Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by CoolHand on Tuesday June 05 2018, @03:22PM   Printer-friendly
from the sticking-it-to-the-consumer dept.

Submitted via IRC for SoyCow8317

Car makers like Jaguar Land Rover and Peugeot have been accused of using special software to raise spare parts prices.

Source: https://www.engadget.com/2018/06/04/car-makers-used-software-to-raise-spare-parts-prices/

Ever had the nagging suspicion that your car's manufacturer was charging outrageous prices for parts simply because it could? Software might be to blame. Reuters has obtained documents from a lawsuit indicating that Jaguar Land Rover, Peugeot, Renault and other automakers have been using Accenture software (Partneo) that recommended price increases for spare parts based on "perceived value." If a brand badge or other component looked expensive, Partneo would suggest raising the price up to a level that drivers would still be willing to pay. It would even distinguish parts based on whether or not there was "pricing supervision" over certain parts (say, from insurance companies or focused publications) to avoid sparking an outcry.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Wednesday June 06 2018, @02:36AM (10 children)

    by JoeMerchant (3937) on Wednesday June 06 2018, @02:36AM (#689116)

    the market is unhealthy

    When was the parts counter at an auto dealer ever a healthy market? Last time I caught a glimpse of the monitor, they've got 3 prices for every item: what they charge their own shop, what they charge other professionals, multiply the second one by two and add it to the first and that's what they charge people off the street.

    Lots of unhealthy markets in the real world - effective price collusion between "competitors" - sham competition between brands owned by common parent companies. Get the government involved with regulations and the prices only get worse.

    --
    🌻🌻 [google.com]
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 2) by sjames on Wednesday June 06 2018, @06:08AM (9 children)

    by sjames (2882) on Wednesday June 06 2018, @06:08AM (#689206) Journal

    yes, there are a great many unhealthy markets. Some caused by IP law, and some caused by failure to regulate the market. Government regulations didn't make the parts cost people off the street more than they cost professionals.

    • (Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Wednesday June 06 2018, @05:07PM (8 children)

      by JoeMerchant (3937) on Wednesday June 06 2018, @05:07PM (#689394)

      My mental picture of government regulated monopoly industries include AT&T in the 1940s-1980s, the airlines in the 1940s-1970s, cable internet even today in many markets... Generally not good for price or innovation, although the quality of service was better with the phone and airlines - not sure what psychopathic issues are driving Comcast today.

      --
      🌻🌻 [google.com]
      • (Score: 2) by sjames on Thursday June 07 2018, @01:35AM (7 children)

        by sjames (2882) on Thursday June 07 2018, @01:35AM (#689670) Journal

        But remember, the breakup of AT&T and forcing them to give "alternative" long-distance companies equal footing was also government regulation. Not allowing workers with chronic TB to spit on meat being distributed for human consumption (pun not intended) is government regulation.

        Regulation works well when it's done well. Unsurprisingly, when it's poorly done, the results aren't as good. An automatic no to regulation is unlikely to be good regulation.

        • (Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Thursday June 07 2018, @12:27PM (6 children)

          by JoeMerchant (3937) on Thursday June 07 2018, @12:27PM (#689827)

          Regulation works well when it's done well. Unsurprisingly, when it's poorly done, the results aren't as good. An automatic no to regulation is unlikely to be good regulation.

          Yep. One of the problems I see with regulation is that changing it frequently is disruptive, while not updating it to reflect current conditions is worse. That's the "magic of the free market," the rules don't have to change because "there are no rules..." as long as "free" still respects all the participants in the game (spitting TB into food being one good example of lack of respect.)

          --
          🌻🌻 [google.com]
          • (Score: 2) by sjames on Thursday June 07 2018, @06:39PM (5 children)

            by sjames (2882) on Thursday June 07 2018, @06:39PM (#690002) Journal

            I wouldn't go so far as to claim that all regulations currently in place are well thought out, but a great many exist exactly because significant players in the market were not respecting all players (and 3rd parties). Many have become tangled and exacting because the disrespectful players made every effort to work around the regulations to continue behaving badly rather than becoming respectful.

