Precision Parts Corporation and Aligned Gears, Inc, are competitors selling certain machine parts that are otherwise generally unattainable in their geographic market. This market includes the states of Minnesota, North Dakota, and South Dakota
Precision Parts and Aligned Gears agree that Precision Parts will no longer sell in Minnesota and that Aligned Gears will no longer sell in North and South Dakota. Have Precision Parts and Aligned Gears violated any antitrust law? If so, which one? Explain. If they had divided their market by type of customer rather than geographic are, would the result be the same? Why or why not?
Precision Parts and Aligned Gears have violated antitrust law. The major antitrust law they have violated is the Sherman Act, Section 1.
Precision Parts and Aligned Gears are engaged in interstate commerce, and the agreement to divide marketing territories between them is a market division-a contract in restraint of trade. This sort of concerted action reduces the costs to the competitors and allows each of them to increase the prices of the parts sold in their respective territories.
The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) could seek criminal penalties against each corporation, including fines and imprisonment. In addition, the DOJ could institute civil proceedings to restrain this conduct.
If these competitors had divided their market by type of customers-retailers and wholesalers, or manufacturers and distributors, for example-the result would most likely be the same.
?
You might also like to view...
At the start of 20x4, Colonial Designs' Allowance for Uncollectibles balance is €120,000 . During 20x4, Colonial Designs' credit sales were €5,000,000; of this amount, it expected 2% will become uncollectible. During 20x4, Colonial Designs wrote off €70,000 of accounts receivable. At the end of 20x4, Colonial Designs estimates, based on an aging of accounts, that the ending balance in the
Allowance for Uncollectibles should be €130,000 . a. Allowance for Uncollectibles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80,000 Accounts Receivable, net . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80,000 b. Bad Debt Expense . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70,000 Accounts Receivable, net . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70,000 c. Allowance for Uncollectibles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70,000 Bad Debt Expense. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70,000 d. Bad Debt Expense . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80,000 Allowance for Uncollectibles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80,000 e. Allowance for Uncollectibles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80,000 Accounts Receivable, gross. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80,000
Human services leaders rarely seek to consider the values of different community populations.
a. True b. False
An ____________________ is a list of topics that will be discussed during the meeting.
Fill in the blank(s) with the appropriate word(s).
Compare and contrast lending and ownership investments
What will be an ideal response?