Another Nikon price increase in the US?

Read also my update to this post.

So far, I have received two separate emails from two different major US retailers indicating a price increase on all Nikon products starting on October 12th (or 16th), 2011. I have removed the store names in order to protect my sources. If you have planned to buy something from Nikon, now will be a good time to do it. Check out the Nikon Buying Guide for some price comparison (the page will take some time to load because it has to collect prices from several different websites). Check also the current Nikon rebates.

First email:

On Sept 1, Nikon announced that there will be a new pricing policy going into effect on all Nikon DSLR, Lens and Flash product.  This will go live October 16, 2011.  What does this mean?  Any retailer that prices Nikon DSLR, Lens or Flash product below their National price will be in a violation of the policy (Unilateral Pricing Policy = Maximum Value Policy (MVP).

Benefits to the Policy

According to Nikon this policy is designed to allow customers to make purchasing decisions based on service provided and not have to worry about hunting for a better price.

Violations listed:  Any pricing discounts on Nikon MVP product outside of the approved national promotions, free promotional gift cards tied to a customer purchasing MVP product, company or category wide savings that discount MVP product, sales through *** for Business that include a bulk discount, and employee discount.

Not considered a violation:  Corporate generated bundles can be up to 10% value of the MVP product price (example given: D3100 at $649 could have a bundle savings value of $64.90 or less), category wide free shipping, category wide financing, open item and demo model sales as long as they are clearly marked as such.

What happens if we break the policy?

Violations are based on an accumulation of company-wide violations, not each individual store.  So if three different stores receive separate violations it equals our third violation.  First violation will result in Nikon canceling any further inventory and canceling -- Company wide -- all promotional funding on the violated SKU for 60 days.  Second violation in 18 months will result in Nikon canceling any further inventory and canceling all promotional funding -- Company wide -- on the violated SKU for six months.  Third violation will result in Nikon canceling any further inventory and canceling all promotional funding -- Company wide -- on the violated SKU for 1 year.  This is a major risk to *** business, make sure the importance of accurate pricing is communicated.  Any MVP violation by any store or online will be a strike against *** with a major impact to the business.

Second email:

Dear Customer,

Our records indicate that you have requested and received a quote from us which includes Nikon Equipment. As a loyal customer we would like to inform you that the Nikon equipment is due to be marked as "unilaterally" priced. This means that *** will not be able to honor the price on your Quote after 10/12/11 for certain Nikon items but instead will have to offer the new unilateral price. If you would like to purchase the equipment at the Quoted price please do so on or before 10/12/11. Moving forward we will be unable to discount some Nikon items beyond the unilateral price specified by the manufacturer.

This entry was posted in Other Nikon stuff and tagged . Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.
  • eb

    First letter was from Best Buy.

  • Steve Starr

    Doesn’t Apple play the same pricing thing? I rarely see any Apple products under MSRP. If they are lower, they don’t show the price and you get the “Come in” or “Call us” thing and maybe it is $10 off.

    What is annoying – and Nikon didn’t mention it – is dealers who sell for way too much when stock gets hard to find. Some of those D3x bodies that topped at $10K and those 70-200 f/2.8 lenses hit upwards of $4,500 after the quake.

    Fwiw, Nikon website shows the D3x MSRP at $7,999.95. Then you get this re-seller in Amazon selling “a refurbished” Nikon D3x for $9,499.00 now.

    Wish Nikon would go after the price gougers as well.

    • nothing wrong with price gauging. It is capitalism. If it have the value for you, you can buy it, if not, you are not forced to.
      Empty stock makes no sense same as full stock. If your product is in high demand, sell for more, to avoid empty stock and rise profit.

      • PHB

        Erm no, it is called anti-trust and it is a felony. The directors of the deBeers corporation are unable to set foot in the US as they would be arrested immediately.

        Retail price maintenance is anti-competitive. What has been allowed in the US has been restrictions on advertising retail prices below a certain level which is what appears to be happening here.

        • ZoetMB

          Unfortunately, you’re incorrect. The Supreme Court ruled several years ago that manufacturers can actually enforce minimum selling prices, not just minimum advertised prices.

          I had expected that discounts would disappear back then, but they didn’t. But it looks like they might disappear now. You rarely see discounts on bodies anyway…it’s the lenses that sell for less.

          But Nikon can’t have it both ways. They can’t claim that there is no “list price” and only quote an “estimated selling price” because the dealers set prices but then enforce a “unilateral price”.

    • Donz

      yes, so true. They try their luck because there’s likely to be some sucker out there who’ll fall for it. And if not, well they’ve got to drop their price then

  • unohu

    Leica’s prices are seeming more reasonable all the time.

  • Ole

    I would like to buy a D800 right now!!!

  • Bill

    WELL, no surprise….I can not figure Nikon out anymore.
    DSLR Prices are way above other competitors and now they raise them again.
    What is comical is why they should care if Joe Blow Camera and Storm Door Repair sells the camera $50 cheaper when Nikon their import price they asked for to start with.
    Sony did, or still does the same thing with their products for years. Set a retail price that is not supposed to be reduced.
    What will this do to all the great camera stores in N.Y that advertise a D3x for $4995 but forget to tell you it doesnt come with battery, charger, cords, software, and instruction book…and when you add all those items back in, instead of $7995 retail it is now $8,995.
    Why arent they punishing these jokers instead of the honest stores.
    And Nikon wonders why they are slipping in worldwide sales of their product?

    • Chris

      Bill’s right, this is a disaster for customers. It helps the crooked stores who will sell a kit stripped of all the included accessories for MSRP to the ignorant.

      It provides a windfall profit for big, reputable retailers who no longer need to compete on price. I watched this tragedy for consumers unfold as a shopping cart at Abe’s jumped in value by over a thousand dollars between last night and tonight.

      Should still be able to haggle face to face, though. How is Nikon going to know about unadvertised violations? If I buy a Nikon lens that was $70 cheaper yesterday, should be little trouble to get a store to give back $70, even if they can’t advertise it.

  • Adrian Kaz

    The beginning of the the end of free enterprise.

  • shane

    I think its a great idea cause Amercia is aways cheaper to buy in and this should level out the playing pitch, like why should other countries be paying higher prices all these yrs

    • Mock Kenwell

      Umm. Because America buys more cameras. Supply and demand.

      • Abaham Collins

        How does that make sense?

        More demand = less cameras in stock = higher prices, not lower.

        The fact that other countries prices are higher mostly has to do with warranty laws; countries mandating longer warranties pay higher prices to compensate for the increased risk… it has nothing to do with supply/demand.

        • BorneoPilot

          Whatever the actual reason is, I think you need to go back to Economics 101. A bigger market for a product means a company can make a profit on smaller margins. It’s the same reason a D3x needs a bigger markup than a Coolpix – the D3x market is much smaller. There are other factors as well, like you mentioned, but in general a larger market means lower prices. In Indonesia, where I live, there are no warranty laws at all (there’s almost zero consumer protection here), yet Nikon (and virtually all Japanese & American electronics products) are much more expensive than Europe/America.

          • Mock Kenwell


          • Abaham Collins

            BorneoPilot you’re correct, but it’s not something that one can categorize under “supply and demand,” it’s rather a bulk logistics situation, the two concepts work conversely against each other.

    • blckcat

      you’re wrong… I’ve been to S. Korea and I’ve seen much more non-professional consumers using DSLR. I was surprised by the ratio of people using DSLR compared to p&S. I mean, seriously, everyone used DSLR. In fact, even D700 pricing is around 600 dollars cheaper than U.S. Meaning more D700 demand in S. Korea than U.S.. I should’ve bought a D700 before I came back to States……

  • Adel Ansams

    D800 is coming out before 16 october or Nikon would finish all D700 before??

