Critical Loss in Market Definition: Methods and Court Decisions

IF 0.6 Q2 LAW Journal of Antitrust Enforcement Pub Date : 2022-05-26 DOI:10.1093/jaenfo/jnac014
M. Coate, Shawn W. Ulrick, John M. Yun
{"title":"Critical Loss in Market Definition: Methods and Court Decisions","authors":"M. Coate, Shawn W. Ulrick, John M. Yun","doi":"10.1093/jaenfo/jnac014","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Critical loss analysis is an empirical tool used to define relevant markets in antitrust law. The existence of two different critical loss methodologies, however, complicates its application. Harris and Simons introduced the first approach, which focused on evaluating the market-level effect of a small, but significant and non-transitory increase in price (‘SSNIP’). Later, O’Brien and Wickelgren, along with Katz and Shapiro, introduced a firm-level approach to critical loss to derive a test that applies mathematical models of demand systems, foundationally based on a single-firm SSNIP, to proxy for a market-level price increase. A critical loss controversy evolved as the two tests can, but do not necessarily, generate different relevant markets. This article examines the choice between the two methods, reviews recent court decisions, and guides practitioners and courts as to when each approach makes the most sense.","PeriodicalId":42471,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Antitrust Enforcement","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-05-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Antitrust Enforcement","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jaenfo/jnac014","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Critical loss analysis is an empirical tool used to define relevant markets in antitrust law. The existence of two different critical loss methodologies, however, complicates its application. Harris and Simons introduced the first approach, which focused on evaluating the market-level effect of a small, but significant and non-transitory increase in price (‘SSNIP’). Later, O’Brien and Wickelgren, along with Katz and Shapiro, introduced a firm-level approach to critical loss to derive a test that applies mathematical models of demand systems, foundationally based on a single-firm SSNIP, to proxy for a market-level price increase. A critical loss controversy evolved as the two tests can, but do not necessarily, generate different relevant markets. This article examines the choice between the two methods, reviews recent court decisions, and guides practitioners and courts as to when each approach makes the most sense.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
市场定义中的临界损失:方法与法院判决
临界损失分析是反垄断法中用于定义相关市场的一种实证工具。然而,两种不同的临界损失方法的存在使其应用变得复杂。Harris和Simons介绍了第一种方法,该方法侧重于评估价格小幅但显著且非暂时性上涨的市场水平影响(“SNIP”)。后来,O'Brien和Wickelgren,以及Katz和Shapiro,引入了一种企业层面的临界损失方法,以推导出一个测试,该测试应用需求系统的数学模型,基本上基于单个企业的SSNIP,来代表市场层面的价格上涨。随着这两项测试可能但不一定会产生不同的相关市场,关键损失争议也随之演变。本文考察了这两种方法之间的选择,回顾了最近的法院判决,并指导从业者和法院何时每种方法最有意义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.30
自引率
14.30%
发文量
28
期刊介绍: The journal covers a wide range of enforcement related topics, including: public and private competition law enforcement, cooperation between competition agencies, the promotion of worldwide competition law enforcement, optimal design of enforcement policies, performance measurement, empirical analysis of enforcement policies, combination of functions in the competition agency mandate, and competition agency governance. Other topics include the role of the judiciary in competition enforcement, leniency, cartel prosecution, effective merger enforcement, competition enforcement and human rights, and the regulation of sectors.
期刊最新文献
Competition policy and the consumer welfare standard The evolution of EU competition law and policy in the pharmaceutical sector: long-lasting impacts of a pandemic From silence to vigilance: overcoming barriers in public reporting of bid-rigging and cartel violations Agency Insights: The first steps of the DMA adventure Why do people think price fixing is unfair? An empirical legal study on public attitudes in the USA
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1