How did the alleged conspiracy work?
Executives met at industry dinners, golf outings and 'girls nights out' using coded terms like 'fair share' and 'playing nice in the sandbox' to allocate customers — ceding prescriptions to new entrants rather than competing on price and following each other's increases.
According to the states, competitors used social relationships to coordinate. Executives allegedly met at industry dinners, "girls nights out," lunches, cocktail parties and golf outings and communicated by phone, email and text. The complaint alleges they used terms such as "fair share," "playing nice in the sandbox" and "responsible competitor" to describe an understanding that each company would get its allocated share of a market and would not undercut rivals. When a new competitor entered, incumbents would allegedly cede some customers rather than compete on price, and companies would follow each other's price increases. The states describe this as an "ingrained culture of collusion." Defendants that have not settled deny the allegations, and the civil claims have yet to be tested at trial.