# F & E Trading, LLC Responds to Canon USA Suit



## Canon Rumors Guy (Jan 13, 2016)

```
<a href="http://www.photographybay.com/2016/01/12/canon-v-gray-market-retailers-update-f-e-trading-responds/" target="_blank">Photography Bay</a> has continued their coverage of the legal battles between Canon USA and gray market retailers. This time, F & E Trading, LLC (who is allegedly BigValueInc & Electronics Valley) has responded to Canon USA’s allegations.</p>
<p>From: F & E Trading, LLC:</p>
<blockquote><p>The Complaint defines “F&E” to encompass both F&E NY and F&E New Jersey. F&E NY’s Answer is only with respect to F&E NY. F&E NY denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of any allegations as to F&E New Jersey or Albert Houllou.</p></blockquote>
<p>Photography Bay summarizes:</p>
<blockquote><p>So, Canon may have missed the mark on serving the wrong company or, perhaps, it just has not been able to serve the right company and Albert Houllou yet, <a href="http://www.photographybay.com/2015/12/06/canon-v-gray-market-retailers-lawsuits-update/">who was a key target it Canon’s Amended complaint</a>.</p></blockquote>
<p>You can <a href="http://www.photographybay.com/2016/01/12/canon-v-gray-market-retailers-update-f-e-trading-responds/" target="_blank">read more</a> over at Photography Bay.</p>
<span id="pty_trigger"></span>
```


----------



## aclectasis (Jan 14, 2016)

Looks like Canon are about as good at suing as they are at creating consumer-oriented imaging equipment.


----------



## davidmurray (Jan 14, 2016)

aclectasis said:


> Looks like Canon are about as good at suing as they are at creating consumer-oriented imaging equipment.



Agreed - they're very good, and even better at making professional-oriented imaging equipment.


----------



## Solar Eagle (Jan 14, 2016)

That's just a stalling tactic. A diversion to try and scatter the point. That's like cosby.... Just deny and pretend to forget. All burden of proof on the accuser.


----------



## Mikehit (Jan 14, 2016)

dilbert said:


> The only thing here is, if Canon wins then customers lose.



No they don't. Purchasers of gear from official retailers keep the rights they have always had so lose nothing, purchasers of grey imports will not have access to something they should not have had in the first place (and in Canon's opinion have only had access to through fraudulent activity of the grey importers).


----------



## Tugela (Jan 14, 2016)

Mikehit said:


> dilbert said:
> 
> 
> > The only thing here is, if Canon wins then customers lose.
> ...



No, they have access to something that Canon chose to provide them access to, not as a result of the activity of grey importers. Canon USA is under no obligation to provide warranty service to them. If those customers want warranty service they need to get it in the country where the products were originally distributed. Alternatively, they can pay Canon USA for the service. Any damage sustained by Canon USA as a result of honoring foreign warranties is purely a result of their own actions, not the actions of the grey market importers.


----------



## zim (Jan 14, 2016)

Tugela said:


> No, they have access to something that Canon chose to provide them access to, not as a result of the activity of grey importers. Canon USA is under no obligation to provide warranty service to them. *If those customers want warranty service they need to get it in the country where the products were originally distributed*. Alternatively, they can pay Canon USA for the service. Any damage sustained by Canon USA as a result of honoring foreign warranties is purely a result of their own actions, not the actions of the grey market importers.



If the grey market supplier has a distribution warehouse in the country of the purchaser does that re-obligate Canon or is it still simply if you don't buy from an approved reseller then Canon has no obligations no matter how you cut it?

Edit: and does Canon act any different between bodies and lenses?


----------



## nhz (Jan 14, 2016)

dilbert said:


> Mikehit said:
> 
> 
> > dilbert said:
> ...


Mostly agree, just look how the MAP has destroyed price competition in Europe over the last 1-2 years. Grey imports keeps distributors and resellers honest. Some Canon cameras and lenses are 50-60% more expensive here in EU compared to the US (that includes 20% VAT, but still ... such a big difference, especially with 'pro' bodies, is ridiculous). There is still a little bit of grey import but it seems to have almost disappeared compared to a few years ago. I guess Canon sues the companies who advertise lower prices, even if it is grey import. And of course one should ask where 'grey imports' come from, these very low prices have a reason and that is usually HUGE discounts for some big box movers that secretly sell to less official channels (often in other countries).