  • jabberwocky

    just tactics ,bump the price up overall a few weeks before some major announcements and when the new gear comes along ,it wont seem quite so expensive .
    obviousely the new DSLR models (upcoming) are going to be a bit more expensive than the models they are going to replace ,this trick will seem to hide that to a certain extent .

  • Allan M

    Well this goes against the law, in Denmark, be source no supplier can fix a price on any product, but only make suggestions on price level.

  • ECLaw

    Don’t worry European readers…this is against EC law and most national laws.

    • 0mega

      If this is the case… then how come Apple products have a fixed price?

      • cpm5280

        Because Apple can control what they charge for their products, not only to consumers, but to resellers. By not charging resellers less than they do, they limit how much a reseller can mark it down and still make a profit.

  • Keith

    Hahah…they are focused on their own dealers competing with each other….instead of focused on competing with Canon. Ooops.

  • 1

    Some of the price variations are absurd. I actually dont mind this pollicy because now I dont have to shop at crappy stores to save money where others just cant match.

    I know some say support your local camera shop but with the stuff that I have purchased I am not going to be out a couple thousand dollars in order to do so.

    It makes me wonder if the stores with the lowest prices are the ones being greedy since they are stealing business away from others or are the stores with the rip off prices worse?

    It doesnt really matter but just a thought.

    In the end Nikon is just forcing us to have to pay the highest price they can get away with and that I do not like.

    • CadenceSF

      I found out over the year, only a couple of stores that can beat B&H & Adorama’s prices, and still deliver descent products. Most places that offer lower prices are running scam operations such as bait and switch. This is especially common in New York.

      Basically shopping at crappy stores claiming to offer things cheaper are mostly waste of time.

  • C_QQ_C

    Like said before, in EC this would be against the Law, AND i think this totally encourages ppl to buy “Grey Import” too ..

    On the other hand, this is exactly what some US based companies try to do in the EC too, and till now seem to get away with it because of US Political backing..

    • Art

      I agree, this will only encourage people to buy Grey Market cameras. This will actually hurt the small US camera retailers even more. Why? Before, the small camera stores were competing between themselves and those who marked down the Authorized US Imports. Now, They have to compete between the even higher priced authorized US Imported gear and Grey Market which is an even higher price differential. The small camera shops do not typically have the financial resources to buy grey market cameras and import them themselves so there is no way to compete. Additionally, B&H (and presumably the other large camera stores) now offers warranties for the their Grey Market gear that rivals that of the manufacturers making it almost painless to buy Grey Market if not downright attractive.

      • buddy

        The same rule applies to the grey market

  • sandpaper

    Dumb question, but does this mean that the D7000 will definitely have a large increase in its price at US retailers after that date? and if so, by how much?

    Also, if purchasing the D7000 from Nikon on Amazon, will the price remain the same? I’ve been saving up for a D7000 to get by mid-november, perhaps during the black friday sale. But if prices are going to drastically increase (like $1,200 – $2,000), then maybe I should just buy it now… Any suggestions on what I should do would be great! thanks 🙂

    • broxibear

      At the moment the Amazon price for a D7000 is $1,129.00… personally I’d buy one now because even if they’re on sale later will you really save that much ?

    • ace

      Nikon prices will not increase. they will stay at MAP and all camera stores that follow MAP will be able to get their orders delivered, so don,t worry $1299.95 will be D7000 price for Black friday. Nikon has some good news on October 16th that will put smile on your face just wait.

      • sandpaper

        I’m sorry but I don’t quite follow… what will be the “news” on october 16th thats so great? I was going to order through amazon, so will waiting another month for the black friday sale save me any money? Thanks again!

  • broxibear

    Brazilians flock to British shops for bargain buys…
    “With prices of Western brands up to a third higher in Brazil than in Britain, tourists are visiting this country to shop in unprecedented numbers.”
    “Harrods, the London department store, has seen a rise in sales of Louis Vuitton, Tiffany, Sony and Nikon products to Brazilian tourists.”
    “Robin Johnson, VisitBritain’s manager in Latin America, said that high import taxes in Brazil mean it is often cheaper for people to fly overseas to shop.”


