Fair Market Value for an EX1
 

Hey guys, I was wondering what a used EX1 in it original box and accessories would fetch for? I have one and want to post it in the classifieds once I figure what a reasonable price would be for a camera with about 90 hours. Thanks.

At least 15% than the lowest authorized dealer price you can find on Google.

Noah

All authorized dealers, if they are really authorized, will have the same price. The price is fixed from Sony and if you break it you will be in very hot water with Sony.

Ebay prices represents a fair picture of a large, and open marketplace.

The "Hot" factor for this camera is a bit weak these days since the DSLR wave, but the camera still a strong value. Depends the accessories (cards, batteries since expensive ones). B&H prices are good start since they are usually the lowest honest deal.

BH used to be the lowest deal long ago. Sometimes I see much higher prices from them vs. other reputable dealers. I used to not worry about price with BH but now I check every price.

True. The Sony Unified Resale Execution (SURE) program went into effect June 2008. At Sony Adds New Premium-Goods Sales Policy - 2008-05-05 06:00:00 | TWICE there's an article describing the program from Twice magazine. In a nutshell, the MAP (Min Advertised Price) is now also the min selling price for many of their products. They enforce the program vigorously.

I'd go at 15% below B-stock which i think is about $5800.

That policy seems to be in breach of the Australian Trade Practices Act. Resale price maintenance is specifically prohibited. Reading the summary of the act Section 96 would seem specifically written to cover exactly what Sony is doing.

It's quite possible that Sony's policy does not apply down here. It would explain why recently the local best price after a bit of arm twisting is lower than the grey import price from the USA. Second hand (ex rental) EX1s are going for 60% of list down here and that was from a Sony Authorised reseller. Maybe the trade in grey imports is going to start flowing the other way over the Pacific.

Price fixing was always a criminal offense under section 1 of the Sherman Antitrust Act. In August of 2008, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that vertical price fixing by a manufacturer and its retailers, also known as retail price maintenance, is not a per se violation.

Colluding on price amongst competitors, also known as horizontal price fixing, is viewed as a per se violation of the Sherman Act regardless of the market impact or alleged efficiency of the action.

So if retailers colluded to fix prices, that would be a horizontal violation, but by having Sony enforcing retail price maintenance, it removes the collusion amongst competitors. I personally feel this is wrong, and it would have been illegal for the 218 years before August 2008.