Agri Stats - Revision history

Guacamole: addition of archived pdf

2026-06-15T17:06:35Z

addition of archived pdf

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:06, 15 June 2026
Line 26:		Line 26:
	On September 28, 2023 the Department of Justice filed a complaint against Agri Stats on the basis of violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1, which states that any contract "in restraint of trade or commerce among the several States, or with foreign nations, is declared to be illegal"<ref name=":0">{{Cite web \|date=1890-07-02 \|title=CHAPTER 1-MONOPOLIES AND COMBINATIONS IN RESTRAINT OF TRADE \|url=https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-1999-title15-section1&num=0&edition=1999 \|url-status=dead \|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20260212041039/https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-1999-title15-section1&num=0&edition=1999 \|archive-date=2026-02-12 \|access-date=2026-05-05 \|website=Office of the Law Revision Counsel - United States Code}}</ref>. In the filing the DOJ states that the United States brings action to "stop Agri Stats’ anticompetitive scheme and restore competition to heartland U.S. agriculture markets"<ref name=":1">{{Cite web \|date=2023-09-28 \|title=UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA \|url=https://www.justice.gov/d9/2023-10/416782.pdf \|url-status=live \|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20260526013720/https://www.justice.gov/d9/2023-10/416782.pdf \|archive-date=2026-05-26 \|access-date=2026-05-05 \|website=Department of Justice}}</ref>. The complaint alleges that Agri Stats shared sensitive market information between competitors through subscription and business consultation services, which allowed processors to forecast competitors production and withhold output at beneficial times when it is was deemed profitable, potentially leading to higher than normal price increases. Additionally the DOJ alleges that Agri Stats shared sensitive wage information, farmer pay, and "other compensation metrics"<ref name=":1" />. On May 28, 2024 Agri Stats filed a Motion to Transfer and a Motion to Dismiss with the District of Minnesota, both of which were dismissed<ref>{{Cite web \|date=2024-05-28 \|title=UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA \|url=https://www.justice.gov/atr/media/1359226/dl?inline \|url-status=live \|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20260526013720/https://www.justice.gov/atr/media/1359226/dl?inline \|archive-date=2026-05-26 \|access-date=2026-05-06 \|website=Department of Justice \|pages=5, 14}}</ref>.		On September 28, 2023 the Department of Justice filed a complaint against Agri Stats on the basis of violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1, which states that any contract "in restraint of trade or commerce among the several States, or with foreign nations, is declared to be illegal"<ref name=":0">{{Cite web \|date=1890-07-02 \|title=CHAPTER 1-MONOPOLIES AND COMBINATIONS IN RESTRAINT OF TRADE \|url=https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-1999-title15-section1&num=0&edition=1999 \|url-status=dead \|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20260212041039/https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-1999-title15-section1&num=0&edition=1999 \|archive-date=2026-02-12 \|access-date=2026-05-05 \|website=Office of the Law Revision Counsel - United States Code}}</ref>. In the filing the DOJ states that the United States brings action to "stop Agri Stats’ anticompetitive scheme and restore competition to heartland U.S. agriculture markets"<ref name=":1">{{Cite web \|date=2023-09-28 \|title=UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA \|url=https://www.justice.gov/d9/2023-10/416782.pdf \|url-status=live \|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20260526013720/https://www.justice.gov/d9/2023-10/416782.pdf \|archive-date=2026-05-26 \|access-date=2026-05-05 \|website=Department of Justice}}</ref>. The complaint alleges that Agri Stats shared sensitive market information between competitors through subscription and business consultation services, which allowed processors to forecast competitors production and withhold output at beneficial times when it is was deemed profitable, potentially leading to higher than normal price increases. Additionally the DOJ alleges that Agri Stats shared sensitive wage information, farmer pay, and "other compensation metrics"<ref name=":1" />. On May 28, 2024 Agri Stats filed a Motion to Transfer and a Motion to Dismiss with the District of Minnesota, both of which were dismissed<ref>{{Cite web \|date=2024-05-28 \|title=UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA \|url=https://www.justice.gov/atr/media/1359226/dl?inline \|url-status=live \|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20260526013720/https://www.justice.gov/atr/media/1359226/dl?inline \|archive-date=2026-05-26 \|access-date=2026-05-06 \|website=Department of Justice \|pages=5, 14}}</ref>.

	On Monday May 4, 2026, U.S. Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche lead a news conference where White House adviser Peter Navarro expressed that the "U.S. Department of Justice plans to settle its case against data company Agri Stats with an agreement officials hope will help drive down food ‌costs"<ref>{{Cite news \|last=Godoy \|first=Jody \|date=2026-05-04 \|title=DOJ plans to settle Agri Stats case, White House official says \|url=https://www.reuters.com/world/us/doj-taking-aim-food-prices-acting-ag-says-2026-05-04/ \|url-status=live \|access-date=2026-05-05 \|work=Reuters}}</ref>.		On Monday May 4, 2026, U.S. Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche lead a news conference where White House adviser Peter Navarro expressed that the "U.S. Department of Justice plans to settle its case against data company Agri Stats with an agreement officials hope will help drive down food ‌costs"<ref>{{Cite news \|last=Godoy \|first=Jody \|date=2026-05-04 \|title=DOJ plans to settle Agri Stats case, White House official says \|url=https://www.reuters.com/world/us/doj-taking-aim-food-prices-acting-ag-says-2026-05-04/ \|url-status=live \|archive-url=https://archive.org/details/doj-plans-to-settle-agri-stats-case-white-house-official-says-reuters \|archive-date=2026-06-15 \|access-date=2026-05-05 \|work=Reuters}}</ref>.

	Agri Stats published a [https://www.agristats.com/doj-lawsuit-against-agri-stats-is-wrong-on-the-law-and-bad-for-consumers/ news article] on September 28, 2023 in response to the DOJ accusations, where they discuss the claim that their business practices assist producers in reducing production cost.		Agri Stats published a [https://www.agristats.com/doj-lawsuit-against-agri-stats-is-wrong-on-the-law-and-bad-for-consumers/ news article] on September 28, 2023 in response to the DOJ accusations, where they discuss the claim that their business practices assist producers in reducing production cost.

Guacamole: added archive.org links

2026-06-01T17:59:13Z

added archive.org links

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:59, 1 June 2026
Line 31:		Line 31:

	===In re Broiler Chicken Antitrust Litigation===		===In re Broiler Chicken Antitrust Litigation===
	A class action lawsuit was brought against defendants including but not limited to Agri Stats alleging that the defedants and co-conspirators "conspired to fix, raise, maintain, and stabilize the price of Broilers, beginning at least as early as January 1, 2008"<ref>{{Cite web \|date=2026-05-05 \|title=Broiler Chicken Antitrust Litigation \|url=https://www.broilerchickenantitrustlitigation.com/ \|url-status=live \|access-date=2026-05-05 \|website=Broiler Chicken Antitrust Litigation}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web \|date=2022-05-27 \|title=MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER \|url=https://www.broilerchickenantitrustlitigation.com/docs/CertifiedClass/5644-Class%20Certification.pdf \|url-status=live \|access-date=2026-05-05 \|website=Broiler Chicken Antitrust Litigation}}</ref>. On April 14, 2026 a Chicago federal judge granted injunctive-relief settlement with Agri Stats, which procedurally progresses plaintiffs closer to the $203.5 million "consumer settlement fund that has been sitting in administrative limbo since... July 31, 2025"<ref>{{Cite web \|last=Levine \|first=Steve \|date=2026-04-21 \|title=Chicken Price-Fixing Settlement Update -- Agri Stats Preliminary Approval Clears Final Hurdle Before $203.35M Consumer Payout \|url=https://openclassactions.com/news/chicken-price-fixing-settlement-agri-stats-preliminary-approval-april-2026.php \|url-status=live \|access-date=2026-05-05 \|website=Open Class Actions}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web \|date=2026-04-21 \|title=$203.35M Chicken Price Fixing Class Action Settlement — 2026 {{!}} Closed \|url=https://openclassactions.com/settlement_chicken.php \|url-status=live \|access-date=2026-05-05 \|website=Open Class Actions}}</ref>.		A class action lawsuit was brought against defendants including but not limited to Agri Stats alleging that the defedants and co-conspirators "conspired to fix, raise, maintain, and stabilize the price of Broilers, beginning at least as early as January 1, 2008"<ref>{{Cite web \|date=2026-05-05 \|title=Broiler Chicken Antitrust Litigation \|url=https://www.broilerchickenantitrustlitigation.com/ \|url-status=live \|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20260309203549/https://www.broilerchickenantitrustlitigation.com/ \|archive-date=2026-03-09 \|access-date=2026-05-05 \|website=Broiler Chicken Antitrust Litigation}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web \|date=2022-05-27 \|title=MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER \|url=https://www.broilerchickenantitrustlitigation.com/docs/CertifiedClass/5644-Class%20Certification.pdf \|url-status=live \|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20260217183334/https://www.broilerchickenantitrustlitigation.com/docs/CertifiedClass/5644-Class%20Certification.pdf \|archive-date=2026-02-17 \|access-date=2026-05-05 \|website=Broiler Chicken Antitrust Litigation}}</ref>. On April 14, 2026 a Chicago federal judge granted injunctive-relief settlement with Agri Stats, which procedurally progresses plaintiffs closer to the $203.5 million "consumer settlement fund that has been sitting in administrative limbo since... July 31, 2025"<ref>{{Cite web \|last=Levine \|first=Steve \|date=2026-04-21 \|title=Chicken Price-Fixing Settlement Update -- Agri Stats Preliminary Approval Clears Final Hurdle Before $203.35M Consumer Payout \|url=https://openclassactions.com/news/chicken-price-fixing-settlement-agri-stats-preliminary-approval-april-2026.php \|url-status=live \|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20260601174633/https://openclassactions.com/news/chicken-price-fixing-settlement-agri-stats-preliminary-approval-april-2026.php \|archive-date=2026-06-01 \|access-date=2026-05-05 \|website=Open Class Actions}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web \|date=2026-04-21 \|title=$203.35M Chicken Price Fixing Class Action Settlement — 2026 {{!}} Closed \|url=https://openclassactions.com/settlement_chicken.php \|url-status=live \|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20260601175716/https://openclassactions.com/settlement_chicken.php \|archive-date=2026-06-01 \|access-date=2026-05-05 \|website=Open Class Actions}}</ref>.

	==Products==		==Products==

Guacamole: added archive.org links

2026-06-01T17:27:54Z

added archive.org links

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:27, 1 June 2026
Line 8:		Line 8:
	\|Website=https://www.agristats.com/\|Description=Provide comparative agricultural data to organizations in the industry in order to support data driven decision making.}}		\|Website=https://www.agristats.com/\|Description=Provide comparative agricultural data to organizations in the industry in order to support data driven decision making.}}

	'''Agri Stats''' is a company based in Indiana, U.S. which collects and analyzes comparative data to sell to agricultural organizations in support of data driven decision making. They were founded in 1865 by Jim Cox, who was a poultry farmer at the time. The company website states that the business started "as a way to help chicken producers make informed decisions based on flock-level cost and performance data"<ref>{{Cite web \|title=Company History \|url=https://www.agristats.com/company-history/ \|url-status=live \|access-date=2026-05-05 \|website=Agri Stats}}</ref>. They have since expanded into other agricultural markets including but not limited to swine, feed, livestock, sanitation, and vaccination.		'''Agri Stats''' is a company based in Indiana, U.S. which collects and analyzes comparative data to sell to agricultural organizations in support of data driven decision making. They were founded in 1865 by Jim Cox, who was a poultry farmer at the time. The company website states that the business started "as a way to help chicken producers make informed decisions based on flock-level cost and performance data"<ref>{{Cite web \|title=Company History \|url=https://www.agristats.com/company-history/ \|url-status=live \|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20260212213130/https://www.agristats.com/company-history/ \|archive-date=2026-02-12 \|access-date=2026-05-05 \|website=Agri Stats}}</ref>. They have since expanded into other agricultural markets including but not limited to swine, feed, livestock, sanitation, and vaccination.

	==Consumer-impact summary==		==Consumer-impact summary==

	===Business model===		===Business model===
	With filings against the company by the Antitrust Division of the Department of Justice for anti-competitive practices<ref>{{Cite web \|date=2023-09-28 \|title=U.S. v. Agri Stats, Inc. \|url=https://www.justice.gov/atr/case/us-v-agri-stats-inc \|url-status=live \|access-date=2026-05-05 \|website=U.S. Department of Justice}}</ref>, this shows a possibility for their business model being anti-competitive in nature.		With filings against the company by the Antitrust Division of the Department of Justice for anti-competitive practices<ref>{{Cite web \|date=2023-09-28 \|title=U.S. v. Agri Stats, Inc. \|url=https://www.justice.gov/atr/case/us-v-agri-stats-inc \|url-status=live \|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20260524170048/https://www.justice.gov/atr/case/us-v-agri-stats-inc \|archive-date=2026-05-24 \|access-date=2026-05-05 \|website=U.S. Department of Justice}}</ref>, this shows a possibility for their business model being anti-competitive in nature.

	===Market control===		===Market control===
	The nature of Agri Stats data means that if the services they are providing aren't sufficiently anonymized, then it can lead to unreasonable market control. Their business model relies on a preservation of "confidentiality among processors by masking the sources of the data it reports"<ref>{{Cite news \|last=Douglas \|first=Leah \|last2=Leonard \|first2=Christopher \|date=2019-08-02 \|title=Is the US chicken industry cheating its farmers? \|url=https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/aug/03/is-the-us-chicken-industry-cheating-its-farmers#:~:text=Agri%20Stats%20was%20founded%20in,anything%20about%20its%20business%20model. \|url-status=live \|work=The Guardian}}</ref>, however, de-anonymization, especially of sensitive information, can lead to a restraining of competition<ref>{{Cite web \|last=Norris Donahue \|first=Lauren \|last2=Pereira Duarte \|first2=Victoria \|date=2024-10-15 \|title=DOJ Speaks Again: Information Exchanges Can Constitute Stand-Alone Violation of Antitrust Laws \|url=https://www.klgates.com/DOJ-Speaks-Again-Information-Exchanges-Can-Constitute-Stand-Alone-Violation-of-Antitrust-Laws-10-15-2024#:~:text=%E2%80%9CThe%20more%20sensitive%20the%20information,information%20can%20still%20raise%20concerns. \|url-status=live \|access-date=2026-05-05 \|website=K&L Gates}}</ref>.		The nature of Agri Stats data means that if the services they are providing aren't sufficiently anonymized, then it can lead to unreasonable market control. Their business model relies on a preservation of "confidentiality among processors by masking the sources of the data it reports"<ref>{{Cite news \|last=Douglas \|first=Leah \|last2=Leonard \|first2=Christopher \|date=2019-08-02 \|title=Is the US chicken industry cheating its farmers? \|url=https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/aug/03/is-the-us-chicken-industry-cheating-its-farmers#:~:text=Agri%20Stats%20was%20founded%20in,anything%20about%20its%20business%20model. \|url-status=live \|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20260526034126/https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/aug/03/is-the-us-chicken-industry-cheating-its-farmers#:~:text=Agri%20Stats%20was%20founded%20in,anything%20about%20its%20business%20model. \|archive-date=2026-05-26 \|work=The Guardian}}</ref>, however, de-anonymization, especially of sensitive information, can lead to a restraining of competition<ref>{{Cite web \|last=Norris Donahue \|first=Lauren \|last2=Pereira Duarte \|first2=Victoria \|date=2024-10-15 \|title=DOJ Speaks Again: Information Exchanges Can Constitute Stand-Alone Violation of Antitrust Laws \|url=https://www.klgates.com/DOJ-Speaks-Again-Information-Exchanges-Can-Constitute-Stand-Alone-Violation-of-Antitrust-Laws-10-15-2024#:~:text=%E2%80%9CThe%20more%20sensitive%20the%20information,information%20can%20still%20raise%20concerns. \|url-status=live \|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20260316212647/https://www.klgates.com/DOJ-Speaks-Again-Information-Exchanges-Can-Constitute-Stand-Alone-Violation-of-Antitrust-Laws-10-15-2024#:~:text=%E2%80%9CThe%20more%20sensitive%20the%20information,information%20can%20still%20raise%20concerns. \|archive-date=2026-03-16 \|access-date=2026-05-05 \|website=K&L Gates}}</ref>.