    I’d hate to see another price increase because their stuff is already ridiculously expensive. I’m sure the pressure for this policy came from dealers losing sales to the interwebs.

    • ace

      1 dollar used to be $105 yen today is $85 yen, they are not expensive, dollar is not as strong as used to be. don’t blame it on Japanies, it is US ecconomy that drives prices higher

      • ZoetMB

        Actually, if you go back to 2007, it was 120 yen to the U.S. dollar.

  • PeterO

    Nikon can’t live in a pricing bubble. The new Canon and Sony offerings will most certainly moderate Nikon’s pricing policies. If this is all true, then I imagine we’ll be seeing a lot of “get it before the price goes up” sales.

    As for low low prices continuing in the US, it seems that some have forgotten that we now live in a global economy, and what happens financially in one part of the world affects all of us. Like it or not, the economic engine that drives the world now comes from China and India.

    • I think people are not understanding what’s really going on here. Both Canon and Sony have similar policies, though there has been inconsistent enforcement.

      If Canon or Sony lower prices (not dealers, but the camera makers), Nikon would probably respond. The issue here is who is controlling the actual prices paid, the dealer or the manufacturer?

      The problem I have with strict enforcement of the current policies is that it makes it very difficult to get volume discounts. If I start a new news service that needs 100 D3s cameras, effectively no one can offer me a discount under the new policy (technically, a dealer could bundle extra stuff worth up to 10% of the overall price, but I’m not sure I’d buy enough “extra non-Nikon stuff” to hit 10%).

      • PeterO

        I understand your concern completely Thom. My point was that Nikon would be foolish to raise prices to the point where customers would consider buying another brand. There are still a lot of first timers out there who want a DSLR and are not committed to a brand and frankly only look at the bells & whistles per dollar offered.

        • But it’s not Nikon raising prices. It would be Amazon raising the price to that which others are charging. Thing is, with Nikon adapting this approach, the others will probably do the same (Sony already has this in place, though it’s less rigidly enforced in what I can see). As I noted on the previous page, the issue for the Japanese makers is more subtle and problematic than just what the consumer pays for a product. The dueling trends of dollar/yen slide and price/performance expectation change puts them in a tough spot if dealers get aggressive about moving boxes via lower prices.

          On the flip side, we’ve got some other manufacturers doing the “shoot yourself in the foot” thing. We’re still seeing older m4/3 models popping up at the US$399 price point because the MANUFACTURER is discounting it to that price. This means that they either overproduced or are simply foolish, maybe both. If you set in people’s minds that you can get a competent system camera with lens for US$399, selling your US$899 product becomes a real chore, especially when it isn’t all that distinguished from the one you just pushed for US$399. You start a vicious cycle that just repeats and repeats. Olympus would have been far better off keeping the price higher on the closeouts and including more stuff with it (e.g., two-lens kits, bag, simple accessories).

          Price points are misunderstood by a lot of people (including many of the organizations setting them ;~). It’s dangerous to set new price points for something, which is why rebates and instant rebates and all kinds of other tactics popped up. Once the public thinks a new price point is the real price point, your volume drops if you price higher.

          • PeterO

            I completely agree on the price point perception being a real block. Before the summer, my niece picked up an XZ-1 for $399. Price now is back up to $499. There’s no way I’ll pay the extra $100. I’ll wait for the next sale or see what else new comes along in the meantime. Question is: what is it really worth?

            • > What is it really worth?

              This is why I harp on marketing all the time. In theory, marketing sets expectations. Then sales comes along and runs a discount to move inventory and you’re screwed ;~).

