IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/jcomle/v7y2011i3p497-522..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The 2010 Merger Guidelines, Critical Loss, And Linear Demand

Author

Listed:
  • Jay Ezrielev
  • Joseph J. Simons

Abstract

Critical Loss Analysis (CLA) is a widely used tool for market definition under the hypothetical monopolist test. The 2010 Horizontal Merger Guidelines appear to refer to a specific version of CLA that assumes that (1) pre-merger pricing satisfies the Lerner Condition; and (2) products' demand functions are linear in price in the vicinity of the pre-merger equilibrium point. We show that under general conditions, the linear demand assumption is not satisfied and can lead to significant errors in the application of the hypothetical monopolist test. We develop a model of differentiated products competition that shows that under reasonable assumptions, products' demand functions are concave around the pre-merger equilibrium point. The concavity of the demand curve appears to be related to clustering of consumers around products in the differentiated product space. When such clustering occurs, the model suggests that demand will tend to have a concave shape around the pre-merger equilibrium point.

Suggested Citation

  • Jay Ezrielev & Joseph J. Simons, 2011. "The 2010 Merger Guidelines, Critical Loss, And Linear Demand," Journal of Competition Law and Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 7(3), pages 497-522.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:jcomle:v:7:y:2011:i:3:p:497-522.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/joclec/nhr007
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Coate, Malcolm B. & Ulrick, Shawn W. & Yun, John M., 2021. "Tailoring critical loss to the competitive process," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(C).

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • K21 - Law and Economics - - Regulation and Business Law - - - Antitrust Law
    • L40 - Industrial Organization - - Antitrust Issues and Policies - - - General

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:jcomle:v:7:y:2011:i:3:p:497-522.. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/jcle .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.