	==Incidents==		==Incidents==
Line 24:		Line 24:

	====U.S. v. Agri Stats, Inc. (''September 2023—'')====		====U.S. v. Agri Stats, Inc. (''September 2023—'')====
	On September 28, 2023 the Department of Justice filed a complaint against Agri Stats on the basis of violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1, which states that any contract "in restraint of trade or commerce among the several States, or with foreign nations, is declared to be illegal"<ref name=":0">{{Cite web \|date=1890-07-02 \|title=CHAPTER 1-MONOPOLIES AND COMBINATIONS IN RESTRAINT OF TRADE \|url=https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-1999-title15-section1&num=0&edition=1999 \|url-status=~~live~~ \|access-date=2026-05-05 \|website=Office of the Law Revision Counsel - United States Code}}</ref>. In the filing the DOJ states that the United States brings action to "stop Agri Stats’ anticompetitive scheme and restore competition to heartland U.S. agriculture markets"<ref name=":1">{{Cite web \|date=2023-09-28 \|title=UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA \|url=https://www.justice.gov/d9/2023-10/416782.pdf \|url-status=live \|access-date=2026-05-05 \|website=Department of Justice}}</ref>. The complaint alleges that Agri Stats shared sensitive market information between competitors through subscription and business consultation services, which allowed processors to forecast competitors production and withhold output at beneficial times when it is was deemed profitable, potentially leading to higher than normal price increases. Additionally the DOJ alleges that Agri Stats shared sensitive wage information, farmer pay, and "other compensation metrics"<ref name=":1" />. On May 28, 2024 Agri Stats filed a Motion to Transfer and a Motion to Dismiss with the District of Minnesota, both of which were dismissed<ref>{{Cite web \|date=2024-05-28 \|title=UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA \|url=https://www.justice.gov/atr/media/1359226/dl?inline \|url-status=live \|access-date=2026-05-06 \|website=Department of Justice \|pages=5, 14}}</ref>.		On September 28, 2023 the Department of Justice filed a complaint against Agri Stats on the basis of violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1, which states that any contract "in restraint of trade or commerce among the several States, or with foreign nations, is declared to be illegal"<ref name=":0">{{Cite web \|date=1890-07-02 \|title=CHAPTER 1-MONOPOLIES AND COMBINATIONS IN RESTRAINT OF TRADE \|url=https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-1999-title15-section1&num=0&edition=1999 \|url-status=dead \|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20260212041039/https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-1999-title15-section1&num=0&edition=1999 \|archive-date=2026-02-12 \|access-date=2026-05-05 \|website=Office of the Law Revision Counsel - United States Code}}</ref>. In the filing the DOJ states that the United States brings action to "stop Agri Stats’ anticompetitive scheme and restore competition to heartland U.S. agriculture markets"<ref name=":1">{{Cite web \|date=2023-09-28 \|title=UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA \|url=https://www.justice.gov/d9/2023-10/416782.pdf \|url-status=live \|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20260526013720/https://www.justice.gov/d9/2023-10/416782.pdf \|archive-date=2026-05-26 \|access-date=2026-05-05 \|website=Department of Justice}}</ref>. The complaint alleges that Agri Stats shared sensitive market information between competitors through subscription and business consultation services, which allowed processors to forecast competitors production and withhold output at beneficial times when it is was deemed profitable, potentially leading to higher than normal price increases. Additionally the DOJ alleges that Agri Stats shared sensitive wage information, farmer pay, and "other compensation metrics"<ref name=":1" />. On May 28, 2024 Agri Stats filed a Motion to Transfer and a Motion to Dismiss with the District of Minnesota, both of which were dismissed<ref>{{Cite web \|date=2024-05-28 \|title=UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA \|url=https://www.justice.gov/atr/media/1359226/dl?inline \|url-status=live \|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20260526013720/https://www.justice.gov/atr/media/1359226/dl?inline \|archive-date=2026-05-26 \|access-date=2026-05-06 \|website=Department of Justice \|pages=5, 14}}</ref>.

	On Monday May 4, 2026, U.S. Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche lead a news conference where White House adviser Peter Navarro expressed that the "U.S. Department of Justice plans to settle its case against data company Agri Stats with an agreement officials hope will help drive down food ‌costs"<ref>{{Cite news \|last=Godoy \|first=Jody \|date=2026-05-04 \|title=DOJ plans to settle Agri Stats case, White House official says \|url=https://www.reuters.com/world/us/doj-taking-aim-food-prices-acting-ag-says-2026-05-04/ \|url-status=live \|access-date=2026-05-05 \|work=Reuters}}</ref>.		On Monday May 4, 2026, U.S. Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche lead a news conference where White House adviser Peter Navarro expressed that the "U.S. Department of Justice plans to settle its case against data company Agri Stats with an agreement officials hope will help drive down food ‌costs"<ref>{{Cite news \|last=Godoy \|first=Jody \|date=2026-05-04 \|title=DOJ plans to settle Agri Stats case, White House official says \|url=https://www.reuters.com/world/us/doj-taking-aim-food-prices-acting-ag-says-2026-05-04/ \|url-status=live \|access-date=2026-05-05 \|work=Reuters}}</ref>.