I'm not in favor of 'freeriding' by grey importers or their customers for service and support, however that is something Canon needs to sort out for themselves.


----------



## Orangutan (Jan 14, 2016)

dilbert said:


> Mikehit said:
> 
> 
> > dilbert said:
> ...



You're missing an important point: part of the accusations against grey-market companies is that they alter the serial numbers. I have no (ethical) problem with grey market importing, so long as everyone knows the device is not covered by local warranty. The buyer, essentially, opts out of paying for the local support and warranty. If the importer intentionally alters the product to make it appear to be an eligible device, then they are causing the local Canon service center to incur inappropriate support and warranty repair costs.


----------



## Random Orbits (Jan 14, 2016)

Orangutan said:


> You're missing an important point: part of the accusations against grey-market companies is that they alter the serial numbers. I have no (ethical) problem with grey market importing, so long as everyone knows the device is not covered by local warranty. The buyer, essentially, opts out of paying for the local support and warranty. If the importer intentionally alters the product to make it appear to be an eligible device, then they are causing the local Canon service center to incur inappropriate support and warranty repair costs.



+1. Although right now the USD is so strong against the Canadian dollar that you can find items from approved Canon resellers in Canada that are much lower cost than from US resellers once the currency conversion is accounted for.


----------



## unfocused (Jan 14, 2016)

dilbert said:


> Given that Canon is specifying the MAP (minimum advertised price) for Canon goods, Canon is essentially engaging in price fixing for their goods through authorized dealers. Price fixing is bad for customers because it removes competition from the market.
> 
> Grey importing is neither fraudulent or illegal however it does promote competition - something Canon wants to eliminate.



First off, you don't know what price fixing is. 

MAP pricing has been reviewed by the courts and found to not be price fixing. Go back and read some of the previous posts on this topic instead of just repeating talking points that are factually incorrect. 

Price fixing occurs when competitors conspire to set the price of a commodity. If Canon, Nikon and Sony were meeting secretly to set prices, that might be price fixing. But MAP is not price fixing and no matter how many times you write that, it won't make it true.

Additionally, this court case has nothing at all to do with MAP pricing and its a gross distortion to claim it does. MAP involves only authorized resellers. Grey market involves unauthorized importing of products. The outcome of this case will not affect MAP pricing in the least.

Plus, people whine about MAP pricing, but it has been a complete failure. The market determines the price and always will, regardless of MAP pricing. There is simply too much competition and too many loopholes.

MAP means Minimum ADVERTISED Price. It doesn't affect the price a retailer actually charges, only what they advertise the price at. If the MAP price reflects the market, then it will be sold at that price. But, when the market demands a different price, it will always float to that price.

Retailers simply resort to gimmicks when the MAP price is too high: 

Add the product to your cart to see the final price;
These are open box items that we used for an in-store demo and can't be sold as new;
Use the Canon Street Price program to contact the retailer;
Buy this special 'bundle' for additional savings;

Even the manufacturers circumvent their own MAP prices:

 Special manufacturers instant "rebate"; 
Buy this with a printer and you'll get a special rebate that is essentially more than the value of the printer, which we know you will actually just resell on eBay;
 We have "refurbished' this lens by painting a little red dot on it and taking it out of its original box.

As others have noted, Canon has actually been more generous toward grey market retailers than their competitors. If they really wanted to shut down the grey market, they would simply do as Nikon and Sony have done and refuse to service any grey market products. 

This lawsuit is about three things: 1) forcing the grey market importers to stop the clearly fraudulent practices like altering serial numbers; 2) showing their authorized dealer network that they are standing up for them; and 3) reaching a compromise in which the grey market retailers pay Canon USA something to offset some of Canon USA's marketing and servicing costs. 

Anyone who thinks that a defeat in court for Canon USA would somehow benefit consumers is simply foolish. If Canon were to lose outright, they will follow the lead of Nikon and Sony and refuse to touch a grey market product.


----------



## tr573 (Jan 14, 2016)

dilbert said:


> Orangutan said:
> 
> 
> > ...
> ...



The serial number forgery is so pointless and dumb, I don't even know why the companies would bother doing it. I bought a 7D2 from GetItDigital (the subject of the other lawsuit) that had a fake serial sticker on it. The firmware still has the real serial in it, so what was the point of the fake sticker? 

With the real serial number available to anyone who plugs it into a computer, the fake sticker gives you neither of these things
A) legitimate us serial for warranty
B) coverup for the original region/distributor

So what's the point? All it did was expose them legally to Canon USA (as seen in these suits) Stupid.


