Lotto, pick quick games, right! Genesis 11:4–9, As the King James version of the Bible puts it: The G-- said, “If as one people speaking the same language they have begun to do this, then nothing they plan to do will be impossible for them. 7 Come, let us go down and confuse their language so they will not understand each other.” Genesis 11:4–9. ... The Flesch-Kincade Index, The Flesch/Flesch–Kincaid readability tests are readability tests designed to indicate comprehension difficulty when reading a passage of contemporary academic English. There are two tests, the Flesch Reading Ease, and the Flesch–Kincaid Grade Level. Although they use the same core measures (word length and sentence length), they have different weighting factors. The results of the two tests correlate approximately inversely. ... Lifes Trinity - Plus: Q. So in order for … the firms to carry out an agreement to achieve the same weighted average price for their units … over a period of time, what type of information would they need to be checking by reports on numbers - exchanges? A. They would need to be price check exchanging information … information about the [unit] volumes that were sold at various prices, including when they are on promotion, of all of those item prices. A. To calculate an average weighted price, because thats inherent in a weighted average is something about [unit] volumes and quantities. … Q. Now, you cant, of course, see the [unit] volume sold just by going into a … store and checking prices, can you? A. No, you cant. C) Over All Revenue Pool/Dollar Share Allocations A. IRI and AC Nielsen, “They get scan data, crunch it and…in fact, furnish it back in reports that state members’ relative … unit and dollar movement.” A. Firm Cartels dont like price dissimilarity, cartels like price uniformity. A. Firm Cartels … like everything done in a neat, tidy package. A. Thats why you … hear the term price fixing, you fix the price. … A. So the key think is not so much whether the price is high or low. A. The key thing is not whether demand is elastic or inelastic. A. Concentration is not the critical variable. The Ultra Is IRI and A.C. Nielsen Contracts Numbers - To Monitor Trinity “Points” or “Spreads” Israel v. Cartel Economist Ken Elzinga under oath at trial page 3937:12-18. Israel v. Cartel Economist Ken Elzinga under oath at trial page 3938:4-7. Israel v. Larry Del Santo under oath at deposition (video tapped), Lucretia and many others have it, at page 47:16-48:11. The Clandestine Government’s economic expert, Kenneth Elzinga, under oath at trial page 3941:16-24. The Clandestine Government’s economic expert, Kenneth Elzinga, under oath at trial pages 3931:1-3932:6. Colleagues, Due to a big void in public, student and client comprehension of simple price economic tools that govern how to identify our chronic up-charge or “Price-Up” problem, this rule based summary provides streamlined clarity. Short examples are attached. Most have received some notice about a public overcharge class case, whether spun as price fixing, breach of contract, securities fraud or whatever. The common rule used to arrive at any “overcharge number” is elementary: you simply ask for and get the “overhead costs, markup and basic pricing” papers. It’s a basic contract disclosure. The American Bar Association authored this instruction on this easy subject: The “Papers”, The “Reasonable Revenues” The “but-for” price is identified by conducting a “cost estimate” of the “competitive price,” which numbers are “subtracted from the actual prices” to determine the illegal up-charge or damages. It is axiomatic that this process requires a “cost analysis.” Indeed, common law specifically requires a review of the cost papers to determine what the price would have been but for the illegal markup or conspiracy.” The measure of overcharge damages … in price fixing cases is the up-charge multiplied by the relevant purchase quantity. Simply put, the up-charge depends on the difference between the actual price paid and the competitive price, or the price that would have been charged absent the alleged illegal agreement. The Up-Charge Numbers It is axiomatic that this process requires a “cost analysis.” It is axiomatic, as the American Bar correctly notes, because “the process” requires “measuring costs” in order