1jeremy: /* U.S. v. Agri Stats, Inc. (September 2023—) */

2026-05-06T15:07:19Z

U.S. v. Agri Stats, Inc. (September 2023—)

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:07, 6 May 2026
Line 24:		Line 24:

	====U.S. v. Agri Stats, Inc. (''September 2023—'')====		====U.S. v. Agri Stats, Inc. (''September 2023—'')====
	On September 28, 2023 the Department of Justice filed a complaint against Agri Stats on the basis of violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1, which states that any contract "in restraint of trade or commerce among the several States, or with foreign nations, is declared to be illegal"<ref name=":0">{{Cite web \|date=1890-07-02 \|title=CHAPTER 1-MONOPOLIES AND COMBINATIONS IN RESTRAINT OF TRADE \|url=https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-1999-title15-section1&num=0&edition=1999 \|url-status=live \|access-date=2026-05-05 \|website=Office of the Law Revision Counsel - United States Code}}</ref>. In the filing the DOJ states that the United States brings action to "stop Agri Stats’ anticompetitive scheme and restore competition to heartland U.S. agriculture markets"<ref>{{Cite web \|date=2023-09-28 \|title=UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA \|url=https://www.justice.gov/d9/2023-10/416782.pdf \|url-status=live \|access-date=2026-05-05 \|website=Department of Justice}}</ref>. The complaint alleges that Agri Stats shared sensitive market information between competitors through subscription and business consultation services, which allowed processors to forecast competitors production and withhold output at beneficial times when it is was deemed profitable, potentially leading to higher than normal price increases. Additionally the DOJ ~~states~~ that Agri Stats shared sensitive wage information, farmer pay, and "other compensation metrics"<ref name=":0" />. On May 28, 2024 a Motion to Transfer and a Motion to Dismiss ~~were filed~~ with the District of Minnesota, both of which were dismissed<ref>{{Cite web \|date=2024-05-28 \|title=UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA \|url=https://www.justice.gov/atr/media/1359226/dl?inline \|url-status=live \|access-date=2026-05-06 \|website=Department of Justice \|pages=5, 14}}</ref>.		On September 28, 2023 the Department of Justice filed a complaint against Agri Stats on the basis of violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1, which states that any contract "in restraint of trade or commerce among the several States, or with foreign nations, is declared to be illegal"<ref name=":0">{{Cite web \|date=1890-07-02 \|title=CHAPTER 1-MONOPOLIES AND COMBINATIONS IN RESTRAINT OF TRADE \|url=https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-1999-title15-section1&num=0&edition=1999 \|url-status=live \|access-date=2026-05-05 \|website=Office of the Law Revision Counsel - United States Code}}</ref>. In the filing the DOJ states that the United States brings action to "stop Agri Stats’ anticompetitive scheme and restore competition to heartland U.S. agriculture markets"<ref name=":1">{{Cite web \|date=2023-09-28 \|title=UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA \|url=https://www.justice.gov/d9/2023-10/416782.pdf \|url-status=live \|access-date=2026-05-05 \|website=Department of Justice}}</ref>. The complaint alleges that Agri Stats shared sensitive market information between competitors through subscription and business consultation services, which allowed processors to forecast competitors production and withhold output at beneficial times when it is was deemed profitable, potentially leading to higher than normal price increases. Additionally the DOJ alleges that Agri Stats shared sensitive wage information, farmer pay, and "other compensation metrics"<ref name=":1" />. On May 28, 2024 Agri Stats filed a Motion to Transfer and a Motion to Dismiss with the District of Minnesota, both of which were dismissed<ref>{{Cite web \|date=2024-05-28 \|title=UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA \|url=https://www.justice.gov/atr/media/1359226/dl?inline \|url-status=live \|access-date=2026-05-06 \|website=Department of Justice \|pages=5, 14}}</ref>.

	On Monday May 4, 2026, U.S. Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche lead a news conference where White House adviser Peter Navarro expressed that the "U.S. Department of Justice plans to settle its case against data company Agri Stats with an agreement officials hope will help drive down food ‌costs"<ref>{{Cite news \|last=Godoy \|first=Jody \|date=2026-05-04 \|title=DOJ plans to settle Agri Stats case, White House official says \|url=https://www.reuters.com/world/us/doj-taking-aim-food-prices-acting-ag-says-2026-05-04/ \|url-status=live \|access-date=2026-05-05 \|work=Reuters}}</ref>.		On Monday May 4, 2026, U.S. Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche lead a news conference where White House adviser Peter Navarro expressed that the "U.S. Department of Justice plans to settle its case against data company Agri Stats with an agreement officials hope will help drive down food ‌costs"<ref>{{Cite news \|last=Godoy \|first=Jody \|date=2026-05-04 \|title=DOJ plans to settle Agri Stats case, White House official says \|url=https://www.reuters.com/world/us/doj-taking-aim-food-prices-acting-ag-says-2026-05-04/ \|url-status=live \|access-date=2026-05-05 \|work=Reuters}}</ref>.
Line 30:		Line 30:
	Agri Stats published a [https://www.agristats.com/doj-lawsuit-against-agri-stats-is-wrong-on-the-law-and-bad-for-consumers/ news article] on September 28, 2023 in response to the DOJ accusations, where they discuss the claim that their business practices assist producers in reducing production cost.		Agri Stats published a [https://www.agristats.com/doj-lawsuit-against-agri-stats-is-wrong-on-the-law-and-bad-for-consumers/ news article] on September 28, 2023 in response to the DOJ accusations, where they discuss the claim that their business practices assist producers in reducing production cost.

	=== In re Broiler Chicken Antitrust Litigation ===		===In re Broiler Chicken Antitrust Litigation===
	A class action lawsuit was brought against defendants including but not limited to Agri Stats alleging that the defedants and co-conspirators "conspired to fix, raise, maintain, and stabilize the price of Broilers, beginning at least as early as January 1, 2008"<ref>{{Cite web \|date=2026-05-05 \|title=Broiler Chicken Antitrust Litigation \|url=https://www.broilerchickenantitrustlitigation.com/ \|url-status=live \|access-date=2026-05-05 \|website=Broiler Chicken Antitrust Litigation}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web \|date=2022-05-27 \|title=MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER \|url=https://www.broilerchickenantitrustlitigation.com/docs/CertifiedClass/5644-Class%20Certification.pdf \|url-status=live \|access-date=2026-05-05 \|website=Broiler Chicken Antitrust Litigation}}</ref>. On April 14, 2026 a Chicago federal judge granted injunctive-relief settlement with Agri Stats, which procedurally progresses plaintiffs closer to the $203.5 million "consumer settlement fund that has been sitting in administrative limbo since... July 31, 2025"<ref>{{Cite web \|last=Levine \|first=Steve \|date=2026-04-21 \|title=Chicken Price-Fixing Settlement Update -- Agri Stats Preliminary Approval Clears Final Hurdle Before $203.35M Consumer Payout \|url=https://openclassactions.com/news/chicken-price-fixing-settlement-agri-stats-preliminary-approval-april-2026.php \|url-status=live \|access-date=2026-05-05 \|website=Open Class Actions}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web \|date=2026-04-21 \|title=$203.35M Chicken Price Fixing Class Action Settlement — 2026 {{!}} Closed \|url=https://openclassactions.com/settlement_chicken.php \|url-status=live \|access-date=2026-05-05 \|website=Open Class Actions}}</ref>.		A class action lawsuit was brought against defendants including but not limited to Agri Stats alleging that the defedants and co-conspirators "conspired to fix, raise, maintain, and stabilize the price of Broilers, beginning at least as early as January 1, 2008"<ref>{{Cite web \|date=2026-05-05 \|title=Broiler Chicken Antitrust Litigation \|url=https://www.broilerchickenantitrustlitigation.com/ \|url-status=live \|access-date=2026-05-05 \|website=Broiler Chicken Antitrust Litigation}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web \|date=2022-05-27 \|title=MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER \|url=https://www.broilerchickenantitrustlitigation.com/docs/CertifiedClass/5644-Class%20Certification.pdf \|url-status=live \|access-date=2026-05-05 \|website=Broiler Chicken Antitrust Litigation}}</ref>. On April 14, 2026 a Chicago federal judge granted injunctive-relief settlement with Agri Stats, which procedurally progresses plaintiffs closer to the $203.5 million "consumer settlement fund that has been sitting in administrative limbo since... July 31, 2025"<ref>{{Cite web \|last=Levine \|first=Steve \|date=2026-04-21 \|title=Chicken Price-Fixing Settlement Update -- Agri Stats Preliminary Approval Clears Final Hurdle Before $203.35M Consumer Payout \|url=https://openclassactions.com/news/chicken-price-fixing-settlement-agri-stats-preliminary-approval-april-2026.php \|url-status=live \|access-date=2026-05-05 \|website=Open Class Actions}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web \|date=2026-04-21 \|title=$203.35M Chicken Price Fixing Class Action Settlement — 2026 {{!}} Closed \|url=https://openclassactions.com/settlement_chicken.php \|url-status=live \|access-date=2026-05-05 \|website=Open Class Actions}}</ref>.

