IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/oxecpp/v65y2013i2p567-593.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Can the failing firm defence rule be counterproductive?

Author

Listed:
  • Helder Vasconcelos

Abstract

The present paper investigates the role of the failing firm defence (FFD) concept in the merger control process within a Cournot setting where (i) endogenous mergers are motivated by prospective efficiency gains and (ii) mergers must be submitted to an antitrust authority that might demand partial divestiture for approval. The findings show that when the FFD concept is one of the tools available for controlling the merger process, firms can strategically embark on a merger that makes other firms fail and then buy out the exiting outsider firm(s), thereby leading to the monopolization of the industry. This implies that in some circumstances, a consumer--surplus--maximizing market structure cannot be achieved if the FFD concept is available, whereas it can if the FFD concept is ruled out. Copyright 2013 Oxford University Press 2012 All rights reserved, Oxford University Press.

Suggested Citation

  • Helder Vasconcelos, 2013. "Can the failing firm defence rule be counterproductive?," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 65(2), pages 567-593, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:oxecpp:v:65:y:2013:i:2:p:567-593
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/oep/gps034
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

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

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Farrell, Joseph & Shapiro, Carl, 1990. "Horizontal Mergers: An Equilibrium Analysis," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 80(1), pages 107-126, March.
    2. Helder Vasconcelos, 2010. "Efficiency Gains And Structural Remedies In Merger Control," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 58(4), pages 742-766, December.
    3. Persson, Lars, 2004. "Predation and mergers: Is merger law counterproductive?," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 48(2), pages 239-258, April.
    4. Motta, Massimo & Vasconcelos, Helder, 2005. "Efficiency gains and myopic antitrust authority in a dynamic merger game," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 23(9-10), pages 777-801, December.
    5. Horn, Henrik & Persson, Lars, 2001. "The equilibrium ownership of an international oligopoly," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 53(2), pages 307-333, April.
    6. Perry, Martin K & Porter, Robert H, 1985. "Oligopoly and the Incentive for Horizontal Merger," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 75(1), pages 219-227, March.
    7. Neven, Damien J. & Roller, Lars-Hendrik, 2005. "Consumer surplus vs. welfare standard in a political economy model of merger control," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 23(9-10), pages 829-848, December.
    8. Lars Persson, 2005. "The Failing Firm Defense," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 53(2), pages 175-201, June.
    9. Helder Vasconcelos, 2005. "Tacit Collusion, Cost Asymmetries, and Mergers," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 36(1), pages 39-62, Spring.
    10. Gautam Gowrisankaran, 1999. "A Dynamic Model of Endogenous Horizonal Mergers," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 30(1), pages 56-83, Spring.
    11. Motta,Massimo, 2004. "Competition Policy," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521016919.
    12. Kamien, Morton I. & Zang, Israel, 1991. "Competitively cost advantageous mergers and monopolization," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 3(3), pages 323-338, August.
    13. Besanko, David & Spulber, Daniel F, 1993. "Contested Mergers and Equilibrium Antitrust Policy," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 9(1), pages 1-29, April.
    14. Yamey, B S, 1972. "Predatory Price Cutting: Notes and Comments," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 15(1), pages 129-142, April.
    15. Weeds, Helen & Mason, Robin, 2002. "The Failing Firm Defence: Merger Policy and Entry," CEPR Discussion Papers 3664, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    16. Garth Saloner, 1987. "Predation, Mergers, and Incomplete Information," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 18(2), pages 165-186, Summer.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Bernard Franck & Nicolas Le Pape, 2020. "The limited liability effect: Implications for anticompetitive horizontal mergers," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 22(6), pages 2082-2102, December.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Mason, Robin & Weeds, Helen, 2013. "Merger policy, entry, and entrepreneurship," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 23-38.
