Showing results for: “premium natural and organic”
The Butcher, the Baker and the Candlestick Maker (2.0)
My colleague Tom Hazlett strikes again in Barron’s on Google’s transformation from its initial reluctance to advertise and its desire to stick to the non-profit sector to an unrelenting market driven approach to its discovery that search-term clicks were … well … profitable. Here’s Hazlett: They discovered that Google’s clean page layout provided a clean ... The Butcher, the Baker and the Candlestick Maker (2.0)
The EU tightens the noose around Google
Here we go again. The European Commission is after Google more formally than a few months ago (but not yet having issued a Statement of Objections). For background on the single-firm antitrust issues surrounding Google I modestly recommend my paper with Josh, Google and the Limits of Antitrust: The Case Against the Antitrust Case Against ... The EU tightens the noose around Google
FTC’s Amazon Complaint: Perhaps the Greatest Affront to Consumer and Producer Welfare in Antitrust History
“Seldom in the history of U.S. antitrust law has one case had the potential to do so much good [HARM] for so many people.” – Federal Trade Commission (FTC) Bureau of Competition Deputy Director John Newman, quoted in a Sept. 26 press release announcing the FTC’s lawsuit against Amazon (correction IN ALL CAPS is mine) ... FTC’s Amazon Complaint: Perhaps the Greatest Affront to Consumer and Producer Welfare in Antitrust History
Let Ethanol Fail
The recent State of the Union address, in which President Bush called for an almost 500% increase in alternative fuel consumption by 2017, once again turned the nation’s attention to the various elixirs that promise to make the U.S. “energy independent.” The closer we look, though, the less appealing the leading alternative fuel — ethanol ... Let Ethanol Fail
Biweekly FTC Roundup: A Guide for the Perplexed Edition
In a prior post, I made the important if wholly unoriginal point that the Federal Trade Commission’s (FTC) recent policy statement regarding unfair methods of competition (UMC)—perhaps a form of “soft law”—has neither legal force nor precedential value. Gus Hurwitz offers a more thorough discussion of the issue here. But policy statements may still have ... Biweekly FTC Roundup: A Guide for the Perplexed Edition
Extending & Rebutting Edelman & Lockwood on Search Bias
In my last post, I discussed Edelman & Lockwood’s (E&L’s) attempt to catch search engines in the act of biasing their results—as well as their failure to actually do so. In this post, I present my own results from replicating their study. Unlike E&L, I find that Bing is consistently more biased than Google, for ... Extending & Rebutting Edelman & Lockwood on Search Bias
Antitrust Populists Don’t Seem to Care About the Poor
Antitrust populists like Biden White House official Tim Wu and author Matt Stoller decry the political influence of large firms. But instead of advocating for policies that tackle this political influence directly, they seek reforms to antitrust enforcement that aim to limit the economic advantages of these firms, believing that will translate into political enfeeblement. ... Antitrust Populists Don’t Seem to Care About the Poor
Political Philosophy, Competition, and Competition Law: The Road to and from Neoliberalism, Part 2
In just over a century since its dawn, liberalism had reshaped much of the world along the lines of individualism, free markets, private property, contract, trade, and competition. A modest laissez-faire political philosophy that had begun to germinate in the minds of French Physiocrats in the early 18th century had, scarcely 150 years later, inspired ... Political Philosophy, Competition, and Competition Law: The Road to and from Neoliberalism, Part 2
The folly of the FTC’s Section Five case against Google
In the past weeks, the chatter surrounding a possible FTC antitrust case against Google has risen in volume, thanks largely to the FTC’s hiring of litigator Beth Wilkinson. The question remains, however, what this aggressive move portends and, more importantly, why the FTC is taking it. It is worth noting at the outset that, as ... The folly of the FTC’s Section Five case against Google
The European Approach to Standard Essential Patents (SEPs): A Sound Critique by Scalia Law’s Global Antitrust Institute (GAI)
The Scalia Law School’s Global Antitrust Institute (GAI) has once again penned a trenchant law and economics-based critique of a foreign jurisdiction’s competition policy pronouncement. On April 28, the GAI posted a comment (GAI Comment) in response to a “Communication from the [European] Commission (EC) on Standard Essential Patents (SEPs) for a European Digitalised Economy” ... The European Approach to Standard Essential Patents (SEPs): A Sound Critique by Scalia Law’s Global Antitrust Institute (GAI)
Amazon/Whole Foods: What Me Worry?
Brandeis is back, with today’s neo-Brandeisians reflexively opposing virtually all mergers involving large firms. For them, industry concentration has grown to crisis proportions and breaking up big companies should be the animating goal not just of antitrust policy but of U.S. economic policy generally. The key to understanding the neo-Brandeisian opposition to the Whole Foods/Amazon mergers is that it has nothing to do with consumer welfare, and everything to do with a large firm animus. Sabeel Rahman, a Roosevelt Institute scholar, concedes that big firms give us higher productivity, and hence lower prices, but he dismisses the value of that. He writes, “If consumer prices are our only concern, it is hard to see how Amazon, Comcast, and companies such as Uber need regulation.” And this gets to the key point regarding most of the opposition to the merger: it had nothing to do with concerns about monopolistic effects on economic efficiency or consumer prices. It had everything to do with opposition to big firm for the sole reason that they are big.
Intermediaries: The Hero We Need?
In policy discussions about the digital economy, a background assumption that frequently underlies the discourse is that intermediaries and centralization always and only serve as a cost to consumers, and to society more generally. Thus, one commonly sees arguments that consumers would be better off if they could freely combine products from different trading partners. ... Intermediaries: The Hero We Need?