Keith: removed stub notice. will revisit later to see if it needs more work but defo not a stub at this point

2026-05-06T13:44:28Z

removed stub notice. will revisit later to see if it needs more work but defo not a stub at this point

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:44, 6 May 2026
Line 1:		Line 1:
	~~{{StubNotice}}~~

	{{CompanyCargo		{{CompanyCargo

1jeremy: /* Anti-Competitive Practices */ Added In re Broiler Chicken Antitrust Litigation with relevant citations.

2026-05-06T05:33:45Z

Anti-Competitive Practices: Added In re Broiler Chicken Antitrust Litigation with relevant citations.

← Older revision		Revision as of 05:33, 6 May 2026
Line 13:		Line 13:
	==Consumer-impact summary==		==Consumer-impact summary==

	===Business ~~Model~~===		===Business model===
	With filings against the company by the Antitrust Division of the Department of Justice for anti-competitive practices<ref>{{Cite web \|date=2023-09-28 \|title=U.S. v. Agri Stats, Inc. \|url=https://www.justice.gov/atr/case/us-v-agri-stats-inc \|url-status=live \|access-date=2026-05-05 \|website=U.S. Department of Justice}}</ref>, this shows a possibility for their business model being anti-competitive in nature.		With filings against the company by the Antitrust Division of the Department of Justice for anti-competitive practices<ref>{{Cite web \|date=2023-09-28 \|title=U.S. v. Agri Stats, Inc. \|url=https://www.justice.gov/atr/case/us-v-agri-stats-inc \|url-status=live \|access-date=2026-05-05 \|website=U.S. Department of Justice}}</ref>, this shows a possibility for their business model being anti-competitive in nature.

	===Market ~~Control~~===		===Market control===
	The nature of Agri Stats data means that if the services they are providing aren't sufficiently anonymized, then it can lead to unreasonable market control. Their business model relies on a preservation of "confidentiality among processors by masking the sources of the data it reports"<ref>{{Cite news \|last=Douglas \|first=Leah \|last2=Leonard \|first2=Christopher \|date=2019-08-02 \|title=Is the US chicken industry cheating its farmers? \|url=https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/aug/03/is-the-us-chicken-industry-cheating-its-farmers#:~:text=Agri%20Stats%20was%20founded%20in,anything%20about%20its%20business%20model. \|url-status=live \|work=The Guardian}}</ref>, however, de-anonymization, especially of sensitive information, can lead to a restraining of competition<ref>{{Cite web \|last=Norris Donahue \|first=Lauren \|last2=Pereira Duarte \|first2=Victoria \|date=2024-10-15 \|title=DOJ Speaks Again: Information Exchanges Can Constitute Stand-Alone Violation of Antitrust Laws \|url=https://www.klgates.com/DOJ-Speaks-Again-Information-Exchanges-Can-Constitute-Stand-Alone-Violation-of-Antitrust-Laws-10-15-2024#:~:text=%E2%80%9CThe%20more%20sensitive%20the%20information,information%20can%20still%20raise%20concerns. \|url-status=live \|access-date=2026-05-05 \|website=K&L Gates}}</ref>.		The nature of Agri Stats data means that if the services they are providing aren't sufficiently anonymized, then it can lead to unreasonable market control. Their business model relies on a preservation of "confidentiality among processors by masking the sources of the data it reports"<ref>{{Cite news \|last=Douglas \|first=Leah \|last2=Leonard \|first2=Christopher \|date=2019-08-02 \|title=Is the US chicken industry cheating its farmers? \|url=https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/aug/03/is-the-us-chicken-industry-cheating-its-farmers#:~:text=Agri%20Stats%20was%20founded%20in,anything%20about%20its%20business%20model. \|url-status=live \|work=The Guardian}}</ref>, however, de-anonymization, especially of sensitive information, can lead to a restraining of competition<ref>{{Cite web \|last=Norris Donahue \|first=Lauren \|last2=Pereira Duarte \|first2=Victoria \|date=2024-10-15 \|title=DOJ Speaks Again: Information Exchanges Can Constitute Stand-Alone Violation of Antitrust Laws \|url=https://www.klgates.com/DOJ-Speaks-Again-Information-Exchanges-Can-Constitute-Stand-Alone-Violation-of-Antitrust-Laws-10-15-2024#:~:text=%E2%80%9CThe%20more%20sensitive%20the%20information,information%20can%20still%20raise%20concerns. \|url-status=live \|access-date=2026-05-05 \|website=K&L Gates}}</ref>.

Line 22:		Line 22:
	This is a list of all consumer-protection incidents this company is involved in. Any incidents not mentioned here can be found in the [[:Category:{{FULLPAGENAME}}\|{{PAGENAME}} category]].		This is a list of all consumer-protection incidents this company is involved in. Any incidents not mentioned here can be found in the [[:Category:{{FULLPAGENAME}}\|{{PAGENAME}} category]].

	===Anti-~~Competitive Practices~~===		===Anti-competitive practices===

	==== U.S. v. Agri Stats, Inc. (''September 2023—'') ====		====U.S. v. Agri Stats, Inc. (''September 2023—'')====
	On September 28, 2023 the Department of Justice filed a complaint against Agri Stats on the basis of violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1, which states that any contract "in restraint of trade or commerce among the several States, or with foreign nations, is declared to be illegal"<ref name=":0">{{Cite web \|date=1890-07-02 \|title=CHAPTER 1-MONOPOLIES AND COMBINATIONS IN RESTRAINT OF TRADE \|url=https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-1999-title15-section1&num=0&edition=1999 \|url-status=live \|access-date=2026-05-05 \|website=Office of the Law Revision Counsel - United States Code}}</ref>. In the filing the DOJ states that the United States brings action to "stop Agri Stats’ anticompetitive scheme and restore competition to heartland U.S. agriculture markets"<ref>{{Cite web \|date=2023-09-28 \|title=UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA \|url=https://www.justice.gov/d9/2023-10/416782.pdf \|url-status=live \|access-date=2026-05-05 \|website=Department of Justice}}</ref>. The complaint alleges that Agri Stats shared sensitive market information between competitors through subscription and business consultation services, which allowed processors to forecast competitors production and withhold output at beneficial times when it is was deemed profitable, potentially leading to higher than normal price increases. Additionally the DOJ states that Agri Stats shared sensitive wage information, farmer pay, and "other compensation metrics"<ref name=":0" />. On May 28, 2024 a Motion to Transfer and a Motion to Dismiss were filed with the District of Minnesota, both of which were dismissed<ref>{{Cite web \|date=2024-05-28 \|title=UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA \|url=https://www.justice.gov/atr/media/1359226/dl?inline \|url-status=live \|access-date=2026-05-06 \|website=Department of Justice \|pages=5, 14}}</ref>.		On September 28, 2023 the Department of Justice filed a complaint against Agri Stats on the basis of violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1, which states that any contract "in restraint of trade or commerce among the several States, or with foreign nations, is declared to be illegal"<ref name=":0">{{Cite web \|date=1890-07-02 \|title=CHAPTER 1-MONOPOLIES AND COMBINATIONS IN RESTRAINT OF TRADE \|url=https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-1999-title15-section1&num=0&edition=1999 \|url-status=live \|access-date=2026-05-05 \|website=Office of the Law Revision Counsel - United States Code}}</ref>. In the filing the DOJ states that the United States brings action to "stop Agri Stats’ anticompetitive scheme and restore competition to heartland U.S. agriculture markets"<ref>{{Cite web \|date=2023-09-28 \|title=UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA \|url=https://www.justice.gov/d9/2023-10/416782.pdf \|url-status=live \|access-date=2026-05-05 \|website=Department of Justice}}</ref>. The complaint alleges that Agri Stats shared sensitive market information between competitors through subscription and business consultation services, which allowed processors to forecast competitors production and withhold output at beneficial times when it is was deemed profitable, potentially leading to higher than normal price increases. Additionally the DOJ states that Agri Stats shared sensitive wage information, farmer pay, and "other compensation metrics"<ref name=":0" />. On May 28, 2024 a Motion to Transfer and a Motion to Dismiss were filed with the District of Minnesota, both of which were dismissed<ref>{{Cite web \|date=2024-05-28 \|title=UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA \|url=https://www.justice.gov/atr/media/1359226/dl?inline \|url-status=live \|access-date=2026-05-06 \|website=Department of Justice \|pages=5, 14}}</ref>.

