.e. Leegin), but life-support gear and training in an ENTIRELY unregulated industry. Price fixing is the #1 mechanism that's allowed those at the top of the industry's pyramid to keep their "troops" in line, never mind that it's not in the long-term interest of the troops themselves.
DA argues that price-fixing allows companies to remain strong (buy an AL or SP regulator, they'll be around in 25 years when you need servicing). But price-fixing creates de facto franchisees, who become overly dependant upon "Big Daddy." Got defective equipment? Shhhh... let's keep this quiet between friends (dealers / senior service techs) and not rock the boat, because that could hurt business (and maybe we'll drop your dealership). SO THEY DON'T TELL THE TRUTH AND LEAVE A DEFECTIVE COMPUTER ON THE MARKET FOR 6 YEARS - EVEN AFTER A RECALL!
Why embrace a system
that encourages and rewards corruption to fester for years? Scubapro's actions unnecessarily put at risk first-responders and consumers.
The book "Nation of Secrets" reveals how Brett Gilliam, others at Scubapro and their lawyers lied and hid their knowingly defective computer. Publicly, Scubapro blamed a 65-year-old executive who was retiring (delaying payment of his costly "parachute"), but ultimately paid him a settlement.
Sure, the legal system punished Scubapro, after the fact. But the few people in the retail channel who knew about the problem did nothing effective to get the computer off the market (i.e. don't get the oligarch mad, it'll ruin my career). The trial dragged on for years, as industry defense tactics always rely upon unethical motions to delay (i.e. plaintiff attrition). The judge threw one defense law firm off the case for ethical misconduct. (And in 2009, Gilliam editorializes about the dearth of innovation in the dive industry.)
The business model of the modern dive industry, in the USA, was shaped by John Cronin, who was simultaneously CEO of PADI and US Divers (Aqualung USA) from 1969 to 1985, and president of DEMA from 1971 to 1993, and 1999 to 2002. PADI has a history of cozy relationships with a few dominant equipment companies, which don't seem to compete with each other very much. But they sure have a history of colluding to quash outside innovators. (e.g. McClure v. Scubapro; USA v. Scuba Retailers Association; Nova v. PADI; State of Washington v. Scubapro and more.)
Why must your LDS become financially beholden to such pirates? Why can't dealers cherry-pick gear they consider superior, instead of getting stuck on buying "programs."
(Just like consumers can cherry-pick who they buy gear and training from.) Few other industries have such concocted buyer programs, which are just devious ways around antitrust laws. Dealers must "qualify" for the next-higher discount level by choking on more inventory than a dealer can reasonably expect to sell in a season. But "Big Daddy" acts as a bank to many, giving 9-month terms. But the real agenda is keeping dealers beholden (ultimately weaker) to coerce cooperation of locking out smaller innovative manufacturers (e.g. "cramming" and "tying" excess inventory in some product categories). Major brands have dropped dealers / changed their discount rate if they bought anything from "Brand-X." Ultimately,
consumers were victimized in manners far worse than over-paying for leather bags
(i.e. Leegin).
Antitrust laws exist to create a dynamic INstability between retailers and manufacturers. To prevent over-cozy relationships that inevitably and irrefutably evolves into collusions that hurt consumers. 21st-century robber barons wrap their argument in the flag of righteous free enterprise (i.e. self-interest), but lack facts to back their argument. Pay no attention to the men behind the curtain! There's no denying: price-fixing is the first domino that begins greater harms, while doing harms itself.
Leegin determined that litigation could occur to argue harms done by price fixing, after the fact (i.e. rule of reason). But the Supreme's 5-vote majority never examined that such plaintiff action would be impossibly expensive, even for state governments, let alone smaller innovators. In any case, consumers continue being harmed while hoped-for litigation never gains traction.
Example from other industries of harms caused by Leegin? Big-Pharma price-fixes drugs for years after their patents have expired -- sometimes costing 20X the retail price charged in other countries --
by paying hundreds of millions of dollars to the makers of generic drugs who agree not to compete. The FTC has been litigating cases, but new laws must be passed. Yes, you read right -- ONLY in the USA can Big-Pharma charge so much. If you're crying about banks getting bailed out, how is this not another form of tax (i.e. patients subsidizing Big Pharma)? Some argue that pharmaceutical research is expensive. But facts show the money does not go to R&D, but instead to buy smaller innovators who've already accomplished R&D. Then there's a net layoff of researchers, so there's less likelihood of future breakthroughs. "Responsibility to shareholders" is killing future innovations. This downward spiral is all courtesy of weak antitrust laws.
Some folks on this thread speak of
the Sherman act, drafted in 1890, as if it had been enacted just yesterday. I guess these
"Grand Traditionalists" desire a further roll back. Are you guys also claiming that "individualist traditions" were eroded by the emancipation proclamation and women's suffrage? Hey, those were the days when an individualist could go into business and really enjoy low labor costs! Instead, the oligarchic structure of this industry commits fraud by having surrogates promise career-potential to under-trained / under-informed would-be dive pros. Then everyone stays silent while they get themselves and first-time divers hurt. For instance, by practicing emergency swimming ascents the wrong way, per a
10-year study from some "wakadoo" Europeans, who found
pulmonary barotraumas (PBT) or arterial gas embolism (AGE) injury rates up to 1,500X more likely during training. BTW, this correlates to a time when PADI has become more dominant in Europe, displacing training that traditionally has been club-based, such as BSAC in the UK.
To the posters on this thread who pine for the days of "grand traditionalist" robber barons, I guess you think that Teddy Roosevelt was just intrusive big government? Personally, thank God for Teddy, or Yellow Stone and Yosemite would be laced with rail lines and freeways leading to foreclosed homes.
