resale price maintenance (RPM)

简明释义

转售价格控制，转售价格维持

英英释义

例句

1.Retailers often complain about resale price maintenance (RPM) because it limits their ability to set competitive prices.

零售商常常抱怨转售价格维护 (RPM)，因为它限制了他们设定具有竞争力价格的能力。

2.The legality of resale price maintenance (RPM) varies by country, with some jurisdictions viewing it as anti-competitive.

各国对转售价格维护 (RPM)的合法性看法各异，有些地区将其视为反竞争行为。

3.By using resale price maintenance (RPM), brands can protect their image by preventing discounting that could devalue their products.

通过使用转售价格维护 (RPM)，品牌可以保护其形象，防止折扣可能贬值其产品。

4.Many luxury brands rely on resale price maintenance (RPM) to maintain their high-end market position.

许多奢侈品牌依赖于转售价格维护 (RPM)来维持其高端市场地位。

5.The company implemented resale price maintenance (RPM) to ensure that their products are sold at a consistent price across all retailers.

公司实施了转售价格维护 (RPM)，以确保他们的产品在所有零售商处以一致的价格销售。

作文

In the world of business, pricing strategies play a crucial role in determining the success of a product. One such strategy that has garnered attention from both businesses and regulators is resale price maintenance (RPM). 转售价格维持 is a practice where a manufacturer sets a minimum price that retailers must adhere to when selling their products. This approach can have significant implications for market dynamics, competition, and consumer behavior.The primary goal of resale price maintenance (RPM) is to ensure that retailers do not engage in price wars that could undermine the perceived value of a brand. By maintaining a consistent price across different retail outlets, manufacturers aim to protect their brand image and prevent a race to the bottom in pricing. For instance, if a luxury brand allows its products to be sold at drastically lower prices by discount retailers, it risks alienating its core customers who expect a certain level of exclusivity and quality associated with higher prices.However, the practice of resale price maintenance (RPM) is not without controversy. Critics argue that it can lead to reduced competition in the marketplace. When manufacturers impose minimum prices, it can limit retailers' ability to offer discounts, which may ultimately harm consumers who benefit from competitive pricing. Additionally, it can create an environment where smaller retailers struggle to compete against larger ones that can absorb costs more effectively.In many jurisdictions, resale price maintenance (RPM) is subject to legal scrutiny. Antitrust laws in countries like the United States and members of the European Union often view this practice as a potential violation of fair competition principles. For example, in the U.S., the Supreme Court's decision in the case of Leegin Creative Leather Products, Inc. v. PSKS, Inc. established that resale price maintenance (RPM) could be considered legal under certain circumstances, but it must be evaluated on a case-by-case basis to determine whether it promotes or suppresses competition.Despite the legal challenges, some businesses continue to implement resale price maintenance (RPM) as a part of their overall marketing strategy. They argue that it helps maintain a level playing field among retailers and ensures that all parties involved in the distribution chain can operate profitably. By setting a minimum price, manufacturers can also incentivize retailers to invest in better customer service and product knowledge, leading to a more positive shopping experience for consumers.Moreover, the rise of e-commerce has added another layer of complexity to the discussion surrounding resale price maintenance (RPM). Online retailers often have different pricing strategies compared to brick-and-mortar stores, and manufacturers must navigate these differences carefully. While some brands have successfully implemented resale price maintenance (RPM) in online settings, others have faced pushback from retailers who argue that it limits their ability to compete in a rapidly changing digital landscape.In conclusion, resale price maintenance (RPM) is a multifaceted issue that encompasses various aspects of business strategy, competition, and consumer welfare. While it can provide benefits to manufacturers and help preserve brand integrity, it also raises important questions about market fairness and consumer choice. As businesses continue to evolve and adapt to new market conditions, the debate over resale price maintenance (RPM) will likely persist, requiring ongoing dialogue between industry stakeholders and regulators to find a balance that serves both economic interests and consumer rights.

在商业世界中，定价策略在决定产品成功方面发挥着至关重要的作用。其中一种引起企业和监管机构关注的策略是转售价格维持（RPM）。转售价格维持是一种做法，制造商设定零售商在销售其产品时必须遵循的最低价格。这种方法对市场动态、竞争和消费者行为具有重大影响。转售价格维持（RPM）的主要目标是确保零售商不会参与可能破坏品牌感知价值的价格战。通过在不同零售店之间保持一致的价格，制造商旨在保护品牌形象，并防止价格大幅下滑。例如，如果一个奢侈品牌允许其产品被折扣零售商以大幅低于市场价的价格出售，它就有可能疏远那些期望与高价相关联的排他性和质量的核心客户。然而，转售价格维持（RPM）的做法并非没有争议。批评者认为，这可能导致市场竞争减少。当制造商施加最低价格时，这可能限制零售商提供折扣的能力，最终会伤害到那些受益于竞争定价的消费者。此外，它可能会造成小型零售商在能够更有效地吸收成本的大型零售商面前难以竞争的环境。在许多司法管辖区内，转售价格维持（RPM）受到法律审查。美国和欧洲联盟成员国的反垄断法通常将这种做法视为潜在的公平竞争原则的违反。例如，在美国，最高法院在Leegin Creative Leather Products, Inc.诉PSKS, Inc.案中的裁决确定，转售价格维持（RPM）在某些情况下可以被视为合法，但必须逐案评估，以确定其是否促进或抑制竞争。尽管面临法律挑战，一些企业仍然继续将转售价格维持（RPM）作为整体营销策略的一部分。他们辩称，这有助于在零售商之间保持公平竞争，并确保分销链中所有相关方都能盈利。通过设定最低价格，制造商还可以激励零售商投资于更好的客户服务和产品知识，从而为消费者创造更积极的购物体验。此外，电子商务的兴起为围绕转售价格维持（RPM）的讨论增添了另一层复杂性。在线零售商的定价策略通常与实体店有所不同，制造商必须谨慎应对这些差异。虽然一些品牌成功地在在线环境中实施了转售价格维持（RPM），但其他品牌却遭遇了来自零售商的反对，后者认为这限制了他们在快速变化的数字环境中竞争的能力。总之，转售价格维持（RPM）是一个多方面的问题，涉及商业策略、竞争和消费者福利的各个方面。虽然它可以为制造商提供好处，并帮助维护品牌完整性，但它也引发了关于市场公平和消费者选择的重要问题。随着企业不断发展并适应新的市场条件，关于转售价格维持（RPM）的辩论可能会持续，需要行业利益相关者和监管机构之间持续对话，以找到既能服务经济利益又能保护消费者权利的平衡。