#That's my guess
5 messages in this thread
That's my guess: a high-stakes game of chicken. CEI figures if ESCOM gets it
for $1.5 (or whatever) million, CEI can buy it from ESCOM later for less than
they'd have to at auction. Problem is, this may be illegal collusion. Dom?
Doubt that it can be called illegal collusion. Usually that comes into
play when groups get together to force prices up, by rigging bids as
suppliers.
There is nothing illegal about one party buying and then parting out the
assets.
My concern is that there could be illegal collusion in refraining from bidding
by prearrangement (something like restraint of trade, but obviously not the
intent of that statute).
If one bidder acted to prevent another bidder from bidding, this would be
true. However, if two people decide to go in together to buy something,
even to split it up later, that is not a problem.
If the seller acted to favor one of the bidders, that would also be
collusion.
In this case, there does not seem to be a problem. Any other bidder that
wanted the technology, and had the $1M front money, could have stepped in
and placed a bid.
CEI are said to have been represented by Dell – perhaps it was Commodore U.K.
that refrained from bidding because no higher bids than ESCOM were accepted
and now they wait to conclude their deal in private after the fact.