The Profitability of Price Fixing: Evidence from Stock Market Reaction to Federal Indictments
AbstractThe authors estimate the profitability of price fixing by examining the stock price reaction to federal indictments for 127 firms during 1962-1980. They hypothesize that the reaction is composed of expected legal costs, lost monopoly profits, and/or various negative "market signal" effects. The mean abnormal return over the WSJ indictment announcement date and the day before is a statistically significant --1.08%. This corresponds to a total value loss of $2.18 billion ($1982), of which only about 13% can be attributed to various legal costs (e.g., fines and damages). The $1.89 billion residual might be, in all or part, the present value of monopoly profits lost because of conspiracy dissolution. They test this and other possible explanations, and on balance find support for the lost monopoly profit interpretation. Copyright 1991 by MIT Press.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Bibliographic InfoArticle provided by MIT Press in its journal Review of Economics & Statistics.
Volume (Year): 73 (1991)
Issue (Month): 2 (May)
Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://mitpress.mit.edu/journals/
You can help add them by filling out this form.
CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
- Hanlon, Michelle & Slemrod, Joel, 2009. "What does tax aggressiveness signal? Evidence from stock price reactions to news about tax shelter involvement," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 93(1-2), pages 126-141, February.
- Houba, H.E.D. & Motchenkova, E. & Wen, Q., 2008.
"Maximal Cartel Pricing and Leniency Programs,"
2008-046, Tilburg University, Tilburg Law and Economic Center.
- Tim Reuter, 2012. "Private antitrust enforcement revisited: The role of private incentives to report evidence to the antitrust authority," Working Paper Series of the Department of Economics, University of Konstanz 2012-04, Department of Economics, University of Konstanz.
- Ching, Stephen & Fu, Yuming, 2003. "Contestability of the urban land market: an event study of Hong Kong land auctions," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(6), pages 695-720, October.
- Fotis, Panagiotis, 2011. "Firm's damages from antitrust & abuse of dominant position investigations," MPRA Paper 32788, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 13 Aug 2011.
- John Thompson & David Kaserman, 2001. "After The Fall: Stock Price Movements and the Deterrent Effect of Antitrust Enforcement," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer, vol. 19(3), pages 329-334, November.
- Mats Bergman, 2008. "Quis Custodiet Ipsos Custodes? or Measuring and Evaluating the Effectiveness of Competition Enforcement," De Economist, Springer, vol. 156(4), pages 387-409, December.
- Thorsten Lübbers, 2009. "Is Cartelisation Profitable? A Case Study of the Rhenish Westphalian Coal Syndicate, 1893-1913," Working Paper Series of the Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods 2009_09, Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods.
- Michael Cichello & Douglas Lamdin, 2006. "Event Studies and the Analysis of Antitrust," International Journal of the Economics of Business, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(2), pages 229-245.
- Yuming Fu & Stephen Ching, 2001. "Examining Competition in Land Market: An Application of Event Study to Land Auctions in Hong Kong," Wisconsin-Madison CULER working papers 01-01, University of Wisconsin Center for Urban Land Economic Research.
- Barbara Baarsma & Ron Kemp & Rob Noll & Jo Seldeslachts, 2012. "Let’s Not Stick Together: Anticipation of Cartel and Merger Control in The Netherlands," De Economist, Springer, vol. 160(4), pages 357-376, December.
- Margaret C. Levenstein & Valerie Y. Suslow, 2002. "What Determines Cartel Success?," UMASS Amherst Economics Working Papers 2002-01, University of Massachusetts Amherst, Department of Economics.
- Joseph E Harrington, 2001.
"Optimal Cartel Pricing in the Presence of an Antitrust Authority,"
Economics Working Paper Archive
460, The Johns Hopkins University,Department of Economics, revised Jul 2002.
- Joseph E. Harrington, 2005. "Optimal Cartel Pricing In The Presence Of An Antitrust Authority," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 46(1), pages 145-169, 02.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Karie Kirkpatrick).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.