NVIDIA Pulling Plug on GPP

Dan_D said:
This isn't remotely close to being true. Had you been paying attention, you would have learned that non-compete agreements and brand exclusivity deals of all kinds were not only legal, but quite common in many industries. The reason NVIDIA pulled the plug on the GPP is because of the backlash it received in the wake of Kyle's article on the matter. The article got massive exposure with many sites linking to it and spreading the word about it. Although not illegal, the reaction to the GPP was extremely negative because of how people perceived the companies actions. It made NVIDIA look unnecessarily greedy.
Click to expand...

Maybe it could have used some Transparency? Nvidia can just release the whole GPP agreement to take away the sting from what Kyle wrote if anything their customers really do not care the GTX 970 proved this.
There is a thread in the videocard forum which has a boatload of people proclaiming that they can not be swayed not buying Nvidia.

Not to second guess the brilliant minds behind Nvidia business tactics was this the best they could come up with?
 
Dan_D said:
This isn't remotely close to being true. Had you been paying attention, you would have learned that non-compete agreements and brand exclusivity deals of all kinds were not only legal, but quite common in many industries. The reason NVIDIA pulled the plug on the GPP is because of the backlash it received in the wake of Kyle's article on the matter. The article got massive exposure with many sites linking to it and spreading the word about it. Although not illegal, the reaction to the GPP was extremely negative because of how people perceived the companies actions. It made NVIDIA look unnecessarily greedy.
Click to expand...

Thank you.. it's good to know in not the only one who thought that Kyle was over reactionary to the whole situation, nobody knows the exact reason behind of why the over reaction and overly concern with the matter.. that's the problem with big influencers in this industry, anything they speak any thought and every speech will be taken as sacred word and instantly will be viral, and that include a lot of disinformation.
 
Araxie said:
Thank you.. it's good to know in not the only one who thought that Kyle was over reactionary to the whole situation, nobody knows the exact reason behind of why the over reaction and overly concern with the matter.. that's the problem with big influencers in this industry, anything they speak any thought and every speech will be taken as sacred word and instantly will be viral, and that include a lot of disinformation.
Click to expand...
LOL! I guess if you read the full text of my first article you would see exactly why I had the reaction I did. Never once was anything that I stated as fact not true. PERIOD. Maybe you don't care about anticompetitive tactics being implemented in our community, but I certainly do. Still a lot more on this story to come out.
 
Araxie said:
Thank you.. it's good to know in not the only one who thought that Kyle was over reactionary to the whole situation, nobody knows the exact reason behind of why the over reaction and overly concern with the matter.. that's the problem with big influencers in this industry, anything they speak any thought and every speech will be taken as sacred word and instantly will be viral, and that include a lot of disinformation.
Click to expand...


lol. I am all for fighting misinformation. I never follow anyone or pay attention to anything that is designed to misrepresent or misguide anyone. KYLE did nothing of that. I know first hand how information is twisted. Just look at politics.

If KYLE did that I would first to call him out. KYLE is as fair as he could be. He makes it very clear in his articles. Very honest and discloses everything so you don’t see any bias. Far from mis information.

KYLE doesn’t represent alternative facts. He represents facts and full honesty.
 
Araxie said:
Thank you.. it's good to know in not the only one who thought that Kyle was over reactionary to the whole situation, nobody knows the exact reason behind of why the over reaction and overly concern with the matter.. that's the problem with big influencers in this industry, anything they speak any thought and every speech will be taken as sacred word and instantly will be viral, and that include a lot of disinformation.
Click to expand...
And I would suggest that Dan has not seen any of the documentation I have or has been exposed the interviews I have done with OEMs and AIBs. And I would again suggest there is more to the story that needs to come out as Dan is not fully informed on those events either.
 
I don't want to witness a Dan and Kyle breakup - I'm still in a depression over the Steve breakup. :-(
 
All the talk of Nvidia wasn't trying to stop AMD from selling cards ect ect is such silly stupid BS.

As Intel has been brought up as a justification for Nvidia somehow. To be completely 100% clear Intel never ever forced anyone to not sell AMD product either. They did however offer improved terms and marketing funds for PRIME product lines. In other words sell all the AMD you like but reserve your Premium brands for INTEL only. That is what was illegal, that is what the where slapped for. What Nvidia was doing is no different. Sell AMD all you like just don't you dare put that product in your superior high end "Gaming" brand with us. The intention is exactly the same... and just as illegal.

