[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Hey Terekhov: Wallace lost. Who'd guess.... ;)

From: Merijn de Weerd
Subject: Re: Hey Terekhov: Wallace lost. Who'd guess.... ;)
Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2006 23:00:23 +0100
User-agent: slrn/ (FreeBSD)

On 2006-03-24, Alexander Terekhov <> wrote:
> Merijn de Weerd wrote:
> [...]
>> You have yet to show that setting a price at zero is predatory
>> pricing. 
> Wallace on predatory pricing:

Wallace got dismissed because he could not show injury.
Without injury there is no antitrust violation. So why
are you quoting someone who could not show an antitrust
violation to support an allegation of antitrust violation?

Please try to write your own response this time, instead
of pick-and-choose quotes from losers' briefs.


Remove +nospam to reply

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]