3 ms·

If there is no requirement, but every landlord using the service takes their advice to maintain a price floor, it is still collusion.

s1artibartfast 3y ago
No it is not. The classic example is law firm salary. Every biglaw firm in the US pays the same salary and publishes them. This has been found not be collusion because there is no agreement or requirement they stick to the price. Every once in a while, one law firm will defect and raise salary, and every other law firm will update theirs within a week to the new rate.
- arrosenberg 3y ago
  That's different - they are choosing to raise their prices to attract talent. In this case landlords colluded to extract rent. You can always pay more for labor, no one is going to stop you because it's not exploitative.
  - s1artibartfast 3y ago
    no, it is the same. They are choosing to align prices so that they do not have to get in a bidding war for employees. It is legal because there is no formal agreement and they are just price matching to a published standard. In theroy, anyone can depart from the standard at any time, but 99% of the time, they dont. It is the same with the landords. In theory, they can charge whatever they want. It is 100% legal to extract rent. It is only illegal to make agreements with other parties to price fix.
    - arrosenberg 3y ago
      > It is only illegal to make agreements with other parties to price fix. Conveniently, all of the landlords participating in the conspiracy had some kind of service agreement with RealPage/YieldStar, which appears to equate to an agreement to fix prices.
      - s1artibartfast 3y ago
        That depends on the service agreement. It seems like there are different services. One where RealPage gives you a recommended price and you are free to choose whatever price you want. They might ask you something along the lines of "why didnt you use our price?" The other is the AutoPilot feature, where RealPage "takes the wheel" and set/publishes the listing price for you based on their model. I think the first case is pretty clearly legal, and the second has some valid concerns. The point of both services is to help landlords maximize profit, but that isnt illegal by itself.
        arrosenberg 3y ago
        The first example is still a crime, but the landlords probably have deniability, whereas RealPage is still very much attempting to create a pricing cartel, which is illegal. The second one is a conspiracy to defraud and a violation of antitrust law. > The point of both services is to help landlords maximize profit, but that isnt illegal by itself. No, it's immoral, which is why lawsuits and regulation are coming.
        s1artibartfast 3y ago
        I guess we just have different understanding. I dont think the first example is a crime, any more than getting an appraisal for a house or good you want to sell. With respect to the latter, I dont think there is anything immoral about maximizing profit by legal means. The counterparty isn't owed anything.
        arrosenberg 3y ago
        Leaving housing stock vacant in order to maximize your rents by artificially inflating demand is absolutely immoral and is sometimes (should always be) illegal. In this (the US) democracy the good faith assumption is that regular people get a fair deal - if that assumption goes away, things get ugly.

s1artibartfast 3y ago

No it is not. The classic example is law firm salary. Every biglaw firm in the US pays the same salary and publishes them. This has been found not be collusion because there is no agreement or requirement they stick to the price. Every once in a while, one law firm will defect and raise salary, and every other law firm will update theirs within a week to the new rate.

arrosenberg 3y ago
That's different - they are choosing to raise their prices to attract talent. In this case landlords colluded to extract rent. You can always pay more for labor, no one is going to stop you because it's not exploitative.
- s1artibartfast 3y ago
  no, it is the same. They are choosing to align prices so that they do not have to get in a bidding war for employees. It is legal because there is no formal agreement and they are just price matching to a published standard. In theroy, anyone can depart from the standard at any time, but 99% of the time, they dont. It is the same with the landords. In theory, they can charge whatever they want. It is 100% legal to extract rent. It is only illegal to make agreements with other parties to price fix.
  - arrosenberg 3y ago
    > It is only illegal to make agreements with other parties to price fix. Conveniently, all of the landlords participating in the conspiracy had some kind of service agreement with RealPage/YieldStar, which appears to equate to an agreement to fix prices.
    - s1artibartfast 3y ago
      That depends on the service agreement. It seems like there are different services. One where RealPage gives you a recommended price and you are free to choose whatever price you want. They might ask you something along the lines of "why didnt you use our price?" The other is the AutoPilot feature, where RealPage "takes the wheel" and set/publishes the listing price for you based on their model. I think the first case is pretty clearly legal, and the second has some valid concerns. The point of both services is to help landlords maximize profit, but that isnt illegal by itself.
      - arrosenberg 3y ago
        The first example is still a crime, but the landlords probably have deniability, whereas RealPage is still very much attempting to create a pricing cartel, which is illegal. The second one is a conspiracy to defraud and a violation of antitrust law. > The point of both services is to help landlords maximize profit, but that isnt illegal by itself. No, it's immoral, which is why lawsuits and regulation are coming.
        s1artibartfast 3y ago
        I guess we just have different understanding. I dont think the first example is a crime, any more than getting an appraisal for a house or good you want to sell. With respect to the latter, I dont think there is anything immoral about maximizing profit by legal means. The counterparty isn't owed anything.
        arrosenberg 3y ago
        Leaving housing stock vacant in order to maximize your rents by artificially inflating demand is absolutely immoral and is sometimes (should always be) illegal. In this (the US) democracy the good faith assumption is that regular people get a fair deal - if that assumption goes away, things get ugly.