Substantial evidence supported the jury verdict finding that defendant had violated Sherman Act section 1 by agreeing with a competitor to fix the terms of credit they would make available to plaintiff.  Terms of credit are part of the price; hence, horizontal agreement to fix credit terms are illegal per se.  Substantial evidence also support the jury verdict finding defendant violated Sherman Act, section 2 by attempting to monopolize by acquiring one of its only two competitors in the business of manufacturing telescopes and by agreeing with the other competitor to allocate products and avoid competing with each other.