By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
foxtail on 07 July 2016
Edit Thread
Intrinsic said:
foxtail said:

Nintendo had to fight to get shelf space with retailers after the crash in the 80s with a lot retailers not wanting to bother with videogames at all.   Trying to get better shelf space was a old practice and something all products and companies wanted way before videogames. Nintendo convinced retailers to give them a chance and with the NES they found success with a wanted product.  Sony and Microsoft are also benefactors of the inroads Nintendo made back in the day for videogame shelf space.

As for keeping  their competitors products off the shelves, was there actually any lawsuits or was this just hearsay because unless I'm mistaken the lawsuit you're talking about is actually Atari vs. Sega in 1994 over shelf space for the Atari Jaguar? - source  

Yup. it happened. this is the most recent article i could fimd of the incident. 

That article actually talks a lot of nintys history but here is a snippet on this very issue.

The courts found Nintendo guilty and required amends to redistribute a large amount back to the consumers and break exclusive deals with third parties and retailers, but Nintendo ended up turning the loss into another victory. They distributed the price-fixing settlement in the form of thousands of $5 rebate checks, so to exercise the settlement consumers had to buy more Nintendo products.

A lot of that article is a bunch of content in the form of hearsay.  That lawsuit was not about keeping their competitors products off the shelves, it was only about price-fixing.  That case had nothing to do with it's competitors or third parties.

Here's the details of the settlement below:

------------------------------------------------------------

New York Atty. Gen. Robert Abrams said the company had been accused of coercing retailers into keeping the price of its basic video system at $99.99 or more and threatening to slow supplies to those who reduced prices on its products by as little as 6 cents.

Nintendo of America, the U.S. unit of the Japanese electronics giant, is not obliged under the consent agreement to admit any violation of antitrust laws. It said it accepted the settlement to avoid a costly trial and maintain "good will" with customers.

"Nintendo has cooperated fully with the FTC and the states of New York and Maryland in this matter," Senior Vice President Howard Lincoln said in a statement. "While we were emphatic during negotiations and continue to insist that Nintendo had done nothing improper or in violation of antitrust laws, we decided to enter into this comprehensive and nationwide settlement to maintain the good will our company enjoys with millions of consumers who play Nintendo games."

 

Under the agreement, Nintendo of America will:

  • Mail a $5 "instant redemption certificate" toward purchase of any Nintendo game cartridge to consumers who bought game machines between June 1, 1988, and Dec. 31, 1990.
  • Guarantee redemption of at least $5 million of the certificates and agree to issue up to $25 million in coupons if enough qualified consumers apply.
  • Pay a total of $4.75 million to the 39 states involved in the dispute to cover administrative and enforcement costs.
  • Advise all Nintendo dealers in writing that they are free to sell the game machines, cartridges and accessories at any price they choose.
  • Include a disclaimer in promotional material that the "suggested" retail price is not mandatory, assuring dealers that they can set their own prices.

------------------------------------------------------------