Samsung, Xiaomi and other makers found guilty of colluding with Amazon and Flipkart
- ?
- Anonymous
- vaS
- 16 Sep 2024
As a non-Indian who could get a Moto G54 Power or any of your decent G series, maybe this is karma for you. Didn't know locals also suffered with this limited availability.
- j
- jiyen235
- XQQ
- 16 Sep 2024
earworm, 16 Sep 2024"Investigators have written a 3000 page report that co... moreyou don't understand it then, they tried to make it as comprehensive as possible, pointing out each detail of the report and making sure no stone was left unturned. That allows them to have the strongest evidence and thus, have the highest chances of winning in court. If they had a small report it might've not been taken seriously at first and gathering more data might've been tougher as companies might've stopped em.
- H
- Hugo
- fCI
- 16 Sep 2024
I dont like online platforms, thats why i avoided buying a motorola this time even though i was somewhat satisfied with the previous motorola that i had.
- e
- earworm
- AK0
- 16 Sep 2024
"Investigators have written a 3000 page report that concludes that that water is indeed wet."
- Y
- Yahya
- 6QI
- 16 Sep 2024
Online shops don't have to deal with cost of maintaining consumer outlets, they can go cheaper with prices that way, nothing evil here. Just a better business model.
But "exclusive launches" should be kept in check, like surely you can launch it a week early on certain platform, but it should be easily available everywhere else after that.
- ?
- Anonymous
- AJj
- 16 Sep 2024
Biggest culprit is Google. They never launched Pixel phones on Amazon. They always deal exclusively with Flipkart (owned by Walmart), which is known for very poor service.
Also the Pixel phones are not available in any offline stores unlike other phones. So the users can't get a hands-on, this is one of the reason for the lackluster sales of pixel in India.
- j
- jiyen235
- XQQ
- 16 Sep 2024
My question is, if nearly all of the relevant smartphone manufacturers do it, is it really THAT bad? Like if it was only the top dog doing it, then yeah, that's horrible. But it seems there are numerous offenders, it's like if all of them are doing shady things then that shady thing is the new norm, for example not having headphone jacks.
I understand the opposing point of view, that it hurts offline markets and most importantly, competitors. I just don't think those competitors would stay relevant even if these manufacturers weren't shady. I'm not defending these practices, just thinking about stuff that's all, the consequences of these practices being used or not used, etc.
I do think they all have to pay a fee as this sort of practices promotes anti-competition, the market is less competitive and newcomers aren't able to have a fair playing field, I just don't think that nearly all of the big ones doing it makes it a huge issue. It's funny that the Indian govt is doing more against anti-consumer practices than the US. Respect ++ for that.
- ?
- Anonymous
- vGJ
- 16 Sep 2024
I mean this was sorta obvious that Amazon and Flipkart get exclusive launches .It's suprising it took so much time to figure it out
- j
- jiyen235
- XQQ
- 16 Sep 2024
Anonymous, 16 Sep 2024Of course they do shady things. It's only a matter of... moreand it's also about how they can trick the ones who'll bust them down into thinking they're actually not that bad.
- ?
- Anonymous
- IT%
- 16 Sep 2024
Womp-Womp
- ?
- Anonymous
- xjH
- 16 Sep 2024
Of course they do shady things.
It's only a matter of who's gonna bust them down.