1. Monopoly for Self-Interest Craig W. Roggow

2. Abstract This presentation identifies 2 separate antitrust cases, involving 2 different companies; describing each corporation and case This presentation identifies 2 separate antitrust cases, involving 2 different companies; describing each corporation and case Many companies intentionally or unintentionally implement strategies or policies to prevent their competitors form thriving in the market. Such self-interest is seen as selfish and monopolistic Many companies intentionally or unintentionally implement strategies or policies to prevent their competitors form thriving in the market. Such self-interest is seen as selfish and monopolistic While a company may struggle to gain dominate control over their respective industry, attempting to create an unfair monopoly is not a solution for their corporate success While a company may struggle to gain dominate control over their respective industry, attempting to create an unfair monopoly is not a solution for their corporate success

3. Multimedia Formats 1. To view the website publishing of this research project and all presentation formats: 1. To view the website publishing of this research project and all presentation formats: http://mergerandacquisitionstrategies.org/mon opoly-for-self-interest/ http://mergerandacquisitionstrategies.org/mon opoly-for-self-interest/ 2. To obtain a PowerPoint training file of this presentation separately: 2. To obtain a PowerPoint training file of this presentation separately: http://mergerandacquisitionstrategies.org/wp- content/uploads/2012/08/monoply-for-self- interest-presentation_roggow_2.ppt http://mergerandacquisitionstrategies.org/wp- content/uploads/2012/08/monoply-for-self- interest-presentation_roggow_2.ppt To view the video training of this presentation separately: To view the video training of this presentation separately: http://youtu.be/wgh_4TsrBN8http://youtu.be/wgh_4TsrBN8

4. Overview Companies inherently want to gain large market share at all costs Companies inherently want to gain large market share at all costs The largest market share occurs for monopolies which control the market in an industry The largest market share occurs for monopolies which control the market in an industry Some companies devise strategies to selfishly gain monopolistic control over an industry but never win Some companies devise strategies to selfishly gain monopolistic control over an industry but never win Examples of Walk vs. AMA (1 st case) and Ramous vs. Micron Technology (2 nd case) Examples of Walk vs. AMA (1 st case) and Ramous vs. Micron Technology (2 nd case)

5. Objects of the Project Identify two separate antitrust cases and the potential effects on their respective industry; fully describing each company, market, and antitrust case against them Identify two separate antitrust cases and the potential effects on their respective industry; fully describing each company, market, and antitrust case against them Compare and contrast the cases, finding key themes or differences Compare and contrast the cases, finding key themes or differences Identify the pros and cons from the outcomes of these two antitrust cases Identify the pros and cons from the outcomes of these two antitrust cases

6. Chiropractic’s and AMA Profiles (1 st case) The chiropractic profession is involved with the diagnosis, treatment and avoidance of neuromuscular-skeletal system The chiropractic profession is involved with the diagnosis, treatment and avoidance of neuromuscular-skeletal system The AMA is a powerful physician organization whose goal is to better promote public health, progress the interests of physicians, patients, and raise money for medical education The AMA is a powerful physician organization whose goal is to better promote public health, progress the interests of physicians, patients, and raise money for medical education Both organizations were found within the medical industry Both organizations were found within the medical industry

7. Outline Chiropractic (Wilk) vs. AMA In 1976 Chester Wilk filed a case against AMA In 1976 Chester Wilk filed a case against AMA Wilk claimed AMA had illegal schemes to destroy them Wilk claimed AMA had illegal schemes to destroy them Claims were found true and AMA was guilty of charges Claims were found true and AMA was guilty of charges Chiropractic practice was permitted as an independent profession within the health care industry Chiropractic practice was permitted as an independent profession within the health care industry

8. Rambus and Micron Technology Profiles (2 nd case) Rambus and Micron Technology were with in the high tech microchip production industry Rambus and Micron Technology were with in the high tech microchip production industry Specifically, Rambus produced RDRAM chips and also dealt with technology licensing Specifically, Rambus produced RDRAM chips and also dealt with technology licensing

9. Outline of Micron Technology vs. Rambus Rambus accused Micron Technology of planning to unfairly remove its RDRAM from the market Rambus accused Micron Technology of planning to unfairly remove its RDRAM from the market Rambus claimed that Micron Technology kept its SDRAM chip artificially low priced, so their chip would be perceived as highly priced Rambus claimed that Micron Technology kept its SDRAM chip artificially low priced, so their chip would be perceived as highly priced Micron Technology denied the claims by providing evidence of faulty RDRAM designs and production costs Micron Technology denied the claims by providing evidence of faulty RDRAM designs and production costs Rambus was found guilty for intentionally destroying evidence Rambus was found guilty for intentionally destroying evidence

