loader image

[Tech] Samsung, SK Hynix being Investigated for Price Fixing! – Weekly News Jayz

What makes us different from other similar websites? Forums News [Tech] Samsung, SK Hynix being Investigated for Price Fixing! – Weekly News Jayz

Viewing 1 post (of 1 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #8498
    thumbtak
    Moderator

    In his latest Weekly News video, JayzTwoCents discusses the major class-action lawsuit recently filed against the three primary global memory manufacturers: Samsung, SK Hynix, and Micron.

    The Core Allegations

    • Price Fixing & Collusion: The lawsuit, filed in a California federal court, alleges that these three companies—which control roughly 90% of the global DRAM market—have been colluding to restrict the supply of consumer-grade DRAM (like DDR3 and DDR4).
    • The “AI Smokescreen”: While the manufacturers claim that shortages and rising prices are a result of shifting production capacity toward high-margin High-Bandwidth Memory (HBM) for the AI and data center boom, the plaintiffs argue this is a coordinated pretext. They allege the companies intentionally throttled supply to artificially create scarcity and gouge prices.
    • Economic Impact: The complaint notes that DRAM prices have surged roughly 700% over the last four years, significantly increasing the cost of consumer devices, including PCs, laptops, and smartphones.

    Historical Context

    • Repeat Offenders: The video highlights that this isn’t the first time these companies have faced such accusations. In the early 2000s, Samsung and SK Hynix were investigated for similar price-fixing schemes, which ultimately resulted in hundreds of millions of dollars in fines and prison sentences for some executives. The plaintiffs are using this history to argue that these companies have a pattern of anti-competitive behavior.

    The Challenges for the Lawsuit

    • Proving Collusion vs. Market Dynamics: Jay notes that this will be a difficult legal battle. The companies will likely defend themselves by arguing that their shift toward HBM is a standard, independent business decision to prioritize higher-profit products, rather than a result of illegal coordination.
    • “Plus Factors”: For the lawsuit to succeed, the plaintiffs must provide evidence of “plus factors”—such as internal communications or coordinated actions that go beyond simple independent business logic—to prove that the companies weren’t just reacting to market conditions simultaneously.

    Additional Highlights from the Weekly News

    • Sony’s move regarding physical game media.
    • The “Protect Our Games Act” update.
    • Intel CPU price increases and a decline in overall PC shipments.
    • A new game studio’s controversial open-source claims.
    • The ESA’s stance on private servers being equated to piracy.
    • dbrand’s recent marketing missteps.

    In short, the segment frames the DRAM lawsuit as a significant moment in tech antitrust history, potentially shaping the market for years to come if the plaintiffs can find the “smoking gun” needed to prove collusion.

     

Viewing 1 post (of 1 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
TAKs Shack