What Nvidia was doing is illegal there is no doubt at all. Trying to point to vague wording in a contract that doesn't exactly say do X or we'll hurt you, when the intention is clear is not a legal defense. Nvidias legal dept knows that. (if you doubt that just consider the Trump immigration issues right now... not trying to be political but what the courts have been looking at is his actual intentions not what he wrote on a piece of paper. Intentions matter more then words)

There really is no defense of Nvidia on this one. If their stated intentions of simply wanting brand clarity where indeed true. They could very easily have said sell Nvidia cards under Nvidia exclusive branding. Instead of demanding the AIBs current Gaming brands. They didn't as that would be of course expensive... costly in terms of sales... and in general a stupid idea. Demanding on penalty instead that the AIBs or the AIBs other suppliers incur those costs so that Nvidia can reap the benefits. Is so illegal that to be frank I would be shocked if NV legal was ever on board to begin with. I imagine NV management went ahead with the GPP program against legal council to begin with. (any lawyer willing to say yes this isn't really legal and this could potentially cost you tens of millions in fines down the road... but wth go ahead anyway. Is neither a good lawyer or an ethical one. Frankly giving such advice would be the type of thing you could actually be disbarred over.)
 
Last edited:
Dan_D said:
I have no idea what the fuck that means.
Click to expand...

Whataboutism (also known as whataboutery) is a variant of the tu quoque logical fallacy that attempts to discredit an opponent's position by charging them with hypocrisy without directly refuting or disproving their argument, which is particularly associated with Soviet and Russian propaganda.

I think MrXL is misapplying it in this situation. Claims of whataboutism is almost as over used as claims of strawman.

you are refuting people positions, while also giving examples of other industry players that engage in the same action, cautioning people to be sceptical of any company that attempts to claim the moral high ground.
 
Aireoth said:
Claims of whataboutism is almost as over used as claims of strawman.
Click to expand...

However whataboutism claims are very easy to make because everyone is guilty of something. There isn't a large tech company, or large company in general, that hasn't faced anti-consumer and anti-competitive issues prompted by greed. It's easy to deflect from the specific issue at hand by pointing out the countless others. I'm not saying that's what Dan was doing, I don't think he was, it's important to have a historical perspective on these long and reoccurring problems with large companies. However apathy becomes an issue. If everyone is doing it and always will, what can be done? You have to look at a problem on its own without tying the sins of the whole world to it otherwise the particular issue gets obfuscated and much harder to rectify.
 
Dan_D said:
Evidently, I haven't been clear on my thoughts on this matter.

Nope and I never claimed to.
Click to expand...
And I never claimed you did. My point, as I exactly started was that you have no more direct information on this than any reader here. Given that you write for HardOCP I think people might assume differently, and that is my point. Sorry I did not make that clear.
 
Pretty telling on some of these posters who are STILL defending NVidia about a program that NVidia created, yet NVidia themselves never attempted to defend or clarify... not even once.

Does it even matter if GPP is / was illegal? Even if it was "good for the consumers" as NVidia claimed, how do you feel about how easy they gave up on you? Either it wasn't beneficial to the consumer or it was and NVidia doesn't care enough to fight on your behalf. Let me know how them warm fuzzies feel, because I couldn't tell you.
 
heatlesssun said:
However whataboutism claims are very easy to make because everyone is guilty of something. There isn't a large tech company, or large company in general, that hasn't faced anti-consumer and anti-competitive issues prompted by greed. It's easy to deflect from the specific issue at hand by pointing out the countless others. I'm not saying that's what Dan was doing, I don't think he was, it's important to have a historical perspective on these long and reoccurring problems with large companies. However apathy becomes an issue. If everyone is doing it and always will, what can be done? You have to look at a problem on its own without tying the sins of the whole world to it otherwise the particular issue gets obfuscated and much harder to rectify.
Click to expand...

Which is why whataboutism is a useful and effective tool of propaganda, though it is no easier to make a whataboutism claim then a strawman or ad hominem. Edit Add: I would argue that those three, the trifecta if you will, are the easiest logical fallacies to use, and many do it without even realizing it.
 
Tweak155 said:
Pretty telling on some of these posters who are STILL defending NVidia about a program that NVidia created, yet NVidia themselves never attempted to defend or clarify... not even once.

Does it even matter if GPP is / was illegal? Even if it was "good for the consumers" as NVidia claimed, how do you feel about how easy they gave up on you? Either it wasn't beneficial to the consumer or it was and NVidia doesn't care enough to fight on your behalf. Let me know how them warm fuzzies feel, because I couldn't tell you.
Click to expand...
The only reason Nvidia put up their GPP blog page was because I informed them that I was publishing my GPP article.
 
I would guess that the Arez brand will stay. You will likely see Strix AMD and NVIDIA cards in the future, both under the ROG brand. In the past the very high end AMD cards were Ares, and NVIDIA were Mars, again under ROG. I think we will see that going forward...but with a Z.
 
