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

MODERATED - The Burn...

If there is one word we heard during our journey through the pandemic and continue to hear more than...

Aligning Your Legal ...

Aligning Your Legal Career with Your Values, explores the profound impact of values alignment on ind...

Patent Eligibility f...

This program examines critical 2025-2026 developments in patent eligibility for software and AI inve...

Boundaries and Burno...

Boundaries and Burnout: The Hidden Crisis in Law is a 60-minute California MCLE Competence Credit pr...

Reinventing Project ...

The landscape of global finance is undergoing a seismic shift as traditional assets migrate to the b...

Intellectual Propert...

This program will address some of the most common intellectual property (IP) issues that arise in co...

Freediving Through F...

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

Depositions: Say tha...

In this seminar, we will talk about the process of taking a deposition, why you should (or should no...

Litigation Series: F...

This program provides a detailed examination of the Black Market Peso Exchange (BMPE), one of the mo...

Best Behavior: Effec...

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