IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/recjxx/v15y2019i2-3p254-280.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Platform competition and market definition in the US Amex case: lessons for economics and law

Author

Listed:
  • Vikas Kathuria

Abstract

The rise of multi-sided platforms in the marketplace has spawned a vast amount of research to understand their implications for competition and welfare. This paper presents the scrutiny of one such academic work that classifies multi-sided platforms into “transaction” and “non-transaction” platforms for the purpose of relevant market definition. It has been posited that in the case of “transaction” platforms, there is one all-encompassing relevant market comprising of all sides of a platform. And such a “transaction” platform can compete only with another “transaction” platform. The U.S. Supreme Court in its Amex decision relied upon this classification and elevated the same into law. This paper identifies flaws in this concept by demonstrating that the relevant academic work defines “transaction” too narrowly. The paper takes the swift adoption of the “transaction” platform approach by the Supreme Court as an opportunity to also provide lessons for economics and law.

Suggested Citation

  • Vikas Kathuria, 2019. "Platform competition and market definition in the US Amex case: lessons for economics and law," European Competition Journal, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(2-3), pages 254-280, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:recjxx:v:15:y:2019:i:2-3:p:254-280
    DOI: 10.1080/17441056.2019.1644578
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/17441056.2019.1644578
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/17441056.2019.1644578?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

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

    More about this item

    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:taf:recjxx:v:15:y:2019:i:2-3:p:254-280. 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/recj .

    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.