In 2014, Phillips Industries, Stuart Corporation and Douglas Enterprises

decided to jointly seek to acquire monopoly power in a particular market in

which they all participated. In 2016, they believed they had an opportunity to

do so and therefore sold their relevant products below cost. Their plan worked

well and by 2017 they acquired 100% of the market. At that point, however,

they were prosecuted for violating some part or parts of Section 2 of the

Sherman Act. During the ensuing trial, the government failed to prove that

the defendants had acquired the power to set prices. Part of the company's

defense included the argument that they had not had the specific intent to

acquire the power to restrict output, just to increase market share. In what

circumstance could they all be found guilty? Would that result change if they

had been prosecuted in 2015?