Predatory Pricing and Platform Competition in India

IF 0.7 Q2 LAW World Competition Pub Date : 2021-03-01 DOI:10.54648/woco2021006
Akanshha Agrawal
{"title":"Predatory Pricing and Platform Competition in India","authors":"Akanshha Agrawal","doi":"10.54648/woco2021006","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Predatory pricing has been a concern since the inception of competition policy. Scholars from different schools have large disagreements about it, with some arguing that predation does not exist to others considering it a legitimate threat to competition. As predatory pricing theory is largely concerned with price cost test, the issue is further complicated while looking at two sided platforms. Due to network effects, the value of the platform for the users changes with the number of users on the network. Therefore, the price of services is influenced by multiplicity of factors rather than just the cost of the service.The aim of the paper is to note such economic theory and apply this in the Indian jurisprudence on predatory pricing. Part I of the paper provides a non-technical introduction to the economics of two-sided platforms. It explains the rationale behind below cost pricing and critiques the usage of a price cost test for determining predation in case of two-sided platforms. Part II touches on the international regulation of predatory pricing and establishes the context for the Indian jurisprudence. Part III discusses the Indian jurisprudence surrounding predatory pricing. This elaborates on the legislative history and the judicial decisions concerning predatory pricing and platform competition in India. This part argues that the Indian jurisprudence has completely disregarded the economic theory of predation in case of two-sided platforms and the adjudications are merely based on a price cost test.\nPredatory Pricing, India, CCI, Competition Law, Chicago School, Game Theory, Uber, Deep Discounting, Predatory Pricing Theory, Abuse of Dominance","PeriodicalId":43861,"journal":{"name":"World Competition","volume":"12 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2021-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"World Competition","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.54648/woco2021006","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

Predatory pricing has been a concern since the inception of competition policy. Scholars from different schools have large disagreements about it, with some arguing that predation does not exist to others considering it a legitimate threat to competition. As predatory pricing theory is largely concerned with price cost test, the issue is further complicated while looking at two sided platforms. Due to network effects, the value of the platform for the users changes with the number of users on the network. Therefore, the price of services is influenced by multiplicity of factors rather than just the cost of the service.The aim of the paper is to note such economic theory and apply this in the Indian jurisprudence on predatory pricing. Part I of the paper provides a non-technical introduction to the economics of two-sided platforms. It explains the rationale behind below cost pricing and critiques the usage of a price cost test for determining predation in case of two-sided platforms. Part II touches on the international regulation of predatory pricing and establishes the context for the Indian jurisprudence. Part III discusses the Indian jurisprudence surrounding predatory pricing. This elaborates on the legislative history and the judicial decisions concerning predatory pricing and platform competition in India. This part argues that the Indian jurisprudence has completely disregarded the economic theory of predation in case of two-sided platforms and the adjudications are merely based on a price cost test. Predatory Pricing, India, CCI, Competition Law, Chicago School, Game Theory, Uber, Deep Discounting, Predatory Pricing Theory, Abuse of Dominance
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
印度的掠夺性定价和平台竞争
自竞争政策出台以来,掠夺性定价一直是一个令人担忧的问题。来自不同学派的学者对此有很大的分歧,一些人认为掠夺并不存在,另一些人认为这是对竞争的合法威胁。由于掠夺性定价理论主要涉及价格成本测试,如果考虑到双边平台,问题就更加复杂了。由于网络效应,平台对于用户的价值会随着网络上用户的数量而变化。因此,服务的价格受到多种因素的影响,而不仅仅是服务的成本。本文的目的是注意到这样的经济理论,并将其应用于印度的掠夺性定价法学。本文的第一部分对双边平台的经济学进行了非技术的介绍。它解释了低于成本定价背后的基本原理,并批评了在双边平台情况下使用价格成本测试来确定掠夺的做法。第二部分涉及掠夺性定价的国际规制,并为印度的法理建立了背景。第三部分讨论了印度关于掠夺性定价的法理。本文阐述了印度关于掠夺性定价和平台竞争的立法历史和司法判决。这一部分认为,印度法理学完全忽视了双边平台案件中掠夺的经济理论,判决仅仅基于价格成本测试。掠夺性定价,印度,CCI,竞争法,芝加哥学派,博弈论,优步,深度折扣,掠夺性定价理论,滥用支配地位
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
0.90
自引率
25.00%
发文量
18
期刊介绍: Information not localized
期刊最新文献
The Decriminalization of Cartel Activity in Kuwait: A Regulatory Framework Collective or Collusive Agreements? World Competition Book Review: Regulation 1/2003 and EU Antitrust Enforcement: A Systematic Guide Kris Dekeyser, Céline Gauer, Johannes Laitenberger, Nils Wahl, Wouter Wils & Luca Prete (Alphen aan den Rijn: Wolters Kluwer 2023) Big Data Requests: The Commission’s Powers to Collect Documents in Investigations Under Articles 101 and 102 TFEU
×
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