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

Mastering the Inner ...

Every trial lawyer has experienced it: the inner critic before opening statements, the surge of ange...

Key Trends Defining ...

Class action litigation continues to evolve rapidly in response to an innovative plaintiffs’ b...

Recognizing and Comb...

This one-hour CLE program examines the impact of implicit and systemic bias within the legal profess...

Freedom of Informati...

During this course, we will go over your rights under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) and Priv...

Thinking Like a Lawy...

Thinking Like a Lawyer, Prompting Like a Pro: Prompting Ethically, Securely, and Safely explores how...

When the Attorney Be...

This program addresses a gap no standard ethics CLE reaches: the psychology of what happens inside t...

Trial Starts Now: Wi...

Trial Starts Now: Winning the Final Six Months provides a comprehensive guide to the critical tasks ...

Scam I Am: Understan...

Cybercriminals increasingly target law firms, attorneys, legal staff, and their clients through soph...

How to Respond to Sh...

Adverse and derogatory information often has devastating effects on a contractor's ability to win co...

Winning Bad Faith Cl...

This CLE course will provide critical insight to counsel for insurers facing bad faith claims on how...