Posted By:
CoreyRS.hanusJK,
My Bill Gates example was not meant to be exclusive. I used it to describe a scenario that would be okay. However, I didn't mean to imply that there could not be other fact patterns I also would have no problem with. You had interpreted my earlier post to say that a means test is all that is necessary to find illegal collusion. I gave the Gates example to rebut that interpretation.
With that said, though, from your posts I do get the sense that at some point our views might diverge as to when forming a group would constitute illegal collusion. For example, if the sole motivation for the members to join is simply to save money by not going head-to-head, and indeed in the absence of the group each member would bid aggressively on the lot with the intent to keep all or most of the cards in it, I think that could be a legal no no. And, correct me if I'm wrong, but I think you're saying it would be okay.
EDITED for spelling