to comply with the sole, applicable to all things sold, law of price: It All Fuses Back to Correct Pricing Correct Pricing, “Add up your unit costs, divide by the number of units you hope to sell and set one price accordingly.” The “independent cost study” is not just part of a reasonable endeavor to estimate a fair compensation, it determines the presumed validity or invalidity of the price attempted to be charged. Prices charged or attempted are not valid unless it would have been impracticable or extremely difficult to fix the actual price … and the seller had made a reasonable cost study endeavor to estimate a fair average compensation …. Absent either of these elements, the price provision in the customer agreement…is void …. ABA Section of Antitrust Law, Proving Antitrust Damages: Legal and Economic Issues, at page 215 (2nd Ed. 2010). ABA Section of Antitrust Law, Proving Antitrust Damages: Legal and Economic Issues, at page 214 (2nd Ed. 2010). ABA Section of Antitrust Law, Proving Antitrust Damages: Legal and Economic Issues, at page 202 (2nd Ed. 2010). ABA Section of Antitrust Law, Proving Antitrust Damages: Legal and Economic Issues, at page 215 (2nd Ed. 2010). Competitive Strategy, at page 242 (Michael E. Porter Free Press 1980). Garrett v. Coast & Southern Fed. Sav. & Loan Assn. (1973) 9 Cal.3d 731, 738-739. Garrett v. Coast & Southern Fed. Sav. & Loan Assn. (1973) 9 Cal.3d 731, 738-739. Garrett v. Coast & Southern Fed. Sav. & Loan Assn. (1973) 9 Cal.3d 731, 738-739. All Point Pricing. All Interest Pricing. Breach, Void, Bank Now! Libor, Londons Bank Barclay, JP Morgan, 100% Take It or Leave It Stated another way, it is a standard form contract (sometimes referred to as adhesive or boilerplate) between two parties where the terms and conditions of the contract are set by one of the parties, and the other party is placed in a take it or leave it position with little or no ability to negotiate terms more favorable to it. Special Scrutiny The concept of contract “obligation” and adhesion originated in French civil law; it was placed in the U.S. Constitution’s “obligation of contracts” clause. Little commentary was made on it until the Harvard Law Review published an influential article by Edwin W. Patterson in 1919. Thereafter, it was finally adopted by most American courts, especially after California’s “Grateful to Almighty God” Court endorsed adhesion analysis in 1962. For a contract to be treated as a contract of adhesion, it must be presented on a standard form on a take it or leave it basis, and give one party no ability to negotiate because of their unequal bargaining position. The special scrutiny given to contracts of adhesion can be performed in a number of ways: • If the term was outside the reasonable expectations of the person who did not write the contract, and if the parties were contracting on an unequal information basis, then it will not be enforceable. Against The Maker Contra proferentem (Latin: against the offeror), also known as interpretation against the draftsman, is a contract interpretation doctrine proving as follows: where a promise, agreement or term is ambiguous, the preferred meaning is one that works against the interests of the party who made or fixed up the wording or term. The doctrine is often applied to situations involving standardized contracts or where the parties are of unequal bargaining power, but is applicable to other cases. The Law of Illegal Contracts In Verizon v. Law Offices, just like in Goldfarb, referencing millennium old common law, the U.S. Supreme Court recently reminded federal citizens, “[T]he supreme economic evil is price economic or so called contract consideration collusion. Black’s Law Dictionary, at page 273 (Abridged 8th Edition, 2005). Steven v. Fidelity & Casualty Co., 58 Cal. 2d 862, 882 n.10 (1962) (explaining history of concept). Section 211, American Law Institutes Restatement (2nd) of Contracts. American Law Institute (1981). “The Scope of Contractual Obligation,” Restatement Second of Contracts 2, St. Paul, Minnesota: American Law Institute Publishers. § 206. Verizon Communications, Inc. v. Law offices of Curtis v. Trinko, LLP, 540 U.S. 398 (2004). https://youtube/watch?v=cSnkWzZ7ZAA
Posted on: Tue, 09 Dec 2014 10:57:29 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015