said by DanteX:When one raises prices to match the prices of their so called competitor that is not competition that is collusion and in no way benefits the consumer.
But hey who am I to talk I am just a 10 percenter right?
Collusion is when both parties meet together and preplan the same prices as a strategy.
So it isn't collusion. It's the effect of an oligopoly/duopoly (not a monopoly, but not many players either). If one side lowers prices, the others will do so rather quickly to remain competitive. If one side raises prices, the other will at a slower pace (kind of a wait and see approach).
I agree that limited competition doesn't benefit the consumer, but I felt the need to correct the assumption that it was collusion when it isn't