Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
In neo-classical economics, price fixing is inefficient. The anti-competitive agreement by producers to fix prices above the market price transfers some of the consumer surplus to those producers and also results in a deadweight loss. International price fixing by private entities can be prosecuted under the antitrust laws of many countries.
The suit was filed because of price fixing and other allegedly anti-competitive trade practices in the credit card industry. In February 2019, U.S. District Court Judge Margo K. Brodie approved a settlement in the case that amounted to $5.54 billion. [1]
Dumping, also known as predatory pricing, is a commercial strategy for which a company sells a product at an aggressively low price in a competitive market at a loss.A company with large market share and the ability to temporarily sacrifice selling a product or service at below average cost can drive competitors out of the market, [1] after which the company would be free to raise prices for a ...
A federal district court in February 1961 fined 29 electrical manufacturing companies and 45 individuals a total of $1,924,500 for violating the antitrust laws by fixing prices and rigging bids on heavy electrical equipment, some of which was sold to the Government. [46] (See also: Allis-Chalmers § 1960s and 1970s.)
Competition law is the field of law that promotes or seeks to maintain market competition by regulating anti-competitive conduct by companies. [ 1 ] [ 2 ] Competition law is implemented through public and private enforcement. [ 3 ]
Walmart’s Mexico subsidiary said Friday it plans to appeal a $4.6 million fine for alleged anti-competitive practices involving suppliers. Walmart de Mexico said in a statement that it had ...
The rule of reason is a legal doctrine used to interpret the Sherman Antitrust Act, one of the cornerstones of United States antitrust law.While some actions like price-fixing are considered illegal per se, other actions, such as possession of a monopoly, must be analyzed under the rule of reason and are only considered illegal when their effect is to unreasonably restrain trade.
In 1982 the U.S. Department of Justice Merger Guidelines introduced the SSNIP test as a new method for defining markets and for measuring market power directly. In the EU it was used for the first time in the Nestlé/Perrier case in 1992 and has been officially recognized by the European Commission in its "Commission's Notice for the Definition of the Relevant Market" in 1997.