----------



## Mikehit (Jan 14, 2016)

unfocused said:


> Anyone who thinks that a defeat in court for Canon USA would somehow benefit consumers is simply foolish. If Canon were to lose outright, they will follow the lead of Nikon and Sony and refuse to touch a grey market product.



Thank you, unfocused, for a far more erudite and comprehensive reply that I could have managed.


----------



## AshtonNekolah (Jan 14, 2016)

unfocused said:


> dilbert said:
> 
> 
> > Given that Canon is specifying the MAP (minimum advertised price) for Canon goods, Canon is essentially engaging in price fixing for their goods through authorized dealers. Price fixing is bad for customers because it removes competition from the market.
> ...


That's right. Finally someone that knows this business... Bravo.


----------



## scrup (Jan 14, 2016)

You need serial numbers to download some software from the Canon site. I still don't know why a company would put a fake serial sticker over the original? 

Canon warranty is a joke, its only one year. Maybe if they bumped it up to 3 or 5 years then there will be less of a grey market. The only time I needed service was outside the one year period anyway.


----------



## Deleted member 91053 (Jan 14, 2016)

There is only one organisation/company that is responsible fro the "Grey Market" and that is the manufacturer - in this case Canon.
My most recent purchase was a 7D Mark 2, bought in the UK with all duties and taxes paid. So it's exactly the same as buying from an authorised dealer (Canon have to honour the warranty - EU law) yet is 59% of the normal price! So a relatively small retailer can purchase Canon gear, ship it across the world, pay all the relevant duties + taxes and still sell it for 41% less than an authorised dealer. There is only one significant variable in this chain and that is Canon.
There is no excuse for tampering with the products (eg serial numbers) and, in the EU, no need. I wish Canon (and other manufacturers) would actually support their dealer network rather than pulling the carpet from under thier feet.


----------



## Roo (Jan 15, 2016)

Mikehit said:


> unfocused said:
> 
> 
> > Anyone who thinks that a defeat in court for Canon USA would somehow benefit consumers is simply foolish. If Canon were to lose outright, they will follow the lead of Nikon and Sony and refuse to touch a grey market product.
> ...



+1. an absolutely spot on summary


----------



## AlanF (Jan 15, 2016)

johnf3f said:


> My most recent purchase was a 7D Mark 2, bought in the UK with all duties and taxes paid. So it's exactly the same as buying from an authorised dealer (Canon have to honour the warranty - EU law)



That is, unfortunately, incorrect. Your contract is with the dealer not the manufacturer - see http://www.consumerrightsexpert.co.uk/shop-manufacturer-responsible-for-faulty-goods.html

Our sale of goods act is usually to the customers advantage because it prevents the dealers washing their hands of responsibility for faulty products. But, conversely, it takes responsibility away from manufacturers if you buy from dodgy dealers.


----------



## Mikehit (Jan 15, 2016)

johnf3f said:


> There is only one organisation/company that is responsible fro the "Grey Market" and that is the manufacturer - in this case Canon.


Nope. Grey markets are cheaper for two reasons: they don't have the overheads that bricks-and-mortar shops do and secondly almost all grey importers are avoiding import duty. Have you ever noticed how the saving on their prices is remarkably similar to the VAT/import duty? 
As has been said above, Canon dictate only the advertised price, not the selling price. Photography magazines have loads of adverts saying 'save £500' when they are in fact referring to saving over the advertised price, not saving over high street price.



johnf3f said:


> There is no excuse for tampering with the products (eg serial numbers) and, in the EU, no need. I wish Canon (and other manufacturers) would actually support their dealer network rather than pulling the carpet from under thier feet.


They are. By stopping grey importers from benefitting from Canon's service network. I really don't see what is so difficult to understand about that. 
Unless of course you can tell us how else they should be supporting their dealer network.


----------



## Mikehit (Jan 15, 2016)

johnf3f said:


> My most recent purchase was a 7D Mark 2, bought in the UK with all duties and taxes paid. So it's exactly the same as buying from an authorised dealer (Canon have to honour the warranty - EU law) yet is 59% of the normal price! So a relatively small retailer can purchase Canon gear, ship it across the world, pay all the relevant duties + taxes and still sell it for 41% less than an authorised dealer. There is only one significant variable in this chain and that is Canon.


