Assessing collective dominance. Next to the case of single dominance, the second case is collective dominance. Article 102 of the TFEU prohibits not only the abuse of dominance exerted by a single enterprise, but also by a group of enterprises: ―Any abuse by one or more undertakings of a dominant position (…).‖ Following the European case law, a collective dominance exists where two or more undertakings present themselves or act together in a specific market as a collective entity. 6 From an economic point of view it is sufficient when the undertakings adopt a common policy in the market and when they act a considerable degree independently from their competitors, their customers and also from the consumers. 5 American Council of Certified Podiatric Physicians & Surgeons v. American Board of Podiatric Surgery, Inc., 185 F.3d 606, 623 (6th Cir. 1999). 6 Joined cases C-395/96 P and C-396/96 P Compagnie maritime belge transports SA, Compagnie maritime belge SA and Dafra-Lines A/S v Commission [2000] ECR I-1365, paragraph 36. The concept of collective dominance refers to the concept of tacit collusion. Tacit collusion is a kind of coordination and cooperation without having a formal or informal consent among competitors (which would have to be addressed under the provisions for unlawful agreements) with the aim to restrict competition to an appreciable extent. The effects of tacit collusion in a market are normally high prices and excessive corporate profits. The assessment of possible collective dominance includes answers to the following questions: are there incentives to collude? are these collusive practices likely to be stable and sustainable?... In order to answer both questions in the affirmative two conditions need to be fulfilled:
