New Reynolds and Reynolds process to prevent third party data collection.

[itdata]

Can anyone spell Class Action Lawsuit??? It is a clear "restraint of trade". Reynolds is in trouble.

 

[Alex Snyder]

Can anyone spell Class Action Lawsuit??? It is a clear "restraint of trade". Reynolds is in trouble.

That would be true if they had a majority of the market.

 

[CliffC]

It is a clear "restraint of trade"

If it were that clear, wouldn't we be hearing about "Injunctions" and "Retraining Orders" around the country? Where's the list?

That would be true if they had a majority of the market.

I think that when you can show that your suppliers have gotten together without you and agreed to increase the price of their services to you simply because they have taken part in limiting your choice of providers, the issue of majority control or influence over a market can be less a factor.

 

[Alex Snyder]

I think that when you can show that your suppliers have gotten together without you and agreed to increase the price of their services to you simply because they have taken part in limiting your choice of providers, the issue of majority control or influence over a market can be less a factor.

I'm curious, who has banded together with Reynolds to do this?

 

[Frank]

I think they are just "testing the water" and judging the amount of heat they are going to take from customers before a nationwide implementation. The dealers who have experienced this are really pissed and screaming at Reynolds. But most have not been affected yet!!!

 

[itdata]

Restraining trade is not defined by market share. It has nothing to do with monopoly. It is when someone owns something, (the Dealers owning their data) they may choose to give it away, grant access to it or sell it to whomever, whenever, and for how ever much they decide. Reynolds is clearly restraining trade (between the Dealership and the Vendor) by imposing a fee on the vendors for access to something they do not own and or shutting down access that the Dealer has granted.

 

[CliffC]

Some light reading...

Sherman Antitrust Act - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[CliffC]

I'm curious, who has banded together with Reynolds to do this?

Did you hear that they have "banded together"?

 

[Alex Snyder]

Did you hear that they have "banded together"?

No, not at all. But antitrust issues and monopolies are targeted at companies who have a large enough amount of a particular market to control things. It might feel that Reynolds has an enormous amount of control over any dealer who is contracted with them for their DMS solution, but there are roughly 120 other DMS options. And 1 of those options, last I heard, has more market share than Reynolds.

Please don't believe for a minute I'm taking sides with Reynolds. I'm simply stating that an antitrust lawsuit against them probably wouldn't be worth anyone's time.....unless Reynolds "banded" together with another major DMS provider to "price-fix" or do something else outlined in the Sherman Act.

 

[ewalraven]

[ ] Is surprised that Reynolds is at it yet again trying to keep vendors out.
[ ] Will be surprised if another lame tactic is tried again in another 3-4 months.

[X] Wants to organize and/or participate in a flash mob right outside the Reynolds HQ.