Wednesday, May 13th 2009
EU Fines Intel a Record €1.06 Billion in Antitrust Case
Following the news we covered the other day, the verdict is now in, and as expected Intel has been found guilty and fined €1.06 Billion ($1.45b/£948m) by the European Commission for anti-competitive practices. This fine smashes the €497 million fine issued to Microsoft by the EU in 2004 for abusing its dominant market position. Nine years on from when AMD first made a complaint that Intel had paid computer manufacturers not to use AMD chips in Europe the EU have ruled that Intel had given rebates to manufacturer's if they only used their chips, and had also found that a retailer had been paid to sell only Intel based systems.
"Intel has harmed millions of European consumers by deliberately acting to keep competitors out of the market for computer chips for many years," said Competition Commissioner Neelie Kroes, "Such a serious and sustained violation of the EU's antitrust rules cannot be tolerated."
Source:
BBC
"Intel has harmed millions of European consumers by deliberately acting to keep competitors out of the market for computer chips for many years," said Competition Commissioner Neelie Kroes, "Such a serious and sustained violation of the EU's antitrust rules cannot be tolerated."
77 Comments on EU Fines Intel a Record €1.06 Billion in Antitrust Case
If you ask me, giving rebates to use Intel chips, is very competitive. Its what drives prices down, competition, companies undercutting each other.
Are the EU going to fine car manufacturer's for you buying a car because they were offering you a discount making it cheaper than buying a similar car from another dealer? Wtf is the difference.
I'm getting bored of the EU fining everything that moves :ohwell:
without amd, we would probably be paying $300 for P4's LOL
the biggest problem is countries like the US and UK where too much corporate tolerance holds down the attractiveness of new products from new companies, and well established (starbucks doesnt make the best coffee does it?) companies dominate the market with products that could be better (intel during the P4 days held off amd pretty well)
And i totally agree alex.
So its okay for you if a company plays unfair? If it would be microsoft you would jump of joy, amiright?
EVGA are NVIDIA only (other than X58, but even that has an NF200 on it), and up until very recently XFX was NVIDIA only.
If you ask me (other than paying off retailers), Intel are being very competitive, its not like they have people backed up against a wall and are forcing them to pay more.
They are undercutting the competition, if AMD came up with a better deal, then the manufacturers and retailers could have said no.
Then it would suck to be a consumer. Often like you get big companies (e.g supermarkets) collaborating to rise prices together. THATS anti-competitive.
I agree they have done some anti-competitive/anti-trust practices, but IMO, rebates to manufacturer's shouldnt have been one of them.
edit - from the source:
In addition to providing rebates to manufacturers that bought almost entirely Intel products, the Commission found that the chipmaker had paid them to postpone or cancel the launch of specific products based on AMD chips.
"sell less than 10% AMD and get 20% off"
etc.
Basically in the competitive PC world, it meant if you went with AMD... you lost out. you would never be able to price match your competitors. The general public knew "pentium" they dont know "athlon" - intel had made it so that if you sold AMD, your intel systems would cost too much and never sell, so it was intel or AMD - no middle ground.
And if you gotta pick one or the other, you go the one the public will buy... and that was intel.
Some of it is the EU as a whole, I'm getting sick of them fining big corps massive amounts, for stupid things.
Take this as my final post here, I'm going round in circles now :)
europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=IP/09/745&format=HTML&aged=0&language=EN&guiLanguage=en
Have a look here; the EU don't just give out Billion Dollar fines for nothing! Theres a reason why it took 9 years!
Plus, about rebates, this is a practice long been known ILLEGAL in EU rulings. Intel should have been aware of this. This was established years ago when Tyre manufacturers got fined for issuing rebates!
Also, about the fines; this is the main reason why running the competition commission is so cost effective. It means that it can cover it's own costs, at the same time protecting consumers from abuse by dominant firms, these investigations are expensive (not helped by un-cooperative companies), and this means that EU taxpayers don't get burdened with the huge cost!
He's stated clearly, that while he doesnt think intel was correct its just ONE of the things, he sees nothing wrong with.