There are often legitimate reasons why companies enter into agreements that contain provisions or obligations that risk restricting competition. In particular, this will be the case where arrangements are concluded in order to generate or promote beneficial effects (so-called 'efficiencies') which, absent the restriction contained in the agreements, would otherwise not arise. In general, such efficiencies derive from vertically or horizontally aligned companies working together to achieve something that individually they could not otherwise achieve—or at least not as efficiently (due to financial, technical, and/or logistical issues). Research and development, production, purchase, and distribution/sales activities represent distinct stages in the supply chain—with firms at each stage deciding whether to undertake the given process alone or with others. Where collective rather than individual action is deemed optimal, parties might agree on restraints or obligations deemed necessary to protect an investment in relation to, for example, the development of a geographical market, a technology, a production plant, or an industrial process or, alternatively, to increase the parties' purchasing power vis-à-vis a powerful supplier. More commonly, restraints