This file is part of IDEAS, which uses RePEc data


[ Papers | Articles | Software | Books | Chapters | Authors | Institutions | JEL Classification | NEP reports | Search | New papers by email | Author registration | Rankings | Volunteers | FAQ | Blog | Help! ]

How Effective is European Merger Control?

Author info | Abstract | Publisher info | Download info | Related research | Statistics
Author Info
Tomaso Duso
Klaus Gugler
Burçin Yurtoglu

Additional information is available for the following registered author(s):

Abstract

This paper applies a novel methodology to a unique dataset of large concentrations during the period 1990-2002 to assess merger control’s effectiveness. By using data gathered from several sources and employing different evaluation techniques, we analyze the economic effects of the European Commission’s (EC) merger control decisions and distinguish between blockings, clearances with commitments (either behavioral or structural), and outright clearances. We run an event study on merging and rival firms’ stocks to quantify the profitability effects of mergers and merger control decisions. We back up our results and methodology by using alternative measures for the merger’s profitability effects based on balance-sheet data and obtain consistent results. Our findings suggest that outright blockings solve the competitive problems generated by the merger. Remedies are not always effective in solving the market power concerns, at least not on average. Nevertheless, both structural (divestitures) and behavioral remedies do help restore effective competition when correctly applied to anticompetitive mergers during the first investigation phase. Yet, they are on the whole ineffective or even detrimental when applied after the second investigation phase. Finally, remedies - especially behavioral ones - seem to constitute a rent transfer from merging firms to rivals when mistakenly applied to pro-competitive mergers.

ZUSAMMENFASSUNG - (Wie wirksam ist die Europäische Fusionskontrolle?)
In diesem Beitrag wenden wir eine neue Methodologie auf einen einzigartigen Datensatz von großen Unternehmenskonzentrationen während der Jahre 1990- 2002 an, um die Wirksamkeit der Fusionskontrolle zu untersuchen. Wir benutzen Daten, welche von unterschiedlichen Quellen erfasst worden sind und setzen unterschiedliche Auswertungsmethoden ein, um die ökonomischen Effekte der Fusionskontrollentscheidungen der Europäischen Kommission zu analysieren. Wir unterscheiden zwischen Untersagungen, Genehmigung mit Auflagen (entweder Verhaltensauflagen oder strukturelle) und sofortige Genehmigung. Wir verwenden eine "event study" - Methodologie und untersuchen, wie die Aktienpreise sowohl der fusionierenden Unternehmen als auch der Wettbewerber auf die Ankündigung einer Fusion oder einer besonderen wettbewerbspolitischen Entscheidung reagieren, um die Rentabilitätseffekte von Fusionen und von Fusionskontrollentscheidungen quantitativ zu bestimmen. Wir stützen unsere Resultate und Methodologie, indem wir alternative Maße für die Rentabilitätseffekte der Fusion verwenden, die auf Bilanzdaten basieren und erreichen gleich bleibende Resultate. Unsere Analyse ergibt, dass sofortige Untersagungen das von der Fusion verursachte Wettbewerbsproblem lösen können. Dagegen sind Auflagen nicht immer wirkungsvoll - mindestens nicht im Durchschnitt - um die durch die Fusion erzeugte Markmacht zu begrenzen. Dennoch helfen strukturelle Auflagen wie Abstoßungen von Kapitalvermögen und Verhaltensauflagen, einen "effektiven" Wettbewerb wieder herzustellen, wenn sie richtig auf wettbewerbswidrige Fusionen während der ersten Untersuchungsphase des Fusionskontrollverfahren angewendet werden. Jedoch sind sie im Durchschnitt erfolglos - wenn nicht sogar schädlich - wenn sie nach der zweiten Untersuchungsphase angewendet werden. Schließlich scheinen Abhilfemaßnahmen - besonders Verhaltensauflagen -, ein Rententransfer von den fusionierenden Unternehmen auf ihre Rivalen zu sein, wenn sie irrtümlich Wettbewerb steigernden Fusionen auferlegt werden.

Download Info
To download:

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. Information about this may be contained in the File-Format links below. 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.

File URL: http://skylla.wz-berlin.de/pdf/2006/ii06-12.pdf
File Format: application/pdf
File Function: Full text (original version)
Download Restriction: no

Publisher Info
Paper provided by Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin (WZB), Research Unit: Competition and Innovation (CIG) in its series CIG Working Papers with number SP II 2006-12.

Download reference. The following formats are available: HTML (with abstract), plain text (with abstract), BibTeX, RIS (EndNote, RefMan, ProCite), ReDIF
Length: 54 pages
Date of creation: Jul 2006
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:wzb:wzebiv:spii2006-12

Contact details of provider:
Postal: Reichpietschufer 50, 10785 Berlin, Germany
Phone: (++49)(30) 25491-441
Fax: (++49)(30) 25491-442
Web page: http://www.wzb.eu/mp/wiw/default.en.htm
More information through EDIRC

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its listing, contact: (Jennifer Rontganger).

Related research
Keywords: Mergers; Merger Control; Remedies; European Commission; Event Studies; Ex-post Evaluation;

Other versions of this item:

Find related papers by JEL classification:
L4 - Industrial Organization - - Antitrust Issues and Policies
K21 - Law and Economics - - Regulation and Business Law - - - Antitrust Law
G34 - Financial Economics - - Corporate Finance and Governance - - - Mergers; Acquisitions; Restructuring; Corporate Governance
C2 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Single Equation Models; Single Variables
L2 - Industrial Organization - - Firm Objectives, Organization, and Behavior

This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
  1. McAfee, R. Preston & Williams, Michael A., 1988. "Can event studies detect anticompetitive mergers?," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 28(2), pages 199-203. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  2. Ellert, James C, 1976. "Mergers, Antitrust Law Enforcement and Stockholder Returns," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 31(2), pages 715-32, May. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  3. Song, Moon H. & Walkling, Ralph A., 2000. "Abnormal returns to rivals of acquisition targets: A test of the 'acquisition probability hypothesis'," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 55(2), pages 143-171, February. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  4. Scholes, Myron & Williams, Joseph, 1977. "Estimating betas from nonsynchronous data," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 5(3), pages 309-327, December. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  5. George L. Mullin & Joseph C. Mullin & Wallace P. Mullin, 1995. "The Competitive Effects of Mergers: Stock Market Evidence from the U.S. Steel Dissolution