Showing results for: “loyalty discounts”
Cuomo Goes After Intel (to Get AMD Plant for NY?)
New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo has issued a subpoena to Intel Corp. as part of an investigation into whether Intel’s discounting practices violate federal or state antitrust laws. According to Cuomo’s press release, the subpoena seeks documents and information concerning Intel’s pricing practices and possible attempt to exclude competitors through its market domination. The ... Cuomo Goes After Intel (to Get AMD Plant for NY?)
Teaching RPM After Leegin
Back in the olden days (i.e., before this past summer), a manufacturer automatically violated the antitrust laws — no ifs, ands, or buts — if he agreed with a retailer that the latter would charge at least a minimum price for the manufacturer’s products. For reasons we elaborated ad nauseum (click and scroll down), that ... Teaching RPM After Leegin
The Best Antitrust Articles of 2007
Danny Sokol has collected picks from antitrust specialists around the globe. There were plenty of excellent articles and books to pick from but I ultimately selected this article from Keith Hylton and Fei Deng and this book on the Microsoft Case from Bill Page and John Lopatka. You can see the rest of the picks ... The Best Antitrust Articles of 2007
Scrapping the Notion of Fiduciary Duties Owed to Shareholders
U of Chicago Law Professors Douglas Baird and M. Todd Henderson (my very smart, very tall law school classmate) recently posted a provocative paper on SSRN. The paper, Other People’s Money, contends that “the oft-repeated maxim that directors of a corporation owe a fiduciary duty to the shareholders” is an “almost-right principle that has distorted ... Scrapping the Notion of Fiduciary Duties Owed to Shareholders
Intel’s Loyalty Rebates: Why the Interventionists Are Wrong
The New York Times isn’t the only one calling for the FTC to go after Intel for its purportedly exclusionary discounting. The reliably interventionist American Antitrust Institute concurs. In a recent letter to the FTC, it wrote: Based on allegations by AMD [Advanced Micro Devices] in a private U.S. case and on what we have ... Intel’s Loyalty Rebates: Why the Interventionists Are Wrong
NYT’s Freudian Slip
I just wandered down to the local Panera Bread for lunch and picked up someone’s discarded copy of today’s New York Times. One of today’s editorials, F.T.C. Goes AWOL, claims that the Federal Trade Commission “clearly shares the ‘starve the regulators and coddle industry’ philosophy that has driven the Bush administration for seven years.” The ... NYT’s Freudian Slip
The Aftermath of a Type I Error: The Case of Conwood Co. v. United States Tobacco
It looks like California consumers, unlike their counterparts in several other states, will be getting cash instead of coupons in their settlement against U.S. Tobacco in one of the many follow-on actions to Conwood Co. v. United States Tobacco. The settlement looks to be in the range of $96 million with qualifying customers taking home ... The Aftermath of a Type I Error: The Case of Conwood Co. v. United States Tobacco
Bootleggers and Baptists, Madison Style
Last Wednesday, the Wisconsin Supreme Court heard oral argument on whether to reinstate an antitrust lawsuit against taverns around the University of Wisconsin (story here). In 2002, the taverns agreed to eliminate drink specials after 8:00 PM on Fridays and Saturdays. A group of students filed a class action lawsuit against the taverns for injunctive ... Bootleggers and Baptists, Madison Style
Interesting Section 2 Developments
A pair of interesting antitrust appellate decisions have been released over the past few days involving single firm conduct and Section 2: Cascade Health Solutions v. PeaceHealth (9th Cir.) and Broadcom v. Qualcomm (3rd Cir.). First, the Ninth Circuit’s decision in Cascade Health Solutions v. PeaceHealth reversed the district court’s Lepage’s based jury instruction in ... Interesting Section 2 Developments
The EC versus Intel: The SO is issued
To no one’s great surprise (other than that it took so long), the European Commission issued a Statement of Objections against Intel today. More information as it becomes available. For those looking for a little insight into the case, you might be intrested in The FTC’s 1998 Complaint against Intel and the resulting Consent Decree (the entire case ... The EC versus Intel: The SO is issued
Dr. Miles (1911-2007)
So Dr. Miles is dead. May he rest in peace. No great surprises in the majority opinion in Leegin. Justice Kennedy, quite rightly, emphasized points we have asserted numerous times on this blog. Most notably: The per se rule should be reserved for practices that are always, or almost always, anticompetitive. The common law nature ... Dr. Miles (1911-2007)
Cass on Leegin
Ronald Cass, dean emeritus of Boston University Law School, argues in today’s WSJ that the Supreme Court should overrule Dr. Miles: The decision was a mistake that has plagued antitrust law and American business ever since. Manufacturers have no interest in suppressing price competition to help increase profits for retailers. A manufacturer with a meaningful ... Cass on Leegin