Line 30:		Line 30:

	Agri Stats published a [https://www.agristats.com/doj-lawsuit-against-agri-stats-is-wrong-on-the-law-and-bad-for-consumers/ news article] on September 28, 2023 in response to the DOJ accusations, where they discuss the claim that their business practices assist producers in reducing production cost.		Agri Stats published a [https://www.agristats.com/doj-lawsuit-against-agri-stats-is-wrong-on-the-law-and-bad-for-consumers/ news article] on September 28, 2023 in response to the DOJ accusations, where they discuss the claim that their business practices assist producers in reducing production cost.

			=== In re Broiler Chicken Antitrust Litigation ===
			A class action lawsuit was brought against defendants including but not limited to Agri Stats alleging that the defedants and co-conspirators "conspired to fix, raise, maintain, and stabilize the price of Broilers, beginning at least as early as January 1, 2008"<ref>{{Cite web \|date=2026-05-05 \|title=Broiler Chicken Antitrust Litigation \|url=https://www.broilerchickenantitrustlitigation.com/ \|url-status=live \|access-date=2026-05-05 \|website=Broiler Chicken Antitrust Litigation}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web \|date=2022-05-27 \|title=MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER \|url=https://www.broilerchickenantitrustlitigation.com/docs/CertifiedClass/5644-Class%20Certification.pdf \|url-status=live \|access-date=2026-05-05 \|website=Broiler Chicken Antitrust Litigation}}</ref>. On April 14, 2026 a Chicago federal judge granted injunctive-relief settlement with Agri Stats, which procedurally progresses plaintiffs closer to the $203.5 million "consumer settlement fund that has been sitting in administrative limbo since... July 31, 2025"<ref>{{Cite web \|last=Levine \|first=Steve \|date=2026-04-21 \|title=Chicken Price-Fixing Settlement Update -- Agri Stats Preliminary Approval Clears Final Hurdle Before $203.35M Consumer Payout \|url=https://openclassactions.com/news/chicken-price-fixing-settlement-agri-stats-preliminary-approval-april-2026.php \|url-status=live \|access-date=2026-05-05 \|website=Open Class Actions}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web \|date=2026-04-21 \|title=$203.35M Chicken Price Fixing Class Action Settlement — 2026 {{!}} Closed \|url=https://openclassactions.com/settlement_chicken.php \|url-status=live \|access-date=2026-05-05 \|website=Open Class Actions}}</ref>.

	==Products==		==Products==

Sojourna: /* U.S. v. Agri Stats, Inc. (September 2023—) */

2026-05-06T04:04:10Z

U.S. v. Agri Stats, Inc. (September 2023—)

← Older revision		Revision as of 04:04, 6 May 2026
Line 24:		Line 24:
	===Anti-Competitive Practices===		===Anti-Competitive Practices===

	==== U.S. v. Agri Stats, Inc. (~~September 2023~~''—'') ====		==== U.S. v. Agri Stats, Inc. (''September 2023—'') ====
	On September 28, 2023 the Department of Justice filed a complaint against Agri Stats on the basis of violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1, which states that any contract "in restraint of trade or commerce among the several States, or with foreign nations, is declared to be illegal"<ref name=":0">{{Cite web \|date=1890-07-02 \|title=CHAPTER 1-MONOPOLIES AND COMBINATIONS IN RESTRAINT OF TRADE \|url=https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-1999-title15-section1&num=0&edition=1999 \|url-status=live \|access-date=2026-05-05 \|website=Office of the Law Revision Counsel - United States Code}}</ref>. In the filing the DOJ states that the United States brings action to "stop Agri Stats’ anticompetitive scheme and restore competition to heartland U.S. agriculture markets"<ref>{{Cite web \|date=2023-09-28 \|title=UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA \|url=https://www.justice.gov/d9/2023-10/416782.pdf \|url-status=live \|access-date=2026-05-05 \|website=Department of Justice}}</ref>. The complaint alleges that Agri Stats shared sensitive market information between competitors through subscription and business consultation services, which allowed processors to forecast competitors production and withhold output at beneficial times when it is was deemed profitable, potentially leading to higher than normal price increases. Additionally the DOJ states that Agri Stats shared sensitive wage information, farmer pay, and "other compensation metrics"<ref name=":0" />. On May 28, 2024 a Motion to Transfer and a Motion to Dismiss were filed with the District of Minnesota, both of which were dismissed<ref>{{Cite web \|date=2024-05-28 \|title=UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA \|url=https://www.justice.gov/atr/media/1359226/dl?inline \|url-status=live \|access-date=2026-05-06 \|website=Department of Justice \|pages=5, 14}}</ref>.		On September 28, 2023 the Department of Justice filed a complaint against Agri Stats on the basis of violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1, which states that any contract "in restraint of trade or commerce among the several States, or with foreign nations, is declared to be illegal"<ref name=":0">{{Cite web \|date=1890-07-02 \|title=CHAPTER 1-MONOPOLIES AND COMBINATIONS IN RESTRAINT OF TRADE \|url=https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-1999-title15-section1&num=0&edition=1999 \|url-status=live \|access-date=2026-05-05 \|website=Office of the Law Revision Counsel - United States Code}}</ref>. In the filing the DOJ states that the United States brings action to "stop Agri Stats’ anticompetitive scheme and restore competition to heartland U.S. agriculture markets"<ref>{{Cite web \|date=2023-09-28 \|title=UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA \|url=https://www.justice.gov/d9/2023-10/416782.pdf \|url-status=live \|access-date=2026-05-05 \|website=Department of Justice}}</ref>. The complaint alleges that Agri Stats shared sensitive market information between competitors through subscription and business consultation services, which allowed processors to forecast competitors production and withhold output at beneficial times when it is was deemed profitable, potentially leading to higher than normal price increases. Additionally the DOJ states that Agri Stats shared sensitive wage information, farmer pay, and "other compensation metrics"<ref name=":0" />. On May 28, 2024 a Motion to Transfer and a Motion to Dismiss were filed with the District of Minnesota, both of which were dismissed<ref>{{Cite web \|date=2024-05-28 \|title=UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA \|url=https://www.justice.gov/atr/media/1359226/dl?inline \|url-status=live \|access-date=2026-05-06 \|website=Department of Justice \|pages=5, 14}}</ref>.