It would be interesting to know who this company way. Did you buy it from bricks and mortar? Or over the internet?
Many of these cheaper places are UK only in name and have a UK address for registration purposes - they are often Hong Kong companies and ship from there. Their second tactic is often to ship goods into the UK without declaring them and if the goods are discovered by customs the company pays the duty without complaint and works on the theory that only a small fraction will get caught in this way and the profit on the majority offsets the few times they pay the duty - so when they say all duties paid' what they really mean is 'it is paid if we get caught'. In addition to this many of them have T&C that says the purchaser is the importer - this avoids problems if at any time in the future you are stopped by customs when returning from holiday and they realise duty had not been paid on that item (it happens).
By the way, buying in the UK is NOT the same as 'buying from an authorised dealer'. Your warranty is with the shop, and any repairs are the responsibility of the shop - the difference is that when buying from an authorised dealer Canon, as part of the dealer network, agrees with the dealer that they (Canon) will pay the costs, not the dealer.


----------



## Roo (Jan 15, 2016)

dilbert said:


> unfocused said:
> 
> 
> > ...
> ...



Do you even understand what cartel behaviour/price fixing is? I guess not because this is definitely not it. If it was Adorama and other retailers colluding to fix the price they sell products at, it is price fixing. If it was Canon, Sony, Nikon etc dictating the price cameras can be sold at it is price fixing. This is far from it. Canon set an _advertised_ price for their products, and their products only, for their authorised sellers and those retailers are free to sell it for the price they choose so long as it's not advertised. Consumers are still free to shop around for the best deal they can get for themselves.


----------



## AlanF (Jan 15, 2016)

Mikehit said:


> johnf3f said:
> 
> 
> > My most recent purchase was a 7D Mark 2, bought in the UK with all duties and taxes paid. So it's exactly the same as buying from an authorised dealer (Canon have to honour the warranty - EU law) yet is 59% of the normal price! So a relatively small retailer can purchase Canon gear, ship it across the world, pay all the relevant duties + taxes and still sell it for 41% less than an authorised dealer. There is only one significant variable in this chain and that is Canon.
> ...



See my comments about Sale of Goods Act, agreeing with what you say. Also our Retail Price Maintenance Act of 1956 prevents manufacturers fixing prices.

What you say about VAT avoidance is also correct. A friend bought a £600 camera from a reputable HK outfit, who shipped it via Gemany with a Customs declared value of £60 for a "refurbished" camera.


----------



## Roo (Jan 15, 2016)

dilbert said:


> Roo said:
> 
> 
> > ...
> ...



You missed the part where they can still sell below the advertised price, so the result is not the same.


----------



## tr573 (Jan 15, 2016)

dilbert said:


> But they cannot *advertise* that.
> 
> What good does selling for a good price do you if you cannot advertise that capability?



Precisely. Average Joe doesn't go to CPW to check the "street price" of a camera. If GID's ebay listing comes up @ 30% less on google shopping searches, guess where they are going.


----------



## adventureous (Jan 15, 2016)

UNFOCUSED has a great post . Here is the Federal Trade Commission link about MAP and price fixing. 

https://www.ftc.gov/tips-advice/competition-guidance/guide-antitrust-laws/dealings-supply-chain/manufacturer-imposed


----------



## nhz (Jan 15, 2016)

tr573 said:


> dilbert said:
> 
> 
> > But they cannot *advertise* that.
> ...



Agree about that as well. It's big fun watching the EU price comparison websites for Canon cameras nowadays, LONG listings with identical prices, many prices 50-60% higher than in the US; plus often quite a few shops who have even higher prices (often resellers who advertise they are 'super cheap' and prey on clueless buyers) and maybe sometimes one Amazon seller that is slightly below the MAP because they are from outside the EU. 

Real camera shops are disappearing and the few remaining retailers who have stock have little incentive to go below the MAP price. Even if I assume I can negotiate a bit on price when I stop by at a real camera shop that now costs me a day and a lot of money to visit, because there aren't any serious camera shops left in my area.

Price control by Canon is a reality. Competition is gone this way and I don't think this is good because the really big existing internet stores will win in these conditions because they are 'everywhere' with their advertising. I can understand if Canon possibly wants to assure that customers get a minimum level of service and support, but I doubt this is helping. 

