3 ms·

The landlords were clearly communicating pricing information to one another with the intent of profit maximization. I don't see how software mediation changes t

by _jal 3y ago

The landlords were clearly communicating pricing information to one another with the intent of profit maximization. I don't see how software mediation changes that.

s1artibartfast 3y ago
What you just said is 100% legal, and occurs in every market. What makes it collusion is if they come to agreements about pricing information.
- sklargh 3y ago
  IANAL, and perhaps you are but I don’t believe it is 100% legal. Seems like a matter of degree. What the parent is describing could reasonably be construed as illegal signaling and/or pricing collusion if the market is itself the mechanism for collusion. There will be some interesting internal emails. Good overview of signaling here - https://www.jonesday.com/-/media/files/publications/2016/09/sending-the-wrong-message-antitrust-liability-for/files/fall16-renderc/fileattachment/fall16renderc.pdf?rev=780423be4f914b7598419368a13a7027 https://www.jonesday.com/-/media/files/publications/2016/09/...
  - lotsofpulp 3y ago
    I can go to a variety of hotel/airline/retail/stock brokers/etc websites right now and get prices. Why would that be illegal? Doing it secretly would invite scrutiny and reason to issue subpoenas though.
    - sklargh 3y ago
      It wouldn’t be. Using a tool as a collusive mechanism to set prices jointly or create a price floor would be though.
- mox1 3y ago
  So if these landlords all got together every Monday and discussed detailed pricing / sales info that would be 100% legal? What would be the purpose of this meeting other than to make implicit pricing agreements? Does anti-trust law explicitly require a written / verbal agreement or does doing lots of things that looks like agreeing (without actually agreeing) count?
  - twoodfin 3y ago
    Talking about pricing is fine. Not fine: “I’ll set my price to $X if you do as well.” The hard cases arise when this communication is obscured or implicit.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
  - HDThoreaun 3y ago
    Saying “I’m charging this much because it’s the most anyone will pay so skip the work of figuring out pricing and just charge the same” is legal. “We agree to never charge less than $x” is not. The question is if realpage lead to landlords keeping units vacant when they couldn’t rent them for the realpage suggested price.

by _jal 3y ago

The landlords were clearly communicating pricing information to one another with the intent of profit maximization. I don't see how software mediation changes that.

s1artibartfast 3y ago

What you just said is 100% legal, and occurs in every market. What makes it collusion is if they come to agreements about pricing information.

sklargh 3y ago
IANAL, and perhaps you are but I don’t believe it is 100% legal. Seems like a matter of degree. What the parent is describing could reasonably be construed as illegal signaling and/or pricing collusion if the market is itself the mechanism for collusion. There will be some interesting internal emails. Good overview of signaling here - https://www.jonesday.com/-/media/files/publications/2016/09/sending-the-wrong-message-antitrust-liability-for/files/fall16-renderc/fileattachment/fall16renderc.pdf?rev=780423be4f914b7598419368a13a7027 https://www.jonesday.com/-/media/files/publications/2016/09/...
- lotsofpulp 3y ago
  I can go to a variety of hotel/airline/retail/stock brokers/etc websites right now and get prices. Why would that be illegal? Doing it secretly would invite scrutiny and reason to issue subpoenas though.
  - sklargh 3y ago
    It wouldn’t be. Using a tool as a collusive mechanism to set prices jointly or create a price floor would be though.
mox1 3y ago
So if these landlords all got together every Monday and discussed detailed pricing / sales info that would be 100% legal? What would be the purpose of this meeting other than to make implicit pricing agreements? Does anti-trust law explicitly require a written / verbal agreement or does doing lots of things that looks like agreeing (without actually agreeing) count?
- twoodfin 3y ago
  Talking about pricing is fine. Not fine: “I’ll set my price to $X if you do as well.” The hard cases arise when this communication is obscured or implicit.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- HDThoreaun 3y ago
  Saying “I’m charging this much because it’s the most anyone will pay so skip the work of figuring out pricing and just charge the same” is legal. “We agree to never charge less than $x” is not. The question is if realpage lead to landlords keeping units vacant when they couldn’t rent them for the realpage suggested price.