nVidia ends GeForce Partner Program

[Trixanity]

They achieved what they set out to do. Those who would play ball have, so it makes sense to end it before it causes any issues legal or otherwise. They also get to spin it as being misunderstood and wanting to do the right thing. They get to say they listened and only wants to do what's right for consumers.

 

Nvidia won this one. A mostly clean victory. The backlash was minor all things considered and the payoff big.

 

Just to be clear: AIB vendors are not gonna roll back changes just because the program has ended. It's too late to dismantle all the work they've done. They might as well stick with it. I'd be mighty surprised if anyone would do so.

[Agosto]

Well that was quick

WE DID IT GUYS

[Blackie Sheen]

1 minute ago, Master Disaster said:

Yes your right, it's a win for consumers.

 

I'm wondering whether AIBs that have invested in splitting lines already might now keep it (at least temporarily) to see if it helps or not.

 

Like I said above, splitting lines wouldn't have been cheap and it COULD be good as easily as it could be bad. If it was me I'd want to keep it running as a test instead of writing off the entire investment but then, I'm not a corporate shareholder so maybe I'm wrong ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

I think overall it would be good. I mean now, it means you dont even need to know what the specific model of the card is what to know whethere the card is and AMD one or an Nvidia one based on the line up of branding and the tier of the card based on specific branding.

 

The only thing that might be bad in all that is that, there might be too many brands associated with graphics cards like for example for ASUS currently having like 4-5 different gpu tier branding on either side

[Razor01]

17 minutes ago, Delicieuxz said:

@huilun02 is likely correct in saying that Nvidia is protecting itself from lawsuits. That GPP was already being reported as costing competitors' sales due to anti-competitive practices is a pretty big indicator.

 

 

 

 

 

No lawsuits are based on damages done based on illegal (antitrust) activates . So if AMD or the AIB's didn't lose sales or money (re branding costs money but that isn't a loss unless they can show they didn't get sales form the re branded cards the same as before) in this oh 2 months they can't sue.  So Anti trust must now be proven first since the program is shut down.  If the program was on going and AIB's and AMD can see the damages it does to the bottom line the lawsuit could be done first.

 

Now this does not preclude the FTC or EU trade commission to stop going after nV either if there was something illegal going on.

 

And that article is really misconstrued we had a pretty big thread on that article already.

[NMS]

Nope, I'm still done with Nvidia.

They pull shit and try to cover their asses. This is nothing but a self-preservation move.

 

Byeeeeeeee!

[Demonking]

Gpp or no gpp it really didn't matter, cause the 1060 is sitting higher on the steam hardware survey than the RX 480 even though the 480 release before the 1060 with more vram at a cheaper price, yet people still bought the 1060 over it. Nvidia marketing is too strong,and most top YouTubers and streamers use Nvidia and have they PC specs below they streams, so people know what brand to buy already.

[Bcat00]

56 minutes ago, Master Disaster said:

So are you going to pay for the marketing required to split cards into separate lines? Think about it, AIBs would have to come up with separate brand names, design box art, advertising, pay for printing etc.

 

Plus AIBs probably don't want to split lines anyway, customers see ROG they know it's ASUS, Gaming is MSI, AOROS is Gigabyte. When customers go into shops and see new lines they might not associate the brand with the new name.

 

Brand recognition is everything.

Like i said, it's my opinion and its undeniable that the one on top don't like being associated with the one on the bottom.

How do you think Apple got so big now? Its because of their persistence in keeping their brand icon and name secluded from the rest of the tech companies out there like Microsoft. 

 

They are premium, so buy us and not them unless you want inferior goods. Paid off for them and i'm assuming Nvidia wanted the same thing going for themselves.

 

Sure, its kind of scummy and will cost the AIB more money, but heck, the AIB aren't exactly in any position to make demands when all they are doing is leeching off both companies. That's how business run and that's how business will keep going forever until time ends.

 

And don't give me crap about something like the AIB companies helped build Nvidia to what it is today, that is nonsense. What built a company is their product and Nvidia is leading so of course they want to be paid well for it, who wouldn't?

 

[The Benjamins]

3 minutes ago, Bcat00 said:

Like i said, it's my opinion and its undeniable that the one on top don't like being associated with the one on the bottom.

How do you think Apple got so big now? Its because of their persistence in keeping their brand icon and name secluded from the rest of the tech companies out there like Microsoft. 

 

They are premium, so buy us and not them unless you want inferior goods. Paid off for them and i'm assuming Nvidia wanted the same thing going for themselves.

 

Sure, its kind of scummy and will cost the AIB more money, but heck, the AIB aren't exactly in any position to make demands when all they are doing is leeching off both companies. That's how business run and that's how business will keep going forever until time ends.

 

And don't give me crap about something like the AIB companies helped build Nvidia to what it is today, that is nonsense. What built a company is their product and Nvidia is leading so of course they want to be paid well for it, who wouldn't?

 

So then Nvidia should require AIB to make a new brand exclusively for them, not force AIB to stop selling AMD cards under existing brands.