Would be funny if they dropped off all nvidia cards to AREZ and put Radeon on ROG. I know they would never do it but would be a nice middle finger launch for the new cards. :p
 
Dan_D said:
Evidently, I haven't been clear on my thoughts on this matter. First and foremost, while I acknowledge that anti-compete agreements and exclusive contracts are commonplace in many industries, I do not agree with them in principle. I also do not know what provisions or clauses are in the GPP contracts and without that information I have to speak in general terms and that's all I've done.



I never claimed to be informed on that subject, nor were my comments intended to make it sound like you were overreacting to anything. All I've ever said is that anti-competitive agreements and exclusive contracts are common place in the industry. I figured there was more to the story which caused you to write that article in the first place. My comments were always in response to people demonizing NVIDIA while pretending that other companies are benevolent. Some people have vilified NVIDIA while continuing to buy Intel processors or iPhones made by Foxconn. While I don't know the depth of the GPP agreements, I doubt NVIDIA has matched those earlier examples for morally questionable decisions.



It's not like that. Again, my responses have all been about putting things in perspective for people demonizing NVIDIA while ignoring what other companies have done or are doing now.



Nope and I never claimed to.
Click to expand...

I think Kyle was trying to let people know so they don't judge you without knowing all the info. From Kyle's statement I never felt he was trying to say you did or did not or speak on your behalf. His statements felt like he was setting right expectations for the other readers, that's all. So they don't assume things.
 
bigdogchris said:
Would explain why they just bullshitted their way through it with the "transparency" claims. They never wanted to be honest about it.
Click to expand...
I reached out to NVIDIA weeks before I published the GPP article. They were one of the first calls I made in order to start investigating it.

We had a couple of back and forths, and I got standard PR answers which you saw on the GPP page. A week or so went by and NVIDIA asked me this.

"What are your big concerns with the program? You mentioned ‘bad for consumers’ how. What are your primary issues you have with the program?"

This was my reply.

_______________________________________________
From: Kyle Bennett [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Thursday, February 22, 2018 3:02 PM
To: XXXXXX [email protected]>
Subject: RE: any update


Didn't you tell me, after you told me I would be cut off if I wrote this article, that no one over there had any concern about this?


Also, you know my concern on this XXXXX. I think it is going to greatly, and negatively, impact consumer choice in the AIB and OEM computer market. Consumer choice is going to be decimated. Looking at the program guidelines, I truly think that is what will happen and is where my concern lies.


This is a big story, but it all goes much further than consumer choice, however it does not matter to me on a personal level beyond that. I am just being my tech journalistic self, which I have to do from time to time. And after the story I wrote about AMD in 2016 on the Intel/AMD deal and the politics attached to that, this story is going to get a LOT of exposure now that HardOCP's credibility has been returned, if not exalted since all the truth came out on that. I am making sure all my I's are dotted and T's crossed and have already prepared my lawyers with what I need to win any sort of lawsuit that might come out of this. They feel I am on solid ground and have signed off on moving forward.


There will certainly be follow up stories written by many websites though, that have a much better grasp of the financial side of this.


I would highly, actually, almost assuredly suggest that GPP is going to open NVIDIA to lawsuits from AMD and Intel. That alone is going to cause NVIDIA to shoulder financial burden. The OEMs and AIBs will not sue NVIDIA, but they will be deposed for years on this and the concerns about that are already being voiced in a very big way. Intel paying $1B+ for anticompetitive practices is one thing, but Jensen having to explain it to your shareholders is going to be a very big deal in terms of NVIDIA stock price. I have to guess that AMD and Intel's latest foray into business together has gotten Jensen worried enough to roll the bones though.


It is my opinion that GPP is not a good business plan for a company that is dominating in terms of both product performance and market share.


As for the timeline for my story, I am wrestling with timing on its publication currently. Publishing before GPP contracts are signed or after GPP contracts are signed? I still have not decided on that.

___________

Kyle Bennett

Editor-in-Chief

HardOCP.com
___________________________________________

After that mail, NVIDIA would not longer speak to me on the topic, and has not responded to any correspondence since. Transparency?
 
Last edited:
Asus should produce a bunch of 1060 or 70 Arez cards just for giggles. Ok they won't but it would be pretty funny.
 
Dan_D said:
I never claimed to be informed on that subject, nor were my comments intended to make it sound like you were overreacting to anything. All I've ever said is that anti-competitive agreements and exclusive contracts are common place in the industry. I figured there was more to the story which caused you to write that article in the first place. My comments were always in response to people demonizing NVIDIA while pretending that other companies are benevolent. Some people have vilified NVIDIA while continuing to buy Intel processors or iPhones made by Foxconn.
Click to expand...
Two wrongs don't make a right. And Nvidia's wrongs tend to be among the smelliest.
 
Meeho said:
Two wrongs don't make a right. And Nvidia's wrongs tend to be among the smelliest.
Click to expand...

I never claimed that it did and that's hardly the case.

I've said it before, people need to keep things in perspective. I'd wager almost every single multi-billion dollar publicly traded company has done things or engages in business practices people would find distasteful or worse if they were privy to all their dealings. Intel and others have likely done far worse and people still buy products from those companies without a second thought. I'm not saying the particulars of the GPP aren't bad, but Intel has practically set the standard and raised the bar on anti-competitive business practices in this industry. No one seems to give two squirts of piss about that when Intel's primary competition is so far behind its almost laughable. In fact, no one seemed to care what Intel did until AMD had a product out that was faster than Intel's Pentium IV and Pentium D processors. No one gave a shit when AMD's Phenom and aptly named Bulldozer were over half a decade behind Intel on the performance front and pulled damn near double the power for what little performance they had. Many people who hate Intel bought those processors with no thought to Intel's reputation in the industry or for the tactics that kept AMD from succeeding despite having a better product in the Athlon 64 and Athlon X2.

When people tell you that the GPP won't make them stop buying NVIDIA, I suspect its much the same thing. They'll need far more detail on the subject before they'd be willing to buy AMD's inferior GPUs over NVIDIAs. That's the camp I'm in. I'm sure the details about the GPP are interesting and perhaps even repulsive but it would take a lot for me to switch to team red over it. I'm also not going to pretend that AMD wouldn't be guilty of similar behavior were it in the market position to act in a similar fashion.
 
Last edited:
ChadD said:
Asus should produce a bunch of 1060 or 70 Arez cards just for giggles. Ok they won't but it would be pretty funny.
Click to expand...

AREZ SUPER AIRBOOST TITANIUM FIRE 1080ti with red PCB and bright green cooler and the loudest inefficient fuckin blower you can find.

Edit
Oh and a middle finger on the warranty void sticker... the Asus way
 
Dan_D said:
I never claimed that it did and that's hardly the case.

I've said it before, people need to keep things in perspective. I'd wager almost every single multi-billion dollar publicly traded company has done things or engages in business practices people would find distasteful or worse if they were privy to all their dealings. Intel and others have likely done far worse and people still buy products from those companies without a second thought. I'm not saying the particulars of the GPP aren't bad, but Intel has practically set the standard and raised the bar on anti-competitive business practices in this industry. No one seems to give two squirts of piss about that when Intel's primary competition is so far behind its almost laughable. In fact, no one seemed to care what Intel did until AMD had a product out that was faster than Intel's Pentium IV and Pentium D processors. No one gave a shit when AMD's Phenom and aptly named Bulldozer were over half a decade behind Intel on the performance front and pulled damn near double the power for what little performance they had. Many people who hate Intel bought those processors with no thought to Intel's reputation in the industry or for the tactics that kept AMD from succeeding despite having a better product in the Athlon 64 and Athlon X2.

When people tell you that the GPP won't make them stop buying NVIDIA, I suspect its much the same thing. They'll need far more detail on the subject before they'd be willing to buy AMD's inferior GPUs over NVIDIAs. That's the camp I'm in. I'm sure the details about the GPP are interesting and perhaps even repulsive but it would take a lot for me to switch to team red over it. I'm also not going to pretend that AMD wouldn't be guilty of similar behavior were it in the market position to act in a similar fashion.
Click to expand...


I agree, no one has to stop buying nvidia but whats wrong is wrong. But to say AMD would something similar had they been in similar position. I think that is too much speculation on your part. Nvidia had no reason to do this, with the performance they have and market share they have. To say AMD wouldn't be guilty of same behavior is sort of very speculative. The honest answer is we don't know what AMD would do since they are not in that position.

I honestly have not seen many people here saying abandon Nvidia. But I am proud of those people that call it what it is regardless of what they buy. That is the entire point, Nvidia never needed to do this since they have an amazing product.
 
Nvidia reminds me of EA, they always shoot themselves in the foot.

It's sad to see morons on other forums call you a AMD shill for publishing the article about Nvidia anti-consumer GPP.
 
Sim said:
Nvidia reminds me of EA, they always shoot themselves in the foot.

It's sad to see morons on other forums call you a AMD shill for publishing the article about Nvidia anti-consumer GPP.
Click to expand...
Kyle and long-time readers are used to it. Just two years ago Kyle was being called a NVIDIA shill for the things he published about AMD.
 
Tbh I wouldn't talk to you after that email either. Once you bring up stock price, investors, the CEO , lawyers, is when companies stop talking.
 
We owe KYLE a big thank you for taking down corporate blackmail. Has anyone noticed that GPU's are returning to MSRP except for 1070/1060?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top