              I currently think, via testing, that the XZ-1 is the best of the bunch in terms of compacts. The G12 is close, but it’s a bigger beast and has a slower lens. The question is this: exactly where do you see Nikon (P7100), Canon (G12), Olympus (XZ-1), Panasonic (LX-5), or Samsung (TL-500) setting expectations? A US$400-500 compact has to be really on its game. It has to clearly exceed lower priced compacts, and it has to compete with low-priced systems cameras. So just exactly how are the marketing departments faring at delivering a clear message there?

              Look at Kawasaki’s 12 things he learned from Jobs, points 8 and 12: value is different from price, but value sets price.

          • Ns

            Actually, the difference between the Sony policy and the Nikon policy is that under Sony, dealers can *sell* for whatever they want, but if they sell below a certain price, but the rules make it that the customer has to be effectively in the store or on the phone, because anything online is advertising (including the “Add to cart for lower price” business)

            The difference here is that Nikon is moving beyond enforcing advertised prices, and is controlling a selling price, which Sony does not do.

      • Malcolm Weir

        Just a note about the 10% thing: the way I read the letters, I’m thinking that not every product Nikon makes will be subject to the policy, “just” the headline items such as the bodies and lenses. If true, this means that dealers could include extra batteries, chargers, etc. as part of that 10% value.

        Or to put it another way, if they DON’T, they’re missing an opportunity because resellers will include third-party accessories!

        However, to Thom’s main point: if you want to buy 100 D3x bodies, call Melville and ask them how they want to handle it… I predict a magic waiver of the price policy. Where the problem really comes in is when you want to buy $750,000 of stuff, of which only some is from Nikon. In the old days, the dealer could cut the margin across the board; under the new scheme, the Nikon prices would have to be preserved, which is still OK up until the moment when other vendors join in, and you have a large order which only looks like a “medium” order to each of several vendors.

  • Richard Snow

    Really, this is probably one of the best things Nikon can do to keep my local camera shop in business. Everyone will have to price Nikon’s products the same. No more people getting all their purchase information from my local shop and then them going online and buying from, taking money and time out of my local shop’s pocket.


    • ace

      I deal with these people every day, i have become a show room for Amazon, B&H and Adorama, I hope the tax issue for on line sale become standard and Like California everybody pays tax

    • dino B

      but fir me and i wouldnt be surprised if others agree that i wouldnt buy anything from a small camera store again as often they will give you a hard time with waranty purposes where the bigger stores will send the camera in for you or even replace it with their extra warrenty… so if prises are the same i wouldnt really care about the small camera stores

  • Keithm

    No one wants to pay more for a product, but I have always regretted buying my DSLR cameras from mail order sources rather than from my local camera store. I appreciate the convenience, the learning opportunities, return policy, and real people who I spend time with at the local store. Now, I can purchase locally and support their lively-hoods. As has been mentioned, this is similar to Apple purchases.

    • PeterO

      Amen to that Keithm, I’m fortunate enough to have two “ma and pa” shops in my town (in addition to the big box stores) who know me and always treat me fairly. I also realize that they need to make a living as well.

    • Mark V

      Sadly, I don’t like buying at my local store because they don’t care about me and it shows, they care about the sale. I always feel like I am being sold something rather than them trying to help me solve problems and just be interested in me as a customer. I understand that it’s their job, but if they simply approached it differently, I would be more apt to pay the higher prices and promote local business.

  • D

    This is appalling.
    I’m a student photographer and every penny I save goes towards my gear, this means is I can no longer afford to buy more kit. I am totally disgusted by Nikon and I will have to stop recommending it to people. Should’ve bought canon 🙁

  • Bob Panick

    I thought price fixing was illegal in the US. Apparently not.

    As to supporting my local camera store. What local camera store, I live just south of Detroit, the two nearest camera shops are at least an hour away and don’t stock much. I’ve spent more time in B&H in NYC than I have in either of them. I generally order from B&H, not for the price but for the selection of merchandise.

    I’ve got news for you Nikon, there isn’t anything left to protect.