[Bananasplit_00]

this is stupidly funny to read, im legit laughing out loud at their statements here 

[Bcat00]

Just now, The Benjamins said:

So then Nvidia should require AIB to make a new brand exclusively for them, not force AIB to stop selling AMD cards under existing brands.

Can you explain to me why they should? What gives AMD the right to have the original branding? Would you jump ship when its doing well? 

 

Yes, i'm a company and in order to do something that I WANT, i'm going to screw myself over just to look out for my competition that wants to knock me down.

Does this even makes sense to you? What you are implying is no different from trying to say, i should help the guy that's trying to beat me up just so he can beat me up????

[Razor01]

15 minutes ago, The Benjamins said:

So then Nvidia should require AIB to make a new brand exclusively for them, not force AIB to stop selling AMD cards under existing brands.

 

and that was what was in the contract, take what Kyle wrote with a huge grain of salt because what he wrote was a specific line in the contract and without the rest of the contract we have no DAMN idea what it means.  Not only that what he stated in the PCgamer video interview, totally contradicts what he stated in his article.  PC gamer interview he read a sentence that directly states AIB's must put nV products in separate brand lines.  They didn't need to use their current most visable brand for nV cards.  But the way Kyle wrote the article, "exclusive gaming brand" without that sentence he stated while reading, gave a totally different meaning.  Doesn't it?

 

So if AIB's made a new brand for nV cards, that will be their new exclusive gaming brand.

 

But for AIB's it was smarter to keep their current best gaming brand as nV's and put AMD's in another, since they make more money on nV card total sales.

[The Benjamins]

3 minutes ago, Bcat00 said:

Can you explain to me why they should? What gives AMD the right to have the original branding? Would you jump ship when its doing well? 

 

Yes, i'm a company and in order to do something that I WANT, i'm going to screw myself over just to look out for my competition that wants to knock me down.

Does this even makes sense to you? What you are implying is no different from trying to say, i should help the guy that's trying to beat me up just so he can beat me up????

Nvidia and AMD do not own the branding of AIB, so if they impose restriction that is anti competitive, which is illegal, but they could have AIB create a new exclusive Nvidia brand.

 

It is NOT LEGAL for Nvidia to restrict consumers access to AMD products, how is that hard to understand. The issue is not that Nvidia can or can't have a exclusive brand, it is how they went about doing it.

[laminutederire]

1 hour ago, Master Disaster said:

Yes your right, it's a win for consumers.

 

I'm wondering whether AIBs that have invested in splitting lines already might now keep it (at least temporarily) to see if it helps or not.

 

Like I said above, splitting lines wouldn't have been cheap and it COULD be good as easily as it could be bad. If it was me I'd want to keep it running as a test instead of writing off the entire investment but then, I'm not a corporate shareholder so maybe I'm wrong ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

I'm pretty sure that was Nvidia's idea all along. Make some bullshit partnership, force them to change their brands then retire the program to not be liable legally.

[Razor01]

Just now, The Benjamins said:

Nvidia and AMD do not own the branding of AIB, so if they impose restriction that is anti competitive, which is illegal, but they could have AIB create a new exclusive Nvidia brand.

 

It is NOT LEGAL for Nvidia to restrict consumers access to AMD products, how is that hard to understand. The issue is not that Nvidia can or can't have a exclusive brand, it is how they went about doing it.

They don't own the brand but they own their brands and products, and they can do what the F they want with their brands and products when it comes to AIB's selling their products.

[Razor01]

1 minute ago, laminutederire said:

I'm pretty sure that was Nvidia's idea all along. Make some bullshit partnership, force them to change their brands then retire the program to not be liable legally.

Doesn't work that way, if they forced AIB's to sign something that was illegal, they are still on the hook.  Just because they stop doing something that is anti trust after the fact is not remotely condoned as OK.

 

You don't get to break the law and then step away from it without getting punished, how ever little that punishment may be. 

[Razor01]

5 minutes ago, The Benjamins said:

Nvidia and AMD do not own the branding of AIB, so if they impose restriction that is anti competitive, which is illegal, but they could have AIB create a new exclusive Nvidia brand.

 

It is NOT LEGAL for Nvidia to restrict consumers access to AMD products, how is that hard to understand. The issue is not that Nvidia can or can't have a exclusive brand, it is how they went about doing it.

 

 

They aren't/weren't restricting AMD products to consumers period.  AIB's just had to sell AMD products in another line.  Did AIB's stop selling AMD products?  I didn't see that happen did you?  Were the AIB's forced not to buy AMD products?  Didn't see that happen either, did you?

[Bcat00]

Just now, The Benjamins said:

Nvidia and AMD do not own the branding of AIB, so if they impose restriction that is anti competitive, which is illegal, but they could have AIB create a new exclusive Nvidia brand.

 

It is NOT LEGAL for Nvidia to restrict consumers access to AMD products, how is that hard to understand. The issue is not that Nvidia can or can't have a exclusive brand, it is how they went about doing it.

Okay, you clearly didn't understand what i said. I'm not defending the fact that its not illegal, heck we don't even know if it is or not because no one has seen the contract.

