How is antitrust law the source of that duty? There are all sorts of things that might rise to the level of a business tort but aren't an antitrust violation.
From an economic perspective, what's the difference if they make it an explicit policy or not? It seems to me if you concede they could refuse to cross SGC cards without violating the antitrust laws, then by the same token they could say they would cross them but then not do it. Sure. maybe one seems more underhanded or distasteful or sleazy, but so what, the economic effect is the same so the antitrust analysis which concerns itself with economic effect should be the same. Either way, the bottom line is that they don't cross SGC cards. It's not an antitrust issue IMO. Maybe the submitters get screwed because they pay on false pretenses, but that has nothing to do with SGC's potential claim.
One other thing I alluded to earlier. SGC would be insane to want to publicize that PSA wouldn't cross its cards. It makes SGC look bad on multiple levels.
__________________
Net 54-- the discussion board where people resent discussions. 
My avatar is a sketch by my son who is an art school graduate. Some of his sketches and paintings are at
https://www.jamesspaethartwork.com/
Last edited by Peter_Spaeth; 05-22-2019 at 09:52 PM.
|
05-22-2019, 09:28 PM
Similar Threads
Threaded Mode