    2. Patrice Bougette & Florent Venayre, 2008. "Contrôles a priori et a posteriori des concentrations : comment augmenter l'efficacité des politiques de concurrence," Revue d'économie industrielle, De Boeck Université, vol. 0(1), pages 9-40.
    3. Mariana Cunha & Hélder Vasconcelos, 2018. "Sequential Mergers and Antitrust Authority’s Decisions in Stackelberg Markets," Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, Springer, vol. 18(3), pages 373-394, September.
    4. Cosnita, Andreea & Tropeano, Jean-Philippe, 2009. "Negotiating remedies: Revealing the merger efficiency gains," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 27(2), pages 188-196, March.
    5. Fumagalli, Eileen & Vasconcelos, Helder, 2009. "Sequential cross-border mergers," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 27(2), pages 175-187, March.
    6. Mariana Cunha & Paula Sarmento & Hélder Vasconcelos, 2014. "Uncertain Efficiency Gains and Merger Policy," FEP Working Papers 527, Universidade do Porto, Faculdade de Economia do Porto.
    7. Alessandro Fedele & Massimo Tognoni, 2010. "Failing Firm Defence With Entry Deterrence," Bulletin of Economic Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 62(4), pages 365-386, October.
    8. Chiara Fumagalli & Massimo Motta & Lars Persson, 2009. "On The Anticompetitive Effect Of Exclusive Dealing When Entry By Merger Is Possible," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 57(4), pages 785-811, December.
    9. Helder Vasconcelos, 2010. "Efficiency Gains And Structural Remedies In Merger Control," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 58(4), pages 742-766, December.
    10. Jovanovic, Dragan & Wey, Christian, 2012. "An equilibrium analysis of efficiency gains from mergers," DICE Discussion Papers 64, Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf Institute for Competition Economics (DICE).
    11. Nie, Pu-yan & Wang, Chan & Wen, Hong-xing, 2021. "Horizontal mergers under uniform resource constraints," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 63(C).
    12. Bojan Ristić & Dejan Trifunović, 2014. "Horizontal Mergers And Weak And Strong Competition Commissions," Economic Annals, Faculty of Economics and Business, University of Belgrade, vol. 59(202), pages 69-106, July – Se.
    13. Norbäck, Pehr-Johan & Persson, Lars & Tåg, Joacim, 2010. "Buying to Sell: A Theory of Buyouts," Working Paper Series 817, Research Institute of Industrial Economics.
    14. Medvedev, A., 2004. "Structural Remedies in Merger Regulation in a Cournot Framework," Discussion Paper 2004-006, Tilburg University, Tilburg Law and Economic Center.
    15. Cristina Pardo-Garcia & Jose Sempere-Monerris, 2015. "Equilibrium mergers in a composite good industry with efficiencies," SERIEs: Journal of the Spanish Economic Association, Springer;Spanish Economic Association, vol. 6(1), pages 101-127, March.
    16. Motta, Massimo & Vasconcelos, Helder, 2005. "Efficiency gains and myopic antitrust authority in a dynamic merger game," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 23(9-10), pages 777-801, December.
    17. Eileen Fumagalli & Tore Nilssen, 2019. "Sweetening the Pill: a Theory of Waiting to Merge," Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, Springer, vol. 19(3), pages 351-388, September.
    18. Pu†yan Nie, 2018. "Comparing Horizontal Mergers Under Cournot with Bertrand Competitions," Australian Economic Papers, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 57(1), pages 55-80, March.
    19. Persson, Lars & Norbäck, Pehr-Johan & Tåg, Joacim, 2012. "Buying to Sell: Private Equity Buyouts and Industrial Restructuring," CEPR Discussion Papers 8992, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    20. Friberg, Richard & Norbäck, Pehr-Johan & Persson, Lars, 2008. "Getting a Better Price: Strategic Behaviour before Changes in Ownership of Corporate Assets," Working Paper Series 777, Research Institute of Industrial Economics.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • D43 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design - - - Oligopoly and Other Forms of Market Imperfection
    • L13 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Oligopoly and Other Imperfect Markets
    • L41 - Industrial Organization - - Antitrust Issues and Policies - - - Monopolization; Horizontal Anticompetitive Practices
    • L51 - Industrial Organization - - Regulation and Industrial Policy - - - Economics of Regulation

    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:oxecpp:v:65:y:2013:i:2:p:567-593. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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/oep .

    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.