> That's definitely untrue. I think he meant Efficient Market Hypothesis, which could be posed as a strategy. > That's also pretty untrue, or so pedantic as t

> That's definitely untrue. I think he meant Efficient Market Hypothesis, which could be posed as a strategy. > That's also pretty untrue, or so pedantic as to be meaningless. It's still collusion. > You're really stuck applying Econ 101 in one of the worst places, retail. This is Game Theory, not Econ 101. I also think it's one of the best places. > But sellers on Amazon? C'mon man, sellers coordinate prices via implicit information exchange on Amazon in a way that, if they were allowed to, they would just collude straightforwardly to do so. I've seen it happen. I've even seen collusion with online reviews on there.