<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Will Section 2 Thwart the DOJ&#039;s New Antitrust Agenda?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://truthonthemarket.com/2009/06/05/will-section-2-thwart-the-dojs-new-antitrust-agenda/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://truthonthemarket.com/2009/06/05/will-section-2-thwart-the-dojs-new-antitrust-agenda/</link>
	<description>Academic commentary on law, business, economics and more</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 02 Jun 2012 12:17:14 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Josh</title>
		<link>http://truthonthemarket.com/2009/06/05/will-section-2-thwart-the-dojs-new-antitrust-agenda/#comment-7775</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Josh]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 08 Jun 2009 15:28:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.truthonthemarket.com/?p=2340#comment-7775</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Yes.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yes.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: antitrust guy</title>
		<link>http://truthonthemarket.com/2009/06/05/will-section-2-thwart-the-dojs-new-antitrust-agenda/#comment-7774</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[antitrust guy]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 08 Jun 2009 13:52:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.truthonthemarket.com/?p=2340#comment-7774</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Isn&#039;t the imposition of costs pretty significant?  In the merger area most cases are settled by consent decree.  Sure, in many instances the government has a dead-bang winner on the divested assets/market.  But even in closer cases, businesses are willing to sell assets as a cost of getting the bigger deal done.

If DOJ (or FTC) launches investigations on &quot;aggressive&quot; theories of Section 2, only a few of those cases are likely to reach trial, and even then only in 2011, 2012 or so.  But the cost of the investigation and possible consents may create a stifling atmosphere for larger companies.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Isn&#8217;t the imposition of costs pretty significant?  In the merger area most cases are settled by consent decree.  Sure, in many instances the government has a dead-bang winner on the divested assets/market.  But even in closer cases, businesses are willing to sell assets as a cost of getting the bigger deal done.</p>
<p>If DOJ (or FTC) launches investigations on &#8220;aggressive&#8221; theories of Section 2, only a few of those cases are likely to reach trial, and even then only in 2011, 2012 or so.  But the cost of the investigation and possible consents may create a stifling atmosphere for larger companies.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