	On Monday May 4, 2026, U.S. Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche lead a news conference where White House adviser Peter Navarro expressed that the "U.S. Department of Justice plans to settle its case against data company Agri Stats with an agreement officials hope will help drive down food ‌costs"<ref>{{Cite news \|last=Godoy \|first=Jody \|date=2026-05-04 \|title=DOJ plans to settle Agri Stats case, White House official says \|url=https://www.reuters.com/world/us/doj-taking-aim-food-prices-acting-ag-says-2026-05-04/ \|url-status=live \|access-date=2026-05-05 \|work=Reuters}}</ref>.		On Monday May 4, 2026, U.S. Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche lead a news conference where White House adviser Peter Navarro expressed that the "U.S. Department of Justice plans to settle its case against data company Agri Stats with an agreement officials hope will help drive down food ‌costs"<ref>{{Cite news \|last=Godoy \|first=Jody \|date=2026-05-04 \|title=DOJ plans to settle Agri Stats case, White House official says \|url=https://www.reuters.com/world/us/doj-taking-aim-food-prices-acting-ag-says-2026-05-04/ \|url-status=live \|access-date=2026-05-05 \|work=Reuters}}</ref>.

	Agri Stats published a [https://www.agristats.com/doj-lawsuit-against-agri-stats-is-wrong-on-the-law-and-bad-for-consumers/ news article] on September 28, 2023 in response to the DOJ accusations, where they discuss the claim that their business practices assist producers in reducing production cost.		Agri Stats published a [https://www.agristats.com/doj-lawsuit-against-agri-stats-is-wrong-on-the-law-and-bad-for-consumers/ news article] on September 28, 2023 in response to the DOJ accusations, where they discuss the claim that their business practices assist producers in reducing production cost.

	==Products==		==Products==

1jeremy: /* U.S. v. Agri Stats, Inc. (28 September 2023 - Present) */

2026-05-06T03:57:39Z

U.S. v. Agri Stats, Inc. (28 September 2023 - Present)

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:57, 6 May 2026
Line 24:		Line 24:
	===Anti-Competitive Practices===		===Anti-Competitive Practices===

	====U.S. v. Agri Stats, Inc. (28 September 2023 ~~- Present~~)====		==== U.S. v. Agri Stats, Inc. (September 2023''—'') ====
	On September 28, 2023 the Department of Justice filed a complaint against Agri Stats on the basis of violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1, which states that any contract "in restraint of trade or commerce among the several States, or with foreign nations, is declared to be illegal"<ref name=":0">{{Cite web \|date=1890-07-02 \|title=CHAPTER 1-MONOPOLIES AND COMBINATIONS IN RESTRAINT OF TRADE \|url=https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-1999-title15-section1&num=0&edition=1999 \|url-status=live \|access-date=2026-05-05 \|website=Office of the Law Revision Counsel - United States Code}}</ref>. In the filing the DOJ states that the United States brings action to "stop Agri Stats’ anticompetitive scheme and restore competition to heartland U.S. agriculture markets"<ref>{{Cite web \|date=2023-09-28 \|title=UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA \|url=https://www.justice.gov/d9/2023-10/416782.pdf \|url-status=live \|access-date=2026-05-05 \|website=Department of Justice}}</ref>. The complaint alleges that Agri Stats shared sensitive market information between competitors through subscription and business consultation services, which allowed processors to forecast competitors production and withhold output at beneficial times when it is was deemed profitable, potentially leading to higher than normal price increases. Additionally the DOJ states that Agri Stats shared sensitive wage information, farmer pay, and "other compensation metrics"<ref name=":0" />. On May 28, 2024 a Motion to Transfer and a Motion to Dismiss were filed with the District of Minnesota, both of which were dismissed<ref>{{Cite web \|date=2024-05-28 \|title=UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA \|url=https://www.justice.gov/atr/media/1359226/dl?inline \|url-status=live \|access-date=2026-05-06 \|website=Department of Justice \|pages=5, 14}}</ref>.		On September 28, 2023 the Department of Justice filed a complaint against Agri Stats on the basis of violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1, which states that any contract "in restraint of trade or commerce among the several States, or with foreign nations, is declared to be illegal"<ref name=":0">{{Cite web \|date=1890-07-02 \|title=CHAPTER 1-MONOPOLIES AND COMBINATIONS IN RESTRAINT OF TRADE \|url=https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-1999-title15-section1&num=0&edition=1999 \|url-status=live \|access-date=2026-05-05 \|website=Office of the Law Revision Counsel - United States Code}}</ref>. In the filing the DOJ states that the United States brings action to "stop Agri Stats’ anticompetitive scheme and restore competition to heartland U.S. agriculture markets"<ref>{{Cite web \|date=2023-09-28 \|title=UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA \|url=https://www.justice.gov/d9/2023-10/416782.pdf \|url-status=live \|access-date=2026-05-05 \|website=Department of Justice}}</ref>. The complaint alleges that Agri Stats shared sensitive market information between competitors through subscription and business consultation services, which allowed processors to forecast competitors production and withhold output at beneficial times when it is was deemed profitable, potentially leading to higher than normal price increases. Additionally the DOJ states that Agri Stats shared sensitive wage information, farmer pay, and "other compensation metrics"<ref name=":0" />. On May 28, 2024 a Motion to Transfer and a Motion to Dismiss were filed with the District of Minnesota, both of which were dismissed<ref>{{Cite web \|date=2024-05-28 \|title=UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA \|url=https://www.justice.gov/atr/media/1359226/dl?inline \|url-status=live \|access-date=2026-05-06 \|website=Department of Justice \|pages=5, 14}}</ref>.

Neige: Stub notice

2026-05-06T00:39:09Z

Stub notice

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:39, 6 May 2026
Line 1:		Line 1:
			{{StubNotice}}

	{{CompanyCargo		{{CompanyCargo
	\|Founded=1985		\|Founded=1985
Line 7:		Line 9:
	\|Website=https://www.agristats.com/\|Description=Provide comparative agricultural data to organizations in the industry in order to support data driven decision making.}}		\|Website=https://www.agristats.com/\|Description=Provide comparative agricultural data to organizations in the industry in order to support data driven decision making.}}

	Agri Stats is a company based in Indiana, U.S. which collects and analyzes comparative data to sell to agricultural organizations in support of data driven decision making. They were founded in 1865 by Jim Cox, who was a poultry farmer at the time. The company website states that the business started "as a way to help chicken producers make informed decisions based on flock-level cost and performance data"<ref>{{Cite web \|title=Company History \|url=https://www.agristats.com/company-history/ \|url-status=live \|access-date=2026-05-05 \|website=Agri Stats}}</ref>. They have since expanded into other agricultural markets including but not limited to swine, feed, livestock, sanitation, and vaccination.		'''Agri Stats''' is a company based in Indiana, U.S. which collects and analyzes comparative data to sell to agricultural organizations in support of data driven decision making. They were founded in 1865 by Jim Cox, who was a poultry farmer at the time. The company website states that the business started "as a way to help chicken producers make informed decisions based on flock-level cost and performance data"<ref>{{Cite web \|title=Company History \|url=https://www.agristats.com/company-history/ \|url-status=live \|access-date=2026-05-05 \|website=Agri Stats}}</ref>. They have since expanded into other agricultural markets including but not limited to swine, feed, livestock, sanitation, and vaccination.

