Showing archive for: “Consumer Welfare Standard”
Breaking Up: “It’s Not You, It’s Me”, “Maybe We Should See Other People” and “with or without You”
[This post is the second in an ongoing symposium on “Should We Break Up Big Tech?” that will feature analysis and opinion from various perspectives.] [This post is authored by Philip Marsden, Bank of England & College of Europe, IG/Twitter: @competition_flaneur] Since the release of our Furman Report, I have been blessed with an uptick in #antitrusttourism. ... Breaking Up: “It’s Not You, It’s Me”, “Maybe We Should See Other People” and “with or without You”
Can Experts Structure Markets? Don’t Count On It.
Complexity need not follow size. A star is huge but mostly homogenous. “It’s core is so hot,” explains Martin Rees, “that no chemicals can exist (complex molecules get torn apart); it is basically an amorphous gas of atomic nuclei and electrons.” Nor does complexity always arise from remoteness of space or time. Celestial gyrations can be ... Can Experts Structure Markets? Don’t Count On It.
A Bargaining Model v. Reality in FTC v. Qualcomm: A Reply to Kattan & Muris
Introduction In a recent article[1] Joe Kattan and Tim Muris (K&M) criticize our article[2] on the predictive power of bargaining models in antitrust, in which we used two recent applications to explore implications for uses of bargaining models in courts and antitrust agencies moving forward. Like other theoretical models used to predict competitive effects, complex bargaining models ... A Bargaining Model v. Reality in FTC v. Qualcomm: A Reply to Kattan & Muris
Senator Warner’s retrogressive proposals could lead to arbitrary and capricious interventions that would harm entrepreneurs and consumers
Last week, I objected to Senator Warner relying on the flawed AOL/Time Warner merger conditions as a template for tech regulatory policy, but there is a much deeper problem contained in his proposals. Although he does not explicitly say “big is bad” when discussing competition issues, the thrust of much of what he recommends would ... Senator Warner’s retrogressive proposals could lead to arbitrary and capricious interventions that would harm entrepreneurs and consumers
The European Commission’s Google Android decision takes a mistaken, ahistorical view of the smartphone market
What to make of Wednesday’s decision by the European Commission alleging that Google has engaged in anticompetitive behavior? In this post, I contrast the European Commission’s (EC) approach to competition policy with US antitrust, briefly explore the history of smartphones and then discuss the ruling. Asked about the EC’s decision the day it was announced, ... The European Commission’s Google Android decision takes a mistaken, ahistorical view of the smartphone market
Weekend reads: Big is bad edition
Big is bad, part 1: Kafka, Coase, and Brandeis walk into a bar … There’s a quip in a well-known textbook that Nobel laureate Ronald Coase said he’d grown weary of antitrust because when prices went up, the judges said it was monopoly; when the prices went down, they said it was predatory pricing; and ... Weekend reads: Big is bad edition
The illiberal vision of neo-Brandeisian antitrust
Following is the (slightly expanded and edited) text of my remarks from the panel, Antitrust and the Tech Industry: What Is at Stake?, hosted last Thursday by CCIA. Bruce Hoffman (keynote), Bill Kovacic, Nicolas Petit, and Christine Caffarra also spoke. If we’re lucky Bruce will post his remarks on the FTC website; they were very ... The illiberal vision of neo-Brandeisian antitrust
Google’s India case and a return to consumer-focused antitrust
What happened Today, following a six year investigation into Google’s business practices in India, the Competition Commission of India (CCI) issued its ruling. Two things, in particular, are remarkable about the decision. First, while the CCI’s staff recommended a finding of liability on a litany of claims (the exact number is difficult to infer from ... Google’s India case and a return to consumer-focused antitrust
Fourth Annual Heritage Foundation Antitrust Conference: A Quick Summary
On January 23rd, the Heritage Foundation convened its Fourth Annual Antitrust Conference, “Trump Antitrust Policy after One Year.” The entire Conference can be viewed online (here). The Conference featured a keynote speech, followed by three separate panels that addressed developments at the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), at the Justice Department’s Antitrust Division (DOJ), and in ... Fourth Annual Heritage Foundation Antitrust Conference: A Quick Summary
The Unreasonable Demands of Antitrust Populism
A panelist brought up an interesting tongue-in-cheek observation about the rising populist antitrust movement at a Heritage antitrust event this week. To the extent that the new populist antitrust movement is broadly concerned about effects on labor and wage depression, then, in principle, it should also be friendly to cartels. Although counterintuitive, employees have long ... The Unreasonable Demands of Antitrust Populism
FTC Commissioner Joshua Wright gets his competiton enforcement guidelines
Today, for the first time in its 100-year history, the FTC issued enforcement guidelines for cases brought by the agency under the Unfair Methods of Competition (“UMC”) provisions of Section 5 of the FTC Act. The Statement of Enforcement Principles represents a significant victory for Commissioner Joshua Wright, who has been a tireless advocate for ... FTC Commissioner Joshua Wright gets his competiton enforcement guidelines
International Competition Network (ICN) 2015 Annual Conference: A Higher Profile for Competition Advocacy
The ICN’s 14 Annual Conference, held in Sydney, Australia, from April 28th through May 1st, as usual, provided a forum for highlighting the work of ICN working groups on cartels, mergers, unilateral conduct, agency effectiveness, and advocacy. The Conference approved multiple working group products, including a guidance document on investigative process that reflects key investigative ... International Competition Network (ICN) 2015 Annual Conference: A Higher Profile for Competition Advocacy
