Battlefront cuts down Maelstrom... (from Dakka)

[Manicmac]

Price fixing? Maybe Maelstrom should have taken Battlefront to court instead of going viral on the web?
They knew the deal going in and violated it, now they want to claim they are being punished? GW has almost the same thing going, you agree not to sell their items below a certain percentage.

[Kaine]

Battlefront in the uk are a little "unusual" shall we say.

For example, they refused to supply a local gaming store because of the word "geek" in their store name.

[nilus]

That is odd. Considering Geek(like Nerd) are kinda those words that we as a group have taken back.

I mean do they also boycott Thinkgeek?

[pancake ss]

mealstrom runs very large FOW tournaments, and from this gets lots of FOW support from the players. Which buy or did buy alot of minis, its a loss for both. But the loss to the FOW players is whats sad. BF have opened the door for FIB. Mind you FIB minis are very nice and cheaper.

[Elazar]

Price fixing? Maybe Maelstrom should have taken Battlefront to court instead of going viral on the web?
They knew the deal going in and violated it, now they want to claim they are being punished? GW has almost the same thing going, you agree not to sell their items below a certain percentage.

Well it's with their solicitors now for that very reason.
They were trading charging their own prices but got dropped for not towing the line on Battlefront's policy of not offering discounts. In the UK forcing a retailer to charge set amounts is price fixing and is an illegal business practice. That other companies might engage in it elsewhere doesn't suddenly make it right. The fact is Battlefront's own margin wasn't affected by Maelstrom's pricing strategies. Battlefront seemingly wanted to flex their muscles and show Maelstrom who was boss but that may well backfire now!
There are many other 15mm WWII miniature sculptors many of them based in the UK that will be a lot cheaper and with Battlefront forgetting one of the the four Ps and reducing the availability of their own products to consumers they're giving other companies a potential foot in the door.

[elril]

Price fixing? Maybe Maelstrom should have taken Battlefront to court instead of going viral on the web?
They knew the deal going in and violated it, now they want to claim they are being punished? GW has almost the same thing going, you agree not to sell their items below a certain percentage.

I believe I read the Maelstrom didn't sign that deal going in, it is now trying to be enforced. And try to remember that this is not in the US, but New Zealand and Great Britain with different laws applying. <shrug> I hate the "why didn't they take them to court? argument, making it legal isn't the same as making it right. Maelstrom might have won, depends on international trade law that I have 0 knowledge of. But instead they said F it, we can sell other lines. It went viral (not really, but your phrase) because the anouncement was made to terminate supplying and customers asked why. There was explanation and counter explanation thus the bitch fest. The consumers weigh in (like we are doing now) and everything spreads.

[Manicmac]

Oh trust me, I know, Battlefront is by no means the "victim" here, they are not blameless. Being a shop owner in the US I didn't do business with Battlefront NZ, I did it with Battlefront USA and as such had a an agreement with them.
Same with Games Workshop, Wizards of the Coast, etc.
Had I violated it I would have lost my retailer status.
Not being a big gamer store, I toed the line.

[AvatarForm]

Oh trust me, I know, Battlefront is by no means the "victim" here, they are not blameless. Being a shop owner in the US I didn't do business with Battlefront NZ, I did it with Battlefront USA and as such had a an agreement with them.
Same with Games Workshop, Wizards of the Coast, etc.
Had I violated it I would have lost my retailer status.
Not being a big gamer store, I toed the line.

Mac, gonna stop you right there.

You have clearly not read or understood this simple fact:

Maelstrom did not sign the same agreement that you were made to.

It is only AFTER this fact that BF changed their decision, and it is clearly a single case, as they have not punished Wayland for doing similar.

BF are in the wrong here, to all external parties, with the facts presented.