Brinks US Anti-Trust Law Campaigns

[George Orwell <nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

It looks like Brinks is no stranger to breaking US Antitrust laws on a regular basis. It won't be long before they use the Brinks v Rojas case against all dealers out there.

<< quote from http://www.answers.com/topic/the-brink-s-company?cat=biz-fin >>
Pittston's other divisions fared as poorly as its coal sector in the late 1970s. The oil crisis left Metropolitan Petroleum dependent on its suppliers and facing much higher costs. It tried to develop its own oil-refining capacity, but a proposed refinery in Eastport, Maine, was unable to overcome opposition from environmental groups and was never built. In 1980, still without refining capacity, Metropolitan changed its name to Pittston Petroleum in an effort to improve name recognition and sales. Brink's faced difficulty in the 1970s as well because of rising costs and increasing competition. In 1976 a federal grand jury began investigating possible antitrust violations in the armored-car business. A year later Brink's paid $5.9 million to settle some of the resulting antitrust charges. Brink's settled the last of the antitrust indictments handed down by the 1976 grand jury in 1980, when it paid $2.7 million to 12 Federal Reserve banks. Also in 1980 Pittston decided to merge its trucking and warehousing ope
rations under one structure. All its United States Distributing group companies thus became subsidiaries of Brink's.
<<end quote>>

Read the entire article here.
http://www.answers.com/topic/the-brink-s-company?cat=biz-fin


Il mittente di questo messaggio|The sender address of this
non corrisponde ad un utente   |message is not related to a real
reale ma all'indirizzo fittizio|person but to a fake address of an
di un sistema anonimizzatore   |anonymous system
Per maggiori informazioni      |For more info
                  https://www.mixmaster.it