Regarding comments from some others about 'cheaper' vendors skipping on import charges and VAT: I don't doubt this happens in some cases, but skipping import charges is not possible if you have any significant business volume and some of the cheap sellers are in the UK, not in HK or another location outside Europe. I cannot imagine these companies have been selling loads of camera gear from the UK without paying any VAT for years. There are some loopholes in the EU e.g. until recently 'camera clubs' etc. could be exempt from VAT but as soon as they start behaving like a business this no longer works. It's just as unlikely as massive fraud with wrong serial numbers etc.

I worked in development, retail and distribution of imaging equipment for many years. The main reason for grey imports is often that some big box movers get HUGE discounts from the local distributor, especially when the manufacturer needs to move a lot of stuff at the end of the quarter or business year. Distributors will offload part of that to some obscure foreign company in order to somewhat protect the local market and voila, there is your grey import problem. Assuming that the price that the camera shop pays to the distributors includes a certain service level, all products that have been sold into the retail channel should be entitled to service (maybe in another country, depending on the conditions). I think Canon should work on that, instead of the current price fixing.


----------



## tr573 (Jan 15, 2016)

nhz said:


> Regarding comments from some others about 'cheaper' vendors skipping on import charges and VAT: I don't doubt this happens in some cases, but skipping import charges is not possible if you have any significant business volume and some of the cheap sellers are in the UK, not in HK or another location outside Europe.



If they were importing one camera via airmail, I could see people easily getting away with this in the US (you can get just about anything into the US via airmail with very little chance of customs catching it, so long as it's not a ridiculously huge package. I've ordered dozens of boxes of cuban cigars and never had a single solitary one opened or seized)

But, none of these guys is importing onesie twosie cameras. They are buying pallets of them. How are you getting a pallet of cameras into the country and avoiding customs duties on them? You would have to be paying off a lot of people.


----------



## Deleted member 91053 (Jan 15, 2016)

AlanF said:


> johnf3f said:
> 
> 
> > My most recent purchase was a 7D Mark 2, bought in the UK with all duties and taxes paid. So it's exactly the same as buying from an authorised dealer (Canon have to honour the warranty - EU law)
> ...



Interesting AlanF, that doesn't tie in with the advice that I have read - I will have to re-investigate it - I certainly don't want to dole out incorrect advice! 
I knew that act offered protection but wasn't thinking along those lines at the time. The camera also came with an extended "Seller" warranty but this will vary as some importers don't hang around very long!
The relevant page from Canon makes no mention of not honouring warranties and I know of Canon users who have had Grey Import cameras repaired under warranty without issue. Still this is an area to check on.
Thanks for the Heads UP.

From the Canon website:

Grey Market/Parallel-Import Products
Currently a number of retailers are importing genuine Canon goods from outside the European market, (which encompasses the European Economic Area (EEA) plus Switzerland) for sale to UK and European consumers. Such products are known as “grey market” or “parallel-import” products. 

UNFORTUNATELY, CASHBACK AND OTHER PROMOTIONS ARE NOT VALID ON THOSE PRODUCTS NOT INTENDED FOR THE EUROPEAN MARKET. 

The problem with grey market products 

European consumers may find that grey market products do not meet their expectations because the products were not intended by Canon for the European market and did not undergo localisation by Canon. Accordingly consumers may find that a grey market product is not correctly localised, for example: 

(i) the box may not contain:

a UK power cord or contains a UK power cord or adaptor which was not provided by Canon and has not been quality checked by Canon;
the correct software discs or contains illegal copies of software which does not function;
an original English manual but contains a photocopy of the original English manual or a non-English manual;
a genuine Canon European warranty card but instead may contain a third party warranty card, a warranty card from a reseller based outside Europe or no warranty card at all; 
(ii) a Camera product may not display a valid serial number. 

As grey-market products are not intended by Canon for the European market, such products are ineligible to benefit from UK/European promotions, including Canon’s Cashback offers. 
If in doubt about whether any Canon product is intended for the European market, please check with the reseller or supplier or refer to the “Where to buy” pages on Canon’s websites for a non-exhaustive list of in-store and online retailers (or “E-Tailers”) selling products approved for sale in Europe. 

Canon’s Cashback and other promotional offers are not valid on Canon products not intended for the European market.



Print this page


----------



## Deleted member 91053 (Jan 15, 2016)

Mikehit said:


> johnf3f said:
> 
> 
> > There is only one organisation/company that is responsible fro the "Grey Market" and that is the manufacturer - in this case Canon.
> ...


----------