    • Bob Panick

      Apparently vertical price fixing is legal in the US since a 2007 Supreme Court interpretation of the Sherman act.

      • Art

        The other side of this is whether price fixing is legal or not, the manufacturers have always had the freedom to sell to one seller or another. So while a manufacturer may not have liked how a store sells their cameras and may not have had legal recourse to stop them, it has always been legal for the manufacturer to cut off a store or stores for any purpose what so ever. Because of this, pricing that is too far out of the ordinary has been typically short lived. I would suspect even in the EU manufacturers can cut off the retailers that get them angry.

  • Sucks.

  • Lulz

    Good god. You guys act like the sky is falling. So you might have to spend an extra 50 bucks on that 70-200. So what. When you’re already breaking out over 2 grand it’s a drop in the bucket.

    • Art

      Yea, except that the price difference has typically been more than $50.

      The funny thing is that this won’t change much. By my ordering a D800 ($4,000) from a NY Camera store, I will save me $250 in sales tax.

      I’m not arguing for sales tax on Internet sales though. There are Internet retailers in virtually every state. By enforcing Internet sales tax, it hurts the retailers that are in your state that are servicing people from other states. Additionally, there are already sales taxes on Internet sales — time and shipping and the inability to get personalized service. There is no way that you can get that Internet order TODAY. If you want it TOMORROW or the next day, you are going to have to pay a hefty fee to FedEx which is of course another “tax” (though not a governmental one) as are the regular shipping fees. Your local retailer will always be able to give you immediate attention & service, you won’t have to pay any shipping, and you can walk out of the store with your new product under arm.

      • @art,
        Most local retailers have limited inventories and can’t afford to compete with the mega online stores like B&H. Brick and mortar is nice but I find you have to wait a few days while they place an order for whatever that high end item is that you want. In the mean time, I could have ordered online and saved the taxes. Most of the time with the big companies you even get free shipping. Its all about volume sales and bulk order purchasing nowadays. I have also been witnessing a trend in various industries; manufacturer direct sales is becoming more common place as it means more profit for them. The Mom&Pop shop is going to need to put value-added services on their sales list if they want to compete. Examples: include a free workshop with a new camera kit purchase, or establish a photography club and provide a meeting place and organize outings, or host photography contests with prizes. Harley Davidson is a perfect example of how buisnesses can establish a customer base, by providing a sense of community. With the fixed pricing model that Nikon is enforcing, it will only work for those who are comitted to their brand. Fortunately the other manufacturers will continue to compete for market share, thereby forcing Nikon to be reasonable. For the consumer, we should see a benefit in the terms of the services which go along with the sale; as this will be the only way for a company to distinguish itself from the others.

        • Art

          I agree. My point is simply that there is a tax for ordering online. Maybe not in the sense that the Government is taking a percentage of your money but in the sense of time and resources. Online retailers have a tax imposed on them — shipping time, less ability to easily interact with customers, shipping price (even if factored into the overall price), etc.

          Local retailers have local and state taxes but do not have the these other “taxes”. You can interact with your local retailer, get questions answered immediately, have them greet you by name when you walk in the store, and the ability to buy a camera and take it to your photo shoot while on your way out of town. There are advantages to either model. Which works best for you depends on you.

        • ZoetMB

          Responding to several posts above:
          B&H is one single store and essentially started out as a Mom & Pop, albeit one with a very dense nearby population, but it certainly can’t be compared to any chain.

          So theoretically, any “Mom & Pop” could become a B&H. Long before the internet, B&H put a lot of money into buying lots of advertising in the back of photography magazines and became a mail order powerhouse.

          J&R (also in NYC) is similar. It’s not a chain, it’s one store.

