To: Keith Hankin who wrote (22166 ) 12/16/1998 3:45:00 AM From: Reginald Middleton Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 24154
<What if a competitor comes up with a radio that provides some benefit over the one bundled with the car, such as the fact that it is cheaper, or that it has a better quality or more powerful amp, or that it includes a built-in equalizer? The consumer would lose out if the radio was forcibly bundled because they could not get the options available from competitors. Besides, even if another company came up with the idea, they would not be able to execute it, since the car manufacturer has control over the design specs for the car, so the radio manufacturers could not implement this integration solution on their own even if they wanted to.> This has been played out already, and as a teenager, I installed many aftermarket stereo systems:-) If the benefit is great enough, it would warrant the consumer to install the superior radios. There is nothing that prevents them from doing so. The DOJs case is based on the consumer being too stupid to know what he/she wants. That is one of the major weaknesses. In the aftermarket stereo market, an entire cottage industry has been built around aftermarket installations and custom jobs for those consumers who feel that other manufacturer have done a better job than the OEM. No law suits and whining, just plain old fashion competition. better amp - Mistubishi cheaper - Jensen (if the radio is not an option and you don't like the combo, you simply buy another car, just like the OS siutation) equalizer - Clarion or Blaunkpaunt Three examples of capitalism at work. If you come to New York, you will see all of the aforementioned products installed in the Toyotas and Mitsubishi's that have integrated sound systems. There is no difference with NSCP and MSFT