It can be tempting sometimes to talk with competitors about bidding strategies and whether or not they will bid on an upcoming procurement.  This is can be especially true in an IDIQ environment or BPA situation where there are fewer companies and the chances of people knowing each other well are good.  The “I’ll sit this one out, if you sit the next one out” strategy, though, is illegal.  Two companies recently found this out the hard way and had to collectively pay $29 million in fines for collusion and discouraging other companies from bidding on a Department of Energy auction.   In this specific case the government alleged that the defendants exerted pressure on the two other competing bidders to suppress their bids, depriving the Department of Energy of a fair bidding process and reducing the amount ultimately recovered in the auction.  The defendants were able to acquire the non-performing loan secured for far less than its fair market value.  We can already hear people saying, “what if it’s not an auction?”  It can’t be emphasized enough that the type of acquisition does not matter here.  What matters is whether companies engaged in anti-competitive behavior. The fine, too, is just one cost.  Legal fees, lost productivity, and now a bad reputation, will all cost the companies much more.  Not every company can compete on every task order, but make sure your decision to bid or not is a business decision, not one driven by the “wink-wink, nudge-nudge” culture of “we’ll the get the next one.”