10. Contrasts and Comparisons Both cases have one entity trying to gain monopolistic control in their respective markets Both cases have one entity trying to gain monopolistic control in their respective markets Rambus and the AMA are both unable to gain monopolistic market control respectively Rambus and the AMA are both unable to gain monopolistic market control respectively The lawsuit hurt the reputation of AMA and Rambus, while chiropractic’s and Micron Technology each gained positive reputations The lawsuit hurt the reputation of AMA and Rambus, while chiropractic’s and Micron Technology each gained positive reputations

11. Pros and Cons Pros Pros  Selfish interests are not recognized by the law as an excuse to seek a monopoly  Less powerful organizations in a given industry are protected from monopolistic exploitation by larger corporations Cons Cons  The losing industry gains a negative reputation that affects its profitability

12. Conclusion Attempting to create an unfair monopoly is not a solution for corporate success. Attempting to create an unfair monopoly is not a solution for corporate success. Companies in various industries inherently want to gain an advantage or monopoly Companies in various industries inherently want to gain an advantage or monopoly Most self-interest driven monopoly cases rarely prevail Most self-interest driven monopoly cases rarely prevail The AMA and Rambus lose, as there was enough evidence to issue verdicts The AMA and Rambus lose, as there was enough evidence to issue verdicts It is not lawful to destroy evidence, as it may result in a total ban from the industry It is not lawful to destroy evidence, as it may result in a total ban from the industry

13. Blog Post For a full report on this project please visit my blog post: For a full report on this project please visit my blog post: http://mergerandacquisitionstrategies.org/monopoly- for-self-interest/ http://mergerandacquisitionstrategies.org/monopoly- for-self-interest/

14. References Brodkin, J. (2011). Rambus loses $4 billion antitrust suit filed against memory chip makers. Retrieved from http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2011/11/rambus- loses-4-billion-antitrust-suit-filed-against-memory-chip- makers/ Brodkin, J. (2011). Rambus loses $4 billion antitrust suit filed against memory chip makers. Retrieved from http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2011/11/rambus- loses-4-billion-antitrust-suit-filed-against-memory-chip- makers/ http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2011/11/rambus- loses-4-billion-antitrust-suit-filed-against-memory-chip- makers/ http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2011/11/rambus- loses-4-billion-antitrust-suit-filed-against-memory-chip- makers/ DePamphilis, D. M. (2012). Mergers, acquisitions, and other restructuring activities, 6/e, San Diego: Academic Press. DePamphilis, D. M. (2012). Mergers, acquisitions, and other restructuring activities, 6/e, San Diego: Academic Press. Lender, D., and Jason, B., (2011). Micron Technology, Iinc. V. Rambus. Retrieved from http://www.weil.com/micron-tech-inc-v-rambus-inc/ Lender, D., and Jason, B., (2011). Micron Technology, Iinc. V. Rambus. Retrieved from http://www.weil.com/micron-tech-inc-v-rambus-inc/ http://www.weil.com/micron-tech-inc-v-rambus-inc/ Murphy, D., Schneider, M., Seaman, D., Perle, S., and Nelson, C. (2008). How can chiropractic become a respected mainstream profession? Chiropractic and Osteopathy Journal. Vol. 16. Iss. 10. Murphy, D., Schneider, M., Seaman, D., Perle, S., and Nelson, C. (2008). How can chiropractic become a respected mainstream profession? Chiropractic and Osteopathy Journal. Vol. 16. Iss. 10.

15. References (cont.) Noto, Y. (1999). American Medical Association, AMA and its membership strategy. Retrieved from www.hsph.harvard.edu/research/takemi/files/rp157.pdf Noto, Y. (1999). American Medical Association, AMA and its membership strategy. Retrieved from www.hsph.harvard.edu/research/takemi/files/rp157.pdf www.hsph.harvard.edu/research/takemi/files/rp157.pdf Painter, F., (2012). The Chiropractic Antitrust Suit Wilk et al vs. the AMA, et al. retrieved from http://www.chiro.org/Wilk/ Painter, F., (2012). The Chiropractic Antitrust Suit Wilk et al vs. the AMA, et al. retrieved from http://www.chiro.org/Wilk/ http://www.chiro.org/Wilk/ Pealstein, D. and Bloch, R. (2003). Antitrust law developments. ABA web store, USA. Pealstein, D. and Bloch, R. (2003). Antitrust law developments. ABA web store, USA. Roggow, C. (2012). Monopoly for Self-Interest. Retrieved from http://mergerandacquisitionstrategies.org/monopoly-for- self-interest/ Roggow, C. (2012). Monopoly for Self-Interest. Retrieved from http://mergerandacquisitionstrategies.org/monopoly-for- self-interest/ http://mergerandacquisitionstrategies.org/monopoly-for- self-interest/ http://mergerandacquisitionstrategies.org/monopoly-for- self-interest/

16. Created By Craig W. Roggow ________ Copyrights © 2012 Craig W. Roggow. All Rights Reserved.