	==Consumer-impact summary==		==Consumer-impact summary==

1jeremy: /* Business Model */

2026-05-05T23:12:04Z

Business Model

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:12, 5 May 2026
Line 11:		Line 11:
	==Consumer-impact summary==		==Consumer-impact summary==

	=== Business Model ===		===Business Model===
	With filings against the company by the Antitrust Division of the Department of Justice for anti-competitive practices, this shows a possibility for their business model being anti-competitive in nature.		With filings against the company by the Antitrust Division of the Department of Justice for anti-competitive practices<ref>{{Cite web \|date=2023-09-28 \|title=U.S. v. Agri Stats, Inc. \|url=https://www.justice.gov/atr/case/us-v-agri-stats-inc \|url-status=live \|access-date=2026-05-05 \|website=U.S. Department of Justice}}</ref>, this shows a possibility for their business model being anti-competitive in nature.

	=== Market Control ===		===Market Control===
	The nature of Agri Stats data means that if the services they are providing aren't sufficiently anonymized, then it can lead to unreasonable market control. Their business model relies on a preservation of "confidentiality among processors by masking the sources of the data it reports"<ref>{{Cite news \|last=Douglas \|first=Leah \|last2=Leonard \|first2=Christopher \|date=2019-08-02 \|title=Is the US chicken industry cheating its farmers? \|url=https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/aug/03/is-the-us-chicken-industry-cheating-its-farmers#:~:text=Agri%20Stats%20was%20founded%20in,anything%20about%20its%20business%20model. \|url-status=live \|work=The Guardian}}</ref>, however, de-anonymization, especially of sensitive information, can lead to a restraining of competition<ref>{{Cite web \|last=Norris Donahue \|first=Lauren \|last2=Pereira Duarte \|first2=Victoria \|date=2024-10-15 \|title=DOJ Speaks Again: Information Exchanges Can Constitute Stand-Alone Violation of Antitrust Laws \|url=https://www.klgates.com/DOJ-Speaks-Again-Information-Exchanges-Can-Constitute-Stand-Alone-Violation-of-Antitrust-Laws-10-15-2024#:~:text=%E2%80%9CThe%20more%20sensitive%20the%20information,information%20can%20still%20raise%20concerns. \|url-status=live \|access-date=2026-05-05 \|website=K&L Gates}}</ref>.		The nature of Agri Stats data means that if the services they are providing aren't sufficiently anonymized, then it can lead to unreasonable market control. Their business model relies on a preservation of "confidentiality among processors by masking the sources of the data it reports"<ref>{{Cite news \|last=Douglas \|first=Leah \|last2=Leonard \|first2=Christopher \|date=2019-08-02 \|title=Is the US chicken industry cheating its farmers? \|url=https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/aug/03/is-the-us-chicken-industry-cheating-its-farmers#:~:text=Agri%20Stats%20was%20founded%20in,anything%20about%20its%20business%20model. \|url-status=live \|work=The Guardian}}</ref>, however, de-anonymization, especially of sensitive information, can lead to a restraining of competition<ref>{{Cite web \|last=Norris Donahue \|first=Lauren \|last2=Pereira Duarte \|first2=Victoria \|date=2024-10-15 \|title=DOJ Speaks Again: Information Exchanges Can Constitute Stand-Alone Violation of Antitrust Laws \|url=https://www.klgates.com/DOJ-Speaks-Again-Information-Exchanges-Can-Constitute-Stand-Alone-Violation-of-Antitrust-Laws-10-15-2024#:~:text=%E2%80%9CThe%20more%20sensitive%20the%20information,information%20can%20still%20raise%20concerns. \|url-status=live \|access-date=2026-05-05 \|website=K&L Gates}}</ref>.

Line 20:		Line 20:
	This is a list of all consumer-protection incidents this company is involved in. Any incidents not mentioned here can be found in the [[:Category:{{FULLPAGENAME}}\|{{PAGENAME}} category]].		This is a list of all consumer-protection incidents this company is involved in. Any incidents not mentioned here can be found in the [[:Category:{{FULLPAGENAME}}\|{{PAGENAME}} category]].

	=== Anti-Competitive Practices ===		===Anti-Competitive Practices===

	==== U.S. v. Agri Stats, Inc. (28 September 2023 - Present) ====		====U.S. v. Agri Stats, Inc. (28 September 2023 - Present)====
	On September 28, 2023 the Department of Justice filed a complaint against Agri Stats on the basis of violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1, which states that any contract "in restraint of trade or commerce among the several States, or with foreign nations, is declared to be illegal"<ref name=":0">{{Cite web \|date=1890-07-02 \|title=CHAPTER 1-MONOPOLIES AND COMBINATIONS IN RESTRAINT OF TRADE \|url=https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-1999-title15-section1&num=0&edition=1999 \|url-status=live \|access-date=2026-05-05 \|website=Office of the Law Revision Counsel - United States Code}}</ref>. In the filing the DOJ states that the United States brings action to "stop Agri Stats’ anticompetitive scheme and restore competition to heartland U.S. agriculture markets"<ref>{{Cite web \|date=2023-09-28 \|title=UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA \|url=https://www.justice.gov/d9/2023-10/416782.pdf \|url-status=live \|access-date=2026-05-05 \|website=Department of Justice}}</ref>. The complaint alleges that Agri Stats shared sensitive market information between competitors through subscription and business consultation services, which allowed processors to forecast competitors production and withhold output at beneficial times when it is was deemed profitable, potentially leading to higher than normal price increases. Additionally the DOJ states that Agri Stats shared sensitive wage information, farmer pay, and "other compensation metrics"<ref name=":0" />. On May 28, 2024 a Motion to Transfer and a Motion to Dismiss were filed with the District of Minnesota, both of which were dismissed<ref>{{Cite web \|date=2024-05-28 \|title=UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA \|url=https://www.justice.gov/atr/media/1359226/dl?inline \|url-status=live \|access-date=2026-05-06 \|website=Department of Justice \|pages=5, 14}}</ref>.		On September 28, 2023 the Department of Justice filed a complaint against Agri Stats on the basis of violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1, which states that any contract "in restraint of trade or commerce among the several States, or with foreign nations, is declared to be illegal"<ref name=":0">{{Cite web \|date=1890-07-02 \|title=CHAPTER 1-MONOPOLIES AND COMBINATIONS IN RESTRAINT OF TRADE \|url=https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-1999-title15-section1&num=0&edition=1999 \|url-status=live \|access-date=2026-05-05 \|website=Office of the Law Revision Counsel - United States Code}}</ref>. In the filing the DOJ states that the United States brings action to "stop Agri Stats’ anticompetitive scheme and restore competition to heartland U.S. agriculture markets"<ref>{{Cite web \|date=2023-09-28 \|title=UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA \|url=https://www.justice.gov/d9/2023-10/416782.pdf \|url-status=live \|access-date=2026-05-05 \|website=Department of Justice}}</ref>. The complaint alleges that Agri Stats shared sensitive market information between competitors through subscription and business consultation services, which allowed processors to forecast competitors production and withhold output at beneficial times when it is was deemed profitable, potentially leading to higher than normal price increases. Additionally the DOJ states that Agri Stats shared sensitive wage information, farmer pay, and "other compensation metrics"<ref name=":0" />. On May 28, 2024 a Motion to Transfer and a Motion to Dismiss were filed with the District of Minnesota, both of which were dismissed<ref>{{Cite web \|date=2024-05-28 \|title=UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA \|url=https://www.justice.gov/atr/media/1359226/dl?inline \|url-status=live \|access-date=2026-05-06 \|website=Department of Justice \|pages=5, 14}}</ref>.