 

What i'm defending is a company has the right to look out for its best interest, that is something you and a lot of people here don't seem to understand. You and the others just screams, SAVE AMD, SAVE AMD, SAVE AMD!!!

 

Why the heck should the competition go save their counterpart that's clearly falling behind? And for real, the business world is like that, live with it because it won't change just for 1 company. 

[laminutederire]

3 minutes ago, Razor01 said:

Doesn't work that way, if they forced AIB's to sign something that was illegal, they are still on the hook.  Just because they stop doing something that is anti trust after the fact is not remotely condoned as OK.

 

You don't get to break the law and then step away from it without getting punished, how ever little that punishment may be. 

You know as well as me that that's not how it works in reality. In reality contracts get burned after being shredded but the investment remain

[The Benjamins]

6 minutes ago, Razor01 said:

 

and that was what was in the contract, take what Kyle wrote with a huge grain of salt because what he wrote was a specific line in the contract and without the rest of the contract we have no DAMN idea what it means.  Not only that what he stated in the PCgamer video interview, totally contradicts what he stated in his article.  PC gamer interview he read a sentence that directly states AIB's must put nV products in separate brand lines.  They didn't need to use the primary brand for nV cards.  But the way Kyle wrote the article, "exclusive gaming brand" without that sentence he stated while reading, gave a totally different meaning.  Doesn't it?

 

So if AIB's made a new brand for nV cards, that will be their new exclusive gaming brand.

 

But for AIB's it was smarter to keep their current best gaming brand as nV's and put AMD's in another, since they make more money on nV card total sales.

The exclusive access to gaming branding is also illegal, due to both companies developing gaming GPU's so AIB must be able to label/brand them as such.

 

This is like if Honda contracted Dealers to brand ONLY Honda's as sports cars, so Benjamins Motors can't sell Porsche's as sports cars.

[The Benjamins]

3 minutes ago, Razor01 said:

 

 

They aren't/weren't restricting AMD products to consumers period.  AIB's just had to sell AMD products in another line.  Did AIB's stop selling AMD products?  I didn't see that happen did you?  Were the AIB's forced not to buy AMD products?  Didn't see that happen either, did you?

To be clear I am just saying what is legal or not, I don't know how much Nvidia is in the wrong or not. but this was not done correctly IMO.

[Razor01]

15 minutes ago, laminutederire said:

You know as well as me that that's not how it works in reality. In reality contracts get burned after being shredded but the investment remain

Then they are still liable then lol, stating the same thing I stated, just because the paper is out of the picture, doesn't change anything.

 

12 minutes ago, The Benjamins said:

To be clear I am just saying what is legal or not, I don't know how much Nvidia is in the wrong or not. but this was not done correctly IMO.

We are speculating on half truths and that specific part that was quoted in the article was absolutely wrong.

 

I think it is definitely fair for nV to force AIB's to have a sperate line for their products, it should have been done long ago, they should have had ei ASUS ROG and ASUS AREZ or what ever separate from each other from the get go.  They are still ASUS branded, but different sub brands for each IHV.

 

Most companies don't understand branding at all.  Look at AMD, they copy Intel's brands to create their brands, that is not good branding, because if Intel screws up and AMD is using similar CPU and motherboard names as Intel, Z2xx, Z3xx and others, x3, x5, x7, you have uneducated people out there thinking they mean the same thing.  Just because Intel is flying high and their brands have strong recognition doesn't mean AMD should follow suite and play the dumb follow the leader role.  They have good products that can stand toe for toe with Intel currently, make their own brands stick out and then they don't need to worry about anything Intel does.  If they believe they are capable of making leadership products, they should brand accordingly.

 

Brand control should be based on what a company wants to do with their products, not based on what the market conditions based on other competing companies brands and what it can do for them, the only way the later works is when your products or you feel your products are looked at as weak.

[Mooshi]

I love you Nvidia, but no one was buying your bullshit. Actual PC gamers know the difference between GeForce and Radeon cards and didn't need nor request this clusterfuck of whatever you claim was helping.

[Mooshi]

1 hour ago, Demonking said:

Gpp or no gpp it really didn't matter, cause the 1060 is sitting higher on the steam hardware survey than the RX 480 even though the 480 release before the 1060 with more vram at a cheaper price, yet people still bought the 1060 over it. Nvidia marketing is too strong,and most top YouTubers and streamers use Nvidia and have they PC specs below they streams, so people know what brand to buy already.

Did you suddenly forget miners ruining stock for the 480 and 580?

[laminutederire]

10 minutes ago, Razor01 said:

Then they are still liable then lol, stating the same thing I stated, just because the paper is out of the picture, doesn't change anything.

Ideally yes, but in practice money talks enough to make those dismissed if there is no strong evidence of it.

[Razor01]

Just now, Mooshi said:

Did you suddenly forget miners ruining stock for the 480 and 580?

Hmm it wasn't all mining that caused that man, mining was secondary issues, Its supply issues from nV and AMD, which all point to memory supply.  Mining compounded the issue, interestingly enough US which is a country where mining is less than other countries, is where prices went up more, Europe, Asia, didn't see those price hikes.