          You cannot define shipping charge and longer delivery times as a tax. Taxes are paid to governments. Congress does need to resolve the internet tax issue. There are two ways to resolve this: a) end this nexus foolishness and simply charge sales tax based upon the delivery address. However, that would make it very difficult for the small business person to submit sales taxes because there are hundreds, if not thousands of local municipalities that collect sales taxes. So the government would have to create some kind of tax clearinghouse. b) sales taxes are paid based only upon the ship from address. The advantage of that is that the locality which actually has the retail/warehouse jobs gets the benefit of the sales taxes. In addition, small businesses would only have to submit sales taxes to two places at most: their local municipality and their state.

          While the major factor in Nikon’s U.S. pricing is the weak dollar (down 36% in four years), you still have to deal with perception. At the very top end, you have highly paid professionals who might be a bit less price sensitive or have their equipment paid for by their employers. But these days, the bulk of Nikon’s sales are enthusiasts and they are a lot more price sensitive. And if Nikon makes it impossible to get a discounted camera or lens, I believe that sales will drop substantially or that consumers will shift to lower-priced models.

          From a business standpoint, if Nikon can’t push out enough inventory anyway, this actually makes sense (although it can alienate your customers). But if they can push out enough inventory, they’ll have product sitting on the shelves (IMO).

  • I think Nikon should protect the small retailer.
    My favorite Quote “Hands On” applies to “box” stores.
    Of course, my local camera store does not stock everything that an Online dealer has in their catalog,
    but they have a return policy that does not cost me shipping or a restock fee.
    So, I can pre-order and still get hands on.
    Plus these guys know cameras and that can be very helpful indeed!

  • Markus

    Why is there suddenly an Apple logo behind Nikon Rumors title? Apple has thankfully nothing to do with Nikon.

    • Art

      Half-Mast: Steve Jobs

    • broxibear

      Apple have bought Nikon, they contacted Peter/admin to tell him he could continue using the Nikon name for his blog provided he add an Apple logo to the site. After 12 months Peter would either have to take the site down, change the name or pay Apple for using the Nikon name that they now own.
      Don’t you read the article before posting Markus ?
      (or it could just be a bit of respect for Steve Jobs.)

  • So, Nikon prices are no longer MSRP but rather MERP (Manufacturer Enforced Retail Price).
    Sadly, the short-minded Nikon managers will realize this will affect their sales, in a bad way.

  • I don’t see no stinkin “Grey Market” Nikons on the B&H website.
    In the past it was never worth buying one.
    But, if the difference were %20% including no tax and free shipping, I can see a lot of buyers going that way.
    Especially if it carries a two year in-house warrantee.
    There are now a lot more repair shops that will service “Grey Market” products.

    • B&H actually offers 1 year warranty on grey market products, read this:

    • ace

      Grey market products will change to MVP also. Dealer with grey market products at lower MVP prices can loose their dealership, you can not add to the cart for lower price on MVP product. This will make local stores stronger and they can start hiring more employes which will help economy. Go Nikon

  • broxibear

    Some interesting pricing of refurbished bodies at the Nikon Store…
    I know some people are expecting the D3s to drop in price when the D4 comes out, but that didn’t happen with the D3 and D3s here in the UK. The D3 prices stayed normal until the stock ran out.

  • Shane

    This is illegal in EU law so dont worry it only affects the US and other…

  • MJr

    Where is the D800 ? 🙁


    I used to pay full list at the local dealers to support, but got sick of them giving me sh*t anytime I didn’t like something and wanted to return it, or them trying to sell me the cheaper but higher profit margin products because they “work just as well.” I’ll still buy online even if prices are the same unless I NEED to have something that day. Great customer service is #1, my local shops don’t have it.

  • samuel

    i love it. i work in retail and you have no idea how many times i get bonned having to do a dirty price match to some store in the midle of nowhere. I for one am glad for the fixed prices.

  • Jim

    Try finding discounts on Leica or Hasselblad.

  • James

    With regard to email 1, In Australia this would be called price fixing and the ACCC (Australian competition & consumer commission) could levy large fines against Nikon. But I suppose, this price rise is not for Australia.

