With regard to the sale of units called stock, which is a “product,” a “good” or a
“commodity,” this testimony marks Wall Street’s position:
A. [T]here is no reason for low, cost-based pricing … [so we] set up a
program to get markups and profits up to where we wanted them.1
In settingthe price of units of paper at the highest, most lucrative level, the “mature”
professional fixing the price of units of paper called stock do not have a lawful pricing
compliance manual. This testimony illustrates by way of parallel example:
Q. Did you have an antitrust [price right] compliance program…?
A. Not that I'm aware of.2
A simple price compliance manual would have this universally taught pricing rule in it:
A) The green use average-[ad or mag, not both] cost-line pricing…; &
B) [T]he mature measure individual [unit] … costs and price accordingly. 3
Wall streets business is the selling of paper with a companies name on it. As the
high court put it:
Under the … plan, … shares were … offered in units consisting of … stock ….4
The worth of units of paper, backed by nothing but the liquidation value of a company
upon bankruptcy or E & O insurance, for example, is defined:
Value is the … Essence, which is realised when something is sold as its price.
Moreover … value is the [useful] quantity of human labor embodied in a [service
or] commodity….
Whenever, by an exchange, we equate as values our different products, by that
very act, we also equate, as human labor, the different kind of labor expended
upon them. We are not [all] aware of this, nevertheless we do it.5
Wall Street can’t comply with correct price rules in setting the price of their units f
money because the labor and cost involved is not more than a dime per “unit” or “share”:
••• The reorganization plan was carried out ….6
••• Some of the information falls into the "duh!" category ….7
“In the usual … case, the [Wall Street accused investment firm] defendant bears
the burden of establishing a pro-competitive justification [for printing money].8
1
Bill G., at trial page 2606:18-28.
2
Bill G, on trial at page 2571:12-25.
3
Competitive Strategy, Techniques for Analyzing Industries and Competitors, Michael E. Porter, page 242 (1980 The Free Press).
4
Blue Chip Stamps v. Manor Drug Stores, 421 U.S. 723, at 726 (1975).
5
Karl Marx Capital, Volume I Chpt. 1: section 4
6
Blue Chip Stamps v. Manor Drug Stores, 421 U.S. 723, at 726 (1975).
7
Web posted Tuesday, December 5, 2000, 12:29 p.m. CT - http://www.amarillo.com/stories/120500/ent_connects.shtml
8
See National Soc. of Professional Engineers v. United States, 435 U. S. 679, 695 (1978); 7 Areeda, ¶ ;1507b, at 397; 11 H.
Hovenkamp, Antitrust Law ¶ ;1914c, pp. 313-315 (1998); see also Law v. National Collegiate Athletic Assn. , 134 F. 3d 1010, 1019
(CA10), cert. denied, 525 U. S. ___ (1998); United States v. Brown Univ. , 5 F. 3d 658, 669 (CA3 1993); Capital Imaging Associates
v. Mohawk Valley Medical Associates , Inc., 996 F. 2d 537, 543 (CA2), cert. denied, 510 U. S. 947 (1993); Kreuzer v. American
Academy of Periodontology , 735 F. 2d 1479, 1492-1495 (CADC 1984).