3 ms·
Why would VC firms meeting and agreeing to change terms for their clients in lock-step not be collusion whereas if the brick and mortar banks did, it would be?
by dschobel 16y ago
Why would VC firms meeting and agreeing to change terms for their clients in lock-step not be collusion whereas if the brick and mortar banks did, it would be? (and was: http://redtape.msnbc.com/2008/04/did-banks-collu.html http://redtape.msnbc.com/2008/04/did-banks-collu.html)
- j_baker 16y agoIt turns out that banks are exempt from antitrust laws: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_antitrust_law#Exemptions_to_antitrust_laws http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_antitrust_law#Exe...
- dschobel 16y agoYou're referring to the Edge Act [1][2] and that only applies to US banks' foreign operations (their subsidiaries, to be specific). It is still very much illegal for them to collude against US customers. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edge_Act http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edge_Act [2] http://www.answers.com/topic/edge-act-corporation http://www.answers.com/topic/edge-act-corporation