    • BartyL

      Seems to me that we already pay more than they do in the US. Even with the AU dollar over parity for around 8 months there was no ‘downward’ shift in prices. Serves us right for not being grossly overpopulated I guess.

  • Careby

    This will cost Nikon at least some sales. If I have x dollars to spend on Nikon gear, and can find a dealer to sell it to me at a steep discount, I’ll end up buying more gear. If I have to pay more for it, I can’t buy as much of it. So more of my money goes to the dealer and less to the manufacturer. I imagine my case is not unique.

  • Up $#!t’s creek

    i just find it odd they are enforcing the prices to begin the day after the current rebates expire. To me it sounds possible they have expanded promotions they may want to begin…

  • Jesse

    I think most people are forgetting the exchange rate. The $ has been in free fall. 5 years ago $1 got you more then ¥110. In ’09 it got you about ¥90. Today it gets you ¥75. Nikon has to pay their bills in ¥ but when they send their product over to the US they get fewer and fewer ¥ for the same number of cameras sold.

  • DJ

    So what’s the advice for someone in the market for a D7000?

    Should I buy today, even though the price is barely down $70 from introduction a year ago, because it is about to go up in a couple of days?

    Should I continue to wait because the price won’t really change that much on the D7000 in the next few days, and see if any sales come towards the end of the year?

    Is the D7100 close enough that I should just wait for that, since I’ve already waited over a year on the D7000? I’m still on a D80 body, and I’d be willing to wait up to about a year for a D7000 successor. If it’s more than a year away, I’d probably get the D7000 now.

  • Sounds like “pricing fixing” to me.

    “The intent of price fixing may be to push the price of a product as high as possible, leading to profits for all sellers but may also have the goal to fix, peg, discount, or stabilize prices. The defining characteristic of price fixing is any agreement regarding price, whether expressed or implied.

    Price fixing requires a conspiracy between sellers or buyers. The purpose is to coordinate pricing for mutual benefit of the traders.”

  • Wayne

    Although Nikon’s price enforcement is not illegal it IS anti-consumer. The bottom line is that the consumer is going to pay more. Nikon’s move is opposite of the premises of free-enterprise: Allowing the market (cost of production vs consumer demand) to set the price and therefore the sellers profiit. If a seller wants to make less on each product to entice consumers to buy then that SHOULD be the sellers right. Nikon is free to set the wholesale cost of selling to its distributor’s/resellers. Equally, in a free-market and free society the distributor’s/resellers should be free to set the retain cost of their goods.

    To anyone who says it does not matter think about this. The retail price of a Nikon 70-200mm VR II is $2,399.95. Most online sellers are selling the lens for $2,169.00. The difference is $230.95. So whose pocket do you want the $230.95 to go to? Your pocket or the seller’s especially when the seller was willing to allow you to keep the $230.95 in the first place and was happy with their profit! In today’s economy how many of you have $230.95 to throw away!

    Will the price increase matter? No, because unlike the Netflix cost increase not enough “little” guys are willing to walk away and buy another product.

  • Roy

    The B&H’s and Amazon’s will benefit the most from this policy. How?

    Because right now, consumer electronics are heavily discounted. We are talking 1-2% margins for the biggest of players (although they get MAP on new items). But they can’t be higher than the competition and move product. Now MAP isn’t what it used to be…5% above dealer cost isn’t uncommon. But selling at 5% means they could sell 50% less, and more than break even. And since everyone will sell at that price, their sales won’t drop anywhere near 50%.

  • plcapeli

    i shot with nikon, but now my d80 gathers dust, my micro 43 with tons of manual glass from zeiss and voigtlander also used: a gxr with m mount and the awesome
    fujifilm whos nikon???there losing market share like trees lose leaves in the fall , this moves suggest desperstion to increase revenue
    but micromanaging worldwide retail prices isnt thr way to do this

    at least it protect the smaller nikon dealers

  • Back to top