            Consider that for car parts, the only reason 3rd party parts are even a consideration is a law that the auto makers can't void all warranties just because you didn't use a "genuine" part or get it serviced exclusively at the stealership. In spite of that, the FTC has just recently informed a number of manufacturers that they are in violation of that law. The demands for right to repair are excactly because manufacturers are actively working to make sure that only "authorized" repair people are even able to work on "their" equipment.

            I'm all for making regulations as simple as possible and I do not believe that the U.S. has been all that good at that goal, but the notion that the Free market will make regulations unnecessary goes against hundreds or years worth of evidence to the contrary.

            • (Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Thursday June 07 2018, @07:15PM (4 children)

              by JoeMerchant (3937) on Thursday June 07 2018, @07:15PM (#690026)

              but a great many exist exactly because significant players in the market were not respecting all players

              Libtards forget this too often. The advances in quality and length of human life in the last 200 years due to pervasive government regulations have been huge.

              right to repair

              Right to repair needs some real teeth, crawling inside the design process and questioning: does this really need to be glued shut instead of screwed? Could this be made of metal that would last 50 years instead of plastic that would last 3? Etc. And, if there is some incentive for making the item disposable, quantifying some kind of "non-repairable item" tax (or repairable item tax rebate, however you want to look at it) to put some incentive on the side of making things that last, instead of turning the whole commercial world into razor-blade sales.

              --
              🌻🌻 [google.com]
              • (Score: 2) by sjames on Thursday June 07 2018, @10:32PM (3 children)

                by sjames (2882) on Thursday June 07 2018, @10:32PM (#690096) Journal

                We also need to kill things like parts on a private network (such as can-bus) that authenticate and refuse to inter-operate until some manufacturer authorized person uses a proprietary tool or software to "introduce" them. That has been John Deere's latest tactic to restrain free trade. Also the "smart" ink and toner carts where printers refuse to use (or just resist using) re-filled or 3rd party carts.

                I'm really glad the EU put an end to special snowflake charging cables and the accompanying gold plated chargers for phones.

                • (Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Thursday June 07 2018, @10:46PM (2 children)

                  by JoeMerchant (3937) on Thursday June 07 2018, @10:46PM (#690106)

                  In ~1998 I looked into making an OBD-II reader software on Palm Pilots, all it would have required was a $5 cable between the car port and the handheld device.

                  Membership into the society that might have given me access to the connector part numbers started at $50K...

                  --
                  🌻🌻 [google.com]
                  • (Score: 2) by sjames on Friday June 08 2018, @12:27AM (1 child)

                    by sjames (2882) on Friday June 08 2018, @12:27AM (#690130) Journal

                    Exactly that sort of thing. I recall years ago attempting to repair a VCR (back when VCRs were still somewhat relevant). I needed to watch it loading a tape to see what was going wrong. I found the lid switch easily enough, but it actually had a well hidden light sensor as a backup to make damned sure it would refuse to operate with someone watching it. I can think of no valid reason for it, it was a repair defeat device.

                    The "special" screwdriver needed to open the original Mac and the odd nut driver for Sears televisions (back when TVs were expensive and typically repaired) come to mind as early examples.

                    • (Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Friday June 08 2018, @03:40AM

                      by JoeMerchant (3937) on Friday June 08 2018, @03:40AM (#690187)

                      I can think of no valid reason for it, it was a repair defeat device.

                      Safety, no doubt. Anybody who pinched a finger inside one of those devices was clearly going out of their way to defeat the built in safety mechanism. I'm sure there was just such a justification recorded somewhere in the company that made that repair defeat device. I had a similar TV that had some kind of field sensor that would defeat the picture with the case off, thing was: the field sensor went out of cal and the TV stopped operating unless you put another box around the back of it... Oh, and this happened about 1 month out of warranty.

                      --
                      🌻🌻 [google.com]