Joint Ventures Antitrust Primer; Case Study -- When Restraints on JV Members are Lawful but Price-Confidentiality Requirements Imposed on the JV's Customer Prevent Comparison of Prices

05 Mar , 2024

To register for the upcoming live webinar, please Click Here

The purpose of this course is to provide a primer about joint ventures.  First, what they are and why they formed.  Next, the course will explain the antitrust implications of joint ventures, via examination of the relevant statutes, case law and agency guidelines.   The course will focus on restraints imposed collectively on the venture members - - most importantly, what attributes make them illegal or not. 

The course then turns to a previously published examination of a series of joint ventures: Wall Street syndicates for private underwritings in excess of $100 million. The course notes that a small oligopoly of commercial and investment banks dominates the arranging and underwriting of loans and bonds for publicly traded companies, and that each underwriting is performed by a syndicate that constitutes a joint venture of competitors.  Further, that each syndicate requires the borrower to agree not to disclose the syndicate’s fee, an obligation that requires not just violation of the securities laws, but constitutes a price-related restraint of each joint venture at issue.  The course concludes that the series of price-related restraints compelling price confidentiality impacts the market for the fees in question by preventing customers to compare them, or show them to competitors in fee negotiations.

A quote of interest from the underlying Article, explained in more detail during the seminar: 

“One leading securities law expert has opined that ‘the failure to file these agreements suggests that it is the ‘custom and practice’ of Wall Street banks to violate the securities laws by directing customers to keep documents relating to their fees confidential”. 

Also, on reviewing the article, the authors of a 2020 Article , “Collusion in Markets with Syndication,” commented that “[t]his is great. It seems like the fees are known internally through the network of banks, so they can monitor compliance with the collusive agreement, but not known externally, so it is hard for a new entrant to figure out the best way to undercut the collusive agreement.”

 

To register for the upcoming live webinar, please Click Here

More Webcasts

Complying with the M...

This course will provide a detailed overview of the Medicare Secondary Payer act as well as provide ...

Best Behavior: Effec...

This program will address the ethical obligations of Lawyer Advocates representing clients in arbitr...

Identifying and Miti...

This program provides attorneys with a practical examination of how legal, regulatory, and liability...

Freediving Through F...

Most legal professionals are operating in survival mode whether they realize it or not. Not crisis-l...

Real Lessons for Law...

This program, conducted by a seasoned litigation and trial lawyer, will emphasize what litigators ca...

Cybersecurity Compli...

This course analyzes federal contractor cyber security obligations under the Federal Acquisition Reg...

Rethinking Harm in C...

This program introduces psychosocial evaluations as a valuable tool in civil litigation, particularl...

Communication, Trust...

Effective representation depends on trust, communication, and responsiveness, yet these can break do...

Artificial Intellige...

Join us for Part 2 of a program tailored for attorneys seeking a better understanding of the ongoing...

Generative AI for Li...

Explore the transformative potential of generative AI in modern litigation. “Generative AI for...