Market Farming

["jay gee" <jgj23 AT mindspring.com>]

Rick Williams wrote:
>>>>
 jay gee wrote:
 
 > Need I explain further?
 
 The explanation does not deal with the issue that the courts have to decide.
 Which has been whether or not the consolidation hurts the consumer. And
 certainly we are talking about financial issues in terms of whether or not
 the product cost will increase or not.
 
 Are you saying that the other consequences are going to be used by the
 courts or that they should be used by the courts?
<<<<

This is not a legal or jurisprudence discussion list as I understand it.

Nor did I interpret the contents of the post I responded to as
being a legal argument for promoting or disallowing meat
packing industry consolidation.  Are you attempting to shift
the discussion from the harsh realities of industry consolidation
to some esoteric nonsense because you have no good response
to what I have said?

Industry consolidations occur in response to bad management
or sea changes in markets.  When poor management brings
about industrial consolidation it has typically been in response
to one successful competitor innovating and making it very difficult
for the others in the business to compete.  A well known, non
agricultural example is Andrew Carnegie's steel business being
acquired by J.P. Morgan, whose only other choice was to
bankrupt the steel companies he controlled.

So the short answer Rick, is Yes.  Courts have to rely on
factual consequences as much as any other reason when
they look at industry consolidations.  But as the Microsoft
cases should have taught you, lawyers and judges are
among the first to dismiss real world consequences of
undesirable corporate behavior as mere aberrations
rather than endorsed behaviors.


Jay Gee
not a farmer -- but interested in farming