NVIDIA's New GPP Program Reportedly Engages in Monopolistic Practices

[HTC]

Pray tell, how would Portugal punish AsusTek Taiwan for signing a document in Taiwan?

Not allowing the sale of that brand of graphic cards in the country? Dunno, really: not a knowledgeable person when it concerns legal matters.

EU fined Intel for stuff Intel didn't do in Europe. Same sort of principle?

 

[Super XP]

Not allowing the sale of that brand of graphic cards in the country? Dunno, really: not a knowledgeable person when it concerns legal matters.

EU fined Intel for stuff Intel didn't do in Europe. Same sort of principle?

If it's sold in the country, they can get fined in that country. Though I think Nvidia is more likely to get fined over AIB's.

 

[bug]

Not allowing the sale of that brand of graphic cards in the country? Dunno, really: not a knowledgeable person when it concerns legal matters.

EU fined Intel for stuff Intel didn't do in Europe. Same sort of principle?

Somehow you managed to make my point while trying to refute it. Even in that case, it was Intel that was fined, not the manufacturers (e.g. HP, Dell or Toshiba).

 

[HTC]

Somehow you managed to make my point while trying to refute it. Even in that case, it was Intel that was fined, not the manufacturers (e.g. HP, Dell or Toshiba).

You're right.

Still, perhaps if they barred those that sell products enabling monopolistic practices, these practices would be much less likely to happen.

 

[Super XP]

You're right.

Still, perhaps if they barred those that sell products enabling monopolistic practices, these practices would be much less likely to happen.

Agreed.

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.

 

[bug]

You're right.

Still, perhaps if they barred those that sell products enabling monopolistic practices, these practices would be much less likely to happen.

Well, that would be too much involvement of the government into private business. After all, there's no monopoly when you can buy your video card from at least a dozen manufacturers. The government probably doesn't care much where those manufacturers source their GPUs from. At least no more than they care where they source their VRAM chips or capacitors.

Agreed.

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.

Yeah, you remember the same case we brought up before. Intel offered rebates that were deemed illegal. Intel had to foot the bill.
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?

 

[HTC]

Well, that would be too much involvement of the government into private business. After all, there's no monopoly when you can buy your video card from at least a dozen manufacturers. The government probably doesn't care much where those manufacturers source their GPUs from. At least no more than they care where they source their VRAM chips or capacitors.

Yeah, you remember the same case we brought up before. Intel offered rebates that were deemed illegal. Intel had to foot the bill.
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?

If they wanted a brand name all to themselves, why didn't they have the manufacturers create it solely for them? Done that way, i would have no issues. They could call it AREZ ...

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 ...

 

[bug]

If they wanted a brand name all to themselves, why didn't they have the manufacturers create it solely for them? Done that way, i would have no issues. They could call it AREZ ...

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 ...

So your beef is really with the sticker on the box.

 

[FordGT90Concept]

More like NVIDIA is abusing their market position to claim brands they don't own through illegal per se agreements. It would be like GE demanding model exclusivity from Boeing so all 777s must have GE engines. If Boeing didn't comply (because it's their own damn product and they want to sell whatever engines they can fit on it to give their customers more choice), Boeing wouldn't have access to GE parts, service manuals, etc. If Boeing were like Gigabyte, MSI, Asus that gave into NVIDIA demands, instead of them all being 777s, P&W would be 778, and RR would be 779.

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?

 

[bug]

Seriously, does anyone here even shops based on brand? Because despite the fact that I've been building my systems for like 20 years, I couldn't thell which manufacturer owns which brand, save for Asus' RoG.
What if GPP also demands exclusive green PCBs, do we open another thread to rant for another 10 pages?

 

[HTC]

More like NVIDIA is abusing their market position to claim brands they don't own through illegal per se agreements. It would be like GE demanding Boeing rename the 777 to GE90 because it uses their engines. If Boeing didn't comply (because it's their own damn product and they want to sell whatever engines they can fit on it to give their customers more choice), Boeing wouldn't have access to GE engines.

Pretty much this.

So your beef is really with the sticker on the box.

No: my "beef" is with nVidia for making a move like this. I would be just as "beefed" if this GPP-like crap was being done by AMD.

 

[FordGT90Concept]

Seriously, does anyone here even shops based on brand? Because despite the fact that I've been building my systems for like 20 years, I couldn't thell which manufacturer owns which brand, save for Asus' RoG.

Doesn't matter. Illegal per se doesn't even require market dominance to be illegal. Companies can't compel buyers to reduce competitor appeal via a metaphorical knife to the throat.

What if GPP also demands exclusive green PCBs, do we open another thread to rant for another 10 pages?

That's not anti-competitive like controlling branding. Definitely authoritarian though.

 

[bug]

Doesn't matter. Illegal per se doesn't even require market dominance to be illegal. Companies can't compel buyers to reduce competitor appeal via a metaphorical knife to the throat.

So if that's a job for the legal system, can we leave it to the legal system?

Pretty much this.



No: my "beef" is with nVidia for making a move like this. I would be just as "beefed" if this GPP-like crap was being done by AMD.

A move like what? Do you really care that much what the box says?
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: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mountain_in_Labour

 

[Xzibit]

KitGuru: ASUS ROG may soon be Nvidia exclusive with AMD GPUs being bumped to new ‘AREZ’ brand

Last week when we spoke to our source, we heard that board partners were feeling the pressure with GPP. Nvidia currently has marketshare dominance, so AiBs heavily rely on the company’s support not just for marketing dollars, but for steady GPU supply too. The second point that our source raised with us is that Nvidia wants exclusivity over the most notable brand each AiB has to offer, meaning GPP members need to bump AMD cards off to a lesser-known sub-brand.

 

[bug]

KitGuru: ASUS ROG may soon be Nvidia exclusive with AMD GPUs being bumped to new ‘AREZ’ brand

Boo Nvidia, let's burn them to the stake. Happy now?

 

[Super XP]

So your beef is really with the sticker on the box.

Absolutely Not. It's how Nvidia presents GPP, force feeding AIB's that support both AMD and Nvidia. And those AIB's would be disadvantaged if they do not accept GPP, because the AIB's that only support Nvidia will get preferential treatment. It's written in black and white. , Nvidia can't deny this fact. AIB's have come out with such proof of anti consumerism tactics inside GPP.

AMD fan boys? Nonsense, this has nothing to do with what people like and dislike.

 

[FordGT90Concept]

So if that's a job for the legal system, can we leave it to the legal system?

Yes and yes, the wounded party (AMD, MSI, Gigabyte, Asus) need to file suit. FTC could too.

 

[sith'ari]

The hole point of this GPP discussion is this:
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). ]

 

[Xzibit]

The hole point of this GPP discussion is this:
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). ]

I hope your not the same guy that got kicked out over there at HardOCP

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.

 

[sith'ari]

I hope your not the same guy that got kicked out over there at HardOCP
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.

-first of all, i myself have already said that i'm the guy at Hardocp ( check #176 at the current thread )
-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.

 

[Xzibit]

-first of all, i myself have already said that i'm the guy at Hardocp ( check #176 at the current thread )
-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.

I don't think that's what Kyle wanted.

You are reaching razor1-like levels with you continuously posting and reposting your already expressed opinions. This is not the GPU forum and you will not monopolize the thread about our GPP story as your own soapbox for your thoughts and opinions. Consider this your warning.

I just think its weird you came from there and was active in the forum discussion. One would think you would have read the article, given your activity over there and here in a few threads on the same topic.

 

[sith'ari]

I don't think that's what Kyle wanted.
I just think its weird you came from there and was active in the forum discussion. One would think you would have read the article, given your activity over there and here in a few threads on the same topic.

-you can read my last comment, before i get a warning from Kyle, and judge for yourself whether or not i deserved this warning. (*i just replied to a person that said something to me, so i believe that i had the right to reply)
-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 ).

 

[bug]

Absolutely Not. It's how Nvidia presents GPP, force feeding AIB's that support both AMD and Nvidia. And those AIB's would be disadvantaged if they do not accept GPP, because the AIB's that only support Nvidia will get preferential treatment. It's written in black and white. , Nvidia can't deny this fact. AIB's have come out with such proof of anti consumerism tactics inside GPP.

AMD fan boys? Nonsense, this has nothing to do with what people like and dislike.

Once again, AIBs are free to stop carrying Nvidia products altogether. If they can't survive without Nvidia and feel Nvidia is strongarming them, then they're still to blame for putting themselves in this position. If they really feel they're being mistreated here, it doesn't make sense for them to not go to authorities, but unofficially complain to whoever buys their story.

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?

 

[FordGT90Concept]

1) Being part of GPP is voluntary.

It's not "voluntary" when it's either sign and bastardize their AMD cards or quit selling NVIDIA cards. Three AIBs have already forked their brands evidencing that the alleged pressure was applied effectively.

Well , I wasn't aware that a company (nVidia in this case) must give away free benefits forever without asking something in return!!

The AIBs are selling NVIDIA's chips as consumer products. NVIDIA supports that endeavor (like ATI/AMD) because engineering GPU architectures is their expertise, not marketing, localization, customer support, etc. It's a mutually beneficial relationship...until NVIDIA dictates they own the AIB branding (which they have no right to, period).

If they really feel they're being mistreated here, it doesn't make sense for them to not go to authorities, but unofficially complain to whoever buys their story.

If NVIDIA catches wind of a legal proceeding, AIB will find they can longer acquire GPUs to put in their products. NVIDIA doesn't outright say that but it's suggested "with a wink and a nod." Literally the only one with the power to do anything about it is regulators and AMD. The AIBs will bend over backwards for NVIDIA because they have no choice unless they leave the NVIDIA market altogether (half or more of their graphics card business which translates to layoffs, closing facilities, etc.).

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?

Brands are worth millions, if not billions of dollars. Think "Mickey Mouse" for example: Disney literally rewrote copyright law to protect that brand.

 

[HTC]

The hole point of this GPP discussion is this:
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). ]

nVidia outsells AMD's cards: we know this. Let's say, for the sake of argument, that 70% of all GPUs sold to gamers from vendors that sell both brands are nVidia GPUs:

- 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!