Friday, March 9th 2018
NVIDIA's New GPP Program Reportedly Engages in Monopolistic Practices
A report from HardOCP's Kyle Bennet aims to shake NVIDIA's foundations, with allegations of anti-competitive business practices under its new GeForce Partner Program (GPP). In his report, which started with an AMD approach that pushed him to look a little closer into GPP, Bennet says that he has found evidence that NVIDIA's new program aims to push partners towards shunning products from other hardware manufacturers - mainly AMD, with a shoot across the bow for Intel.
After following the breadcrumb trail and speaking with NVIDIA AIBs and OEM partners ("The ones that did speak to us have done so anonymously, in fear of losing their jobs, or having retribution placed upon them or their companies by NVIDIA," Bennett says), the picture is painted of an industry behemoth that aims to abuse its currently dominant market position. NVIDIA controls around 70% of the discrete GPU market share, and its industrious size is apparently being put to use to outmuscle its competitors' offerings by, essentially, putting partners between the proverbial rock and a hard place. According to Bennet, industry players unanimously brought about three consequences from Nvidia's GPP, saying that "They think that it has terms that are likely illegal; GPP is likely going to tremendously hurt consumers' choices; It will disrupt business with the companies that they are currently doing business with, namely AMD and Intel."
The crux of the issue seems to be in that NVIDIA, while publicly touting transparency, is hiding some not so transparent clauses from the public's view. Namely, the fact that in order to become a part of NVIDIA's GPP program, partners must have its "Gaming Brand Aligned Exclusively With GeForce." Bennet says that he has read NVIDIA papers, and these very words, in internal documents meant for NVIDIA's partners only; however, none of these have been made available as of time of writing, though that may be an effort to protect sources.
But what does this "exclusivity" mean? That partners would have to forego products from other brands (case in point, AMD) in order to be granted the GeForce partner status. And what do companies who achieve GPP status receive? Well, enough that it would make competition from other NVIDIA AIBs that didn't make the partner program extremely difficult - if not unfeasible. This is because GPP-branded companies would receive perks such as: high-effort engineering engagements (likely, aids to custom designs); early tech engagement; launch partner status (as in, being able to sell GeForce-branded products at launch date); game bundling; sales rebate programs; social media and PR support; marketing reports; and the ultimate kicker, Marketing Development Funds (MDF). This last one may be known to our more attentive readers, as it was part of Intel's "Intel Inside" marketing program which spurred... a pretty incredible anti-trust movement against the company.
As a result of covering this story, HardOCP's Kyle Bennet says he expects the website to be shunned from now on when it comes to NVIDIA or NVIDIA partner graphics cards being offered for review purposes. Whether or not that will happen, I guess time will time; as time will tell whether or not there is indeed any sort of less... transparent plays taking place here.
Sources:
HardOCP, NVIDIA GeForce Partner Program
After following the breadcrumb trail and speaking with NVIDIA AIBs and OEM partners ("The ones that did speak to us have done so anonymously, in fear of losing their jobs, or having retribution placed upon them or their companies by NVIDIA," Bennett says), the picture is painted of an industry behemoth that aims to abuse its currently dominant market position. NVIDIA controls around 70% of the discrete GPU market share, and its industrious size is apparently being put to use to outmuscle its competitors' offerings by, essentially, putting partners between the proverbial rock and a hard place. According to Bennet, industry players unanimously brought about three consequences from Nvidia's GPP, saying that "They think that it has terms that are likely illegal; GPP is likely going to tremendously hurt consumers' choices; It will disrupt business with the companies that they are currently doing business with, namely AMD and Intel."
But what does this "exclusivity" mean? That partners would have to forego products from other brands (case in point, AMD) in order to be granted the GeForce partner status. And what do companies who achieve GPP status receive? Well, enough that it would make competition from other NVIDIA AIBs that didn't make the partner program extremely difficult - if not unfeasible. This is because GPP-branded companies would receive perks such as: high-effort engineering engagements (likely, aids to custom designs); early tech engagement; launch partner status (as in, being able to sell GeForce-branded products at launch date); game bundling; sales rebate programs; social media and PR support; marketing reports; and the ultimate kicker, Marketing Development Funds (MDF). This last one may be known to our more attentive readers, as it was part of Intel's "Intel Inside" marketing program which spurred... a pretty incredible anti-trust movement against the company.
As a result of covering this story, HardOCP's Kyle Bennet says he expects the website to be shunned from now on when it comes to NVIDIA or NVIDIA partner graphics cards being offered for review purposes. Whether or not that will happen, I guess time will time; as time will tell whether or not there is indeed any sort of less... transparent plays taking place here.
317 Comments on NVIDIA's New GPP Program Reportedly Engages in Monopolistic Practices
Still, perhaps if they barred those that sell products enabling monopolistic practices, these practices would be much less likely to happen.
I do remember at one point, DELL would not adopt AMD products, because Intel was giving them huge incentives not too. Of course, that has changed all due to regulatory protections for the prevention of monopolistic practices.
What I'm arguing here, is that in this case, too, it's conceivable Nvidia could find themselves slapped with a fine. But it's highly unlikely for the manufacturers themselves to be fined as well.
Regardless, I still fail to see the evil here (which seems to be all too obvious to AMD fanboys). We've had manufacturers with AMD-only or Nvidia-only line-ups before. By now it is clear GPP is less than that. So what exactly is the beef here? Is there anyone who thinks buyers will avoid AMD products because Asus doesn't write RoG on them anymore?
nVidia wanted THE top brand name for their cards WHILE denying the competition the same benefit. It's when they "force" their competitor's away from brands that aren't theirs that i take issue.
ASUS ROG brand, Gigabyte's AORUS and others are well known brand names and already have their own reputations, which is what nVidia is after: that and making sure their competition is denied access to it.
Imagine if it were the other way around and you saw ROG Vega cards, Aorus Polaris cards, AREZ 1080 TIs ...
Another example would be Ford in the 1990s with International demanding PowerStroke be a different model from Ford's gasoline engines.
These things don't happen because they're inherently illegal. NVIDIA should know better, but as others pointed out, NVIDIA would rather do serious harm to AMD and take the slap on the wrist from a lawsuit than let AMD continue to gain ground. This ploy only works once because when it goes to court and the plaintiff wins, if the defendant doesn't comply with the order to stop it, the plaintiff can request an injection which can lead banning the sale of offending products. In other words, all of the brands NVIDIA is trying to claim could become black market goods if NVIDIA doesn't comply with the court order--a major backfire.
TL;DR: how could NVIDIA be this stupid?
What if GPP also demands exclusive green PCBs, do we open another thread to rant for another 10 pages?
And about how Nvidia treats manufacturers, that's their business. If the manufacturers feel so abused, they should drop Nvidia. If their existence depends on Nvidia, well, then maybe Nvidia should have a say after all.
I simply do not get why we need 10 pages for something that doesn't affect us beyond changing a word on a box.
Edit: All this has reminded me of: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mountain_in_Labour
AMD fan boys? Nonsense, this has nothing to do with what people like and dislike.
1) Being part of GPP is voluntary.
2) Everyone is saying that the AIBs are forced to do this because otherwise they will lose all benefits!!
Well , I wasn't aware that a company (nVidia in this case) must give away free benefits forever without asking something in return!! Yes, they give privileges, money etc, and they are asking for exclusivity and commitment from the AIBs in return. If the AIBs feel that this is extortion, they don't have to sign , since as i said at 1) the program is voluntary. BUT they will have to pay the cost. They can't have both, ... money/privileges from nVidia , and also doing whatever they want with these money. They have to choose. So simple.
[*generally speaking ,since nobody among us has read the contract terms, only Kyle Bennet claims this, and he was informed from a non-credible source (AMD) who has every interest to cause harm to their rivals (nVidia). ]
Anyone who read the original article knows what your saying is false. Kyle did his own query into the matter and others are doing the same.
-secondly, ...."kicked out" ? you are mistaken. I left [H] by myself, (i'm not banned or anything), since i don't like guidelines on what to think or say. If what Kyle wants, is every person there to accept whatever he says, then i can simply leave Kyle to do the talking by himself, it's much easier...;)
-EDIT: and lastly, there have been many things that i haven't said, during my posts at [H], since i mostly respect Kyle's work and decided to tell him personally, via PM.
-also, from all the people who made comments at [H]'s GPP thread, only myself and Razor -(who curiously, we were both asking questions let's say... " favourable" towards nVidia)- we were the only ones who got a warning, all the others, no matter of the number of their posts , -(*you can try count the number of my own posts at this thread and compare them with the number of the posts of other active members)-, they were never bothered by Kyle (*but they also weren't judging what Kyle have been saying as well, on the contrary to myself ;) ).
And for the millionth time: wtf is "anti consumerism" (?) in GPP if the only effect so far is the changing of a sticker on the product box?
- do you honestly think GPU vendors are willing to let go of a 70% share? They don't care as much about the benefits as they do about that share
- don't forget that nVidia cards are pricier, which only inflates that 70% share that much more
nVidia knows these vendors have allot to lose if nVidia pulls the plug on GPUs entirely (look @ XFX) so they are strong-arming them to "voluntarily" participate. Even if they didn't cut off vendor X completely due to not participating in GPP, they could severely limit the GPU allocation to that vendor, thus putting it @ a disadvantage VS other vendors.
@FordGT90Concept : agree completely!
1) Do they, or don't they , the AIBs receive many privileges & and money(*in all kind of forms) from nVidia?
If YES, does or doesn't nVidia has the right to ask something in return for what they give to AIBs? Must nVidia give these privileges to AIBs for ....free ????
2) Also , i asked something at [H] and here as well , -(#176)-, but still noone gave me an answer:We have as a given that right now nVidia is 1 generation ahead from the competition, since AMD in order to keep up with performance, their cards need to consume almost double power . With this in mind, what would you do if you were at nVidia's place? would you like your superior products being sold under the same brand name with your rivals (*especially now that you have a total advantage ) ?
Isn't this tactic completely logical from nVidia's point of view ?
Personally, I know for sure that i would want the exact same thing !! to differentiate my -superior- products from those of my competitors!!