What Is The Name Of An Agreement Among Firms To Charge One Price For The Same Good
If the price of a new supplier drops significantly after the offer, some suppliers may have agreed and the new supplier has forced them to compete.  Agreements are illegal in the United States, Canada and most of the EU under antitrust laws, but implicit agreements in the form of price leadership and unspoken agreements are still ongoing. Several examples of collusion in the United States are as follows: individuals or organizations can sue for triple damages for breaches of cartels and, by law, recover legal fees and costs of prosecuting a case.    If the above case is also contrary to the False Claims Act, in addition to the Sherman Act, individuals may also bring a civil action on behalf of the United States under the Qui Tam provision of the False Claims Act. Imagine that both companies place the same prices above marginal costs. Each company would receive half the market at a higher than marginal price. However, a slight drop in prices would allow a company to win the entire market. As a result, both companies are tempted to reduce prices as much as possible. However, it would be irrational to praise marginal costs, because the company would lose out. As a result, both companies will lower prices until they reach the marginal cost ceiling. On this model, a duopoly will result in a result that corresponds exactly to what prevails in full competition. The result of corporate strategies is a Nash balance – a pair or strategy where neither company can increase profits by unilaterally changing the price. In October 2005, The Korean company Samsung pleaded guilty to conspiring with other companies, including Infineon and Hynix Semiconductor, to set the price of DRAM (Dynamic Access Memory) chips.
Samsung was the third company to be indicted under the international cartel and fined US$300 million, the second-largest fine in U.S. history. International airfares have set their prices in accordance with IATA, a practice for which there is a specific exception for cartels and abuse of dominant position.  [best source required] In March 2018, the European Commission fined eight companies, most of them Japanese, 254 million euros for exploiting an illegal price agreement on capacitors.  The two main players were Nippon Chemi-Con, fined 98 million euros, and Hitachi Chemical, fined 18 million euros.  The objective of pricing may be to reduce the price of a product to the maximum, which generally results in profits for all sellers, but may also be aimed at fixing, fixing, fixing, cancelling or stabilizing prices. The defining characteristic of pricing is any agreement on price, whether explicit or tacit. Gambling theory suggests that cartels are inherently unstable because the behaviour of cartel members is a prisoner`s dilemma. Any cartel member would be able to make a higher profit, at least in the short term, by breaking the agreement (a larger quantity produced or sold at a lower price) than it would under the agreement. However, if the deal collapses because of resignations, companies will return to competition, profits would go down and things would be worse.
Price fixing is an agreement between participants of the same party in a market, product, service or property only at a fixed price, or to maintain market conditions so that the price is maintained at a level determined by supply and demand control.