Quote:
Originally Posted by stonetools
If this was conclusive eviodence thatthe publishers were and acting together to fix prices on particuklar books , the DOJ wouldnt be in settlement negotiations. Its the ONLY piece of evidence that indicates collusion.
|
Yes they would. Settlements save time & taxpayer money, and are *often* used in cases of "we know we have you pinned; would you like to cut down on the expense of a trial and the randomness of a judge's assigned penalties, and make a deal with us for reasonable penalties?"
Quote:
|
There are lots of industry wide agreements out there in countless industies. Are they asll evidencve of collusion?
|
No. But agreements all entered at the same time, among supposed competitors, who made public statements that the public was getting things too cheap--not too cheap for them to make a profit, just too cheap for them to be comfortable with the sales--is evidence of collusion. The combination of "we want to raise prices for the end user" (which was publicly stated, more than once) and the change of an entire business model to support the forced higher prices, is also evidence.
It's not proof, hence the investigation.
Feel free to give examples of other industries working together with a supplier to change their business model in order to raise end-user prices.