aco

I have read numerous times that Lexus policy is not allowed to charge mark-ups on any of their vehicles. Especially with high demand vehicles like the IS-F, as it is proving to be in Japan. How does Lexus prevent price gouging by it's US dealers without getting in trouble with US "price fixing" laws?

4TehNguyen

iTrader: (1)

they do the same thing, you pay sticker only, "market adjustment fees" arent allowed

flipside909

Chances are most dealerships will add things like tint or pin striping to add profit.

CoasterG

iTrader: (1)

Oh god pin striping an IS-F would be a crime.

rominl

iTrader: (4)

probably also with the 700 bucks tint?

TandaT

Most dealers will add LoJack or some kind of accessories to mark up the vehicle. But, I think you have nothing to worry about. Since the vehicle will already be close to $60k most dealers will know that enthusiasts hate dealer add ons.

btw: I drove the IS-F a few days ago at Westminster, a big wig came in and flip the keys to a sales guy and told him to drive it and show it off while he was there.... one word: INCREDIBLE!

Celsius

iTrader: (1)

The stealerships would be lucky to get MSRP. There are so many alternatives out there with four seats (M3, C63, RS4, 2 evoX's, GTR-if you can get it @ MSRP, etc)<--these are all on my list, it makes it easier to negotiate a price when you have a big list.

LexISguy

hopefully lexus doesnt mark up if so I might have to look elsewhere....

flipside909

It seems like a lot of dealers...especially in the southeast region like to package their cars with tint, pin striping, chrome wheels which helps them bump up the price to ridiculous prices.

GS350

The dealers can charge what ever they want for the car. If Lexus tells them what they can sell the car for, it is an Anti-Trust Violation. Not good for Lexus...

STIG

Anti-Trust violation? How so??

GS350

A company/corporation cannot tell it's retailers (or in this case dealers) how much to charge for certain goods or products. Oakley got in trouble for this a few years ago because their sunglasses could only be sold for the price that Oakley said. They got in trouble with the Feds and now there are Oakley outlets and sometimes even sales.

My point is: the Lexus dealerships can charge whatever they want for the IS-F and Lexus can't tell them what to sell the car for.

gengar

Totally untrue. There's no legislation or precedent for blanket anti-trust application in these situations (at least, not in recent history). Furthermore, we're talking about price ceilings in this case, and those have always been granted more leeway than price minimums. And even judgment as far as price minimums is swinging in favor of the corporations (see Leegin v. PSKS for the Supreme Court's most recent case involving price minimums, in which a manufacturer was allowed to pull its products from a retailer's shelves after the retailer refused to honor the manufacturer's price minimums). Besides, if they weren't going in the favor of manufacturers, companies like Apple and Bose would get sued all the time (not that in the case of those two, I'd really mind ).

Without getting into the separate debate of anti-trust being rather silly in a capitalist economy, the point here is simple: You must examine the legal theory involved. It's not good enough to say "X company was setting price mins and anti-trust was invoked, therefore Y company setting price mins is violating anti-trust". Anti-trust isn't about setting price minimums; it's about whether competition is being prevented. And the fact that courts, including the SC, are looking at anti-trust solely on a case-by-case basis demonstrates that.

Were they sued in the US? Please let me know the exact case - I'm truly interested, as I'd never heard of it. I only heard of Oakley getting sued in the UK, and that was over market monopoly, not price minimums specifically. And AFAIK (I don't really follow international cases), the suit was not successful.

GS350

Very interesting. I was unaware of most of what you just said. What I said before was just what I had heard from a buddy of mine when we having a discussion about this. Thanks for the clarification. And as for Oakley getting sued in the US, I don't know.