5 ms·

They did coordinate: the software had a policy that you had to take their recommendation at least n% of the time (I think 80?) Edit: Per discussion below, it w

They did coordinate: the software had a policy that you had to take their recommendation at least n% of the time (I think 80?) Edit: Per discussion below, it was merely strongly encouraged and effectively followed (in practice) to take the recommendation at least 80% of the time... in order to raise prices together...

bombcar 3y ago
This might end up being the lynchpin - the software sounds like a textbook cartel.
- mcmoor 3y ago
  This fact either make it 100% a cartel or is actually false and keep being repeated on HN for some reason.
s1artibartfast 3y ago
I don't think that is true from reading the complaint - there wasnt any mandatory requirement, but guidelines on how to use the algorithm.
- ethanbond 3y ago
  https://www.hausfeld.com/media/550bhzyp/realpage-complaint-filed.pdf https://www.hausfeld.com/media/550bhzyp/realpage-complaint-f... Paragraph 7
  - svnt 3y ago
    “As one Lessor explains, while ‘we are all technically competitors’ RealPage ‘helps us work together’” “RealPage explains that for its services to be most effective in increasing rents, Lessors must accept the pricing at least 80 percent of the time” Yeah this is collusion.
    - jlarocco 3y ago
      "Collusion as a service." The clients have plausible deniability because how can they know if everybody else is using it, and the service provider is "just a recommendation", so they're not guilty either. If it's not ruled illegal (and it should be) then it seems like a great business model to copy in other markets.
      - svnt 3y ago
        They know that it works by competitors “working together”, it doesn’t matter whether they communicate via language or through prices combined with a service that both explains how it works and dictates how they all behave.
      - DannyBee 3y ago
        One piece of confusion here is that you do not actually have to prove a literal explicit agreement between the parties to be successful. While tacit collusion is not itself illegal, conspiracy is. Put another way: You can prohibit folks from agreeing not to compete, no matter what form that agreement takes. You don't have to know who you are avoiding competition with, etc However you can't order people to compete just because they aren't
      - bsder 3y ago
        > "Collusion as a service." This has become a general problem with outsourcing and we really need to update the law on this. Big hotel chains outsource their housekeeping--the chain doesn't pay under minimum wage--it just bids out the contract so the contractor can't possibly win the bid without paying under minimum wage. The law needs to be updated so that fines and punishments against a subcontractor also need to be enforceable against the parent, as well.
    - anigbrowl 3y ago
      'People of the same trade seldom meet together, even for merriment and diversion, but the conversation ends in a conspiracy against the public, or in some contrivance to raise prices.'
  - twoodfin 3y ago
    They claimed 80% was the level needed to see effectiveness. That’s not the same thing as “requiring” anything of their customers.
    - packetlost 3y ago
      Effectiveness of what? Price fixing?
      - twoodfin 3y ago
        I don’t know. But the claim that the commercial agreement with RealPage was contingent on accepting its recommendations 80% of the time is false.
        ethanbond 3y ago
        I edited the comment above, but as mentioned: the thing they're requesting 80% coordination to accomplish is indeed price fixing, ergo cartel.
  - s1artibartfast 3y ago
    I've read the complaint before. Nowhere does it say that users are penalized for not following the model. Keep in mind that this is a document written by the prosecution and completely one-sided. Paragraph 7 says "RealPage explains that for its services to be most effective in increasing rents, Lessors must accept the pricing at least eighty percent of the time“ That is very different than what the poster above me claimed. Nobody has kicked out of the service for not following recommendations. The closest thing to a penalty that the document can come up with is that real page will call people and inquire why they aren't following the recommendations
    - ethanbond 3y ago
      Sure, I edited the above comment. Fortunately punishment for not colluding is not actually a necessary feature of cartels, only the collusion is. Which this obviously is.

bombcar 3y ago

This might end up being the lynchpin - the software sounds like a textbook cartel.

mcmoor 3y ago
This fact either make it 100% a cartel or is actually false and keep being repeated on HN for some reason.

s1artibartfast 3y ago

I don't think that is true from reading the complaint - there wasnt any mandatory requirement, but guidelines on how to use the algorithm.

ethanbond 3y ago
https://www.hausfeld.com/media/550bhzyp/realpage-complaint-filed.pdf https://www.hausfeld.com/media/550bhzyp/realpage-complaint-f... Paragraph 7
- svnt 3y ago
  “As one Lessor explains, while ‘we are all technically competitors’ RealPage ‘helps us work together’” “RealPage explains that for its services to be most effective in increasing rents, Lessors must accept the pricing at least 80 percent of the time” Yeah this is collusion.
  - jlarocco 3y ago
    "Collusion as a service." The clients have plausible deniability because how can they know if everybody else is using it, and the service provider is "just a recommendation", so they're not guilty either. If it's not ruled illegal (and it should be) then it seems like a great business model to copy in other markets.
    - svnt 3y ago
      They know that it works by competitors “working together”, it doesn’t matter whether they communicate via language or through prices combined with a service that both explains how it works and dictates how they all behave.
    - DannyBee 3y ago
      One piece of confusion here is that you do not actually have to prove a literal explicit agreement between the parties to be successful. While tacit collusion is not itself illegal, conspiracy is. Put another way: You can prohibit folks from agreeing not to compete, no matter what form that agreement takes. You don't have to know who you are avoiding competition with, etc However you can't order people to compete just because they aren't
    - bsder 3y ago
      > "Collusion as a service." This has become a general problem with outsourcing and we really need to update the law on this. Big hotel chains outsource their housekeeping--the chain doesn't pay under minimum wage--it just bids out the contract so the contractor can't possibly win the bid without paying under minimum wage. The law needs to be updated so that fines and punishments against a subcontractor also need to be enforceable against the parent, as well.
  - anigbrowl 3y ago
    'People of the same trade seldom meet together, even for merriment and diversion, but the conversation ends in a conspiracy against the public, or in some contrivance to raise prices.'
- twoodfin 3y ago
  They claimed 80% was the level needed to see effectiveness. That’s not the same thing as “requiring” anything of their customers.
  - packetlost 3y ago
    Effectiveness of what? Price fixing?
    - twoodfin 3y ago
      I don’t know. But the claim that the commercial agreement with RealPage was contingent on accepting its recommendations 80% of the time is false.
      - ethanbond 3y ago
        I edited the comment above, but as mentioned: the thing they're requesting 80% coordination to accomplish is indeed price fixing, ergo cartel.
- s1artibartfast 3y ago
  I've read the complaint before. Nowhere does it say that users are penalized for not following the model. Keep in mind that this is a document written by the prosecution and completely one-sided. Paragraph 7 says "RealPage explains that for its services to be most effective in increasing rents, Lessors must accept the pricing at least eighty percent of the time“ That is very different than what the poster above me claimed. Nobody has kicked out of the service for not following recommendations. The closest thing to a penalty that the document can come up with is that real page will call people and inquire why they aren't following the recommendations
  - ethanbond 3y ago
    Sure, I edited the above comment. Fortunately punishment for not colluding is not actually a necessary feature of cartels, only the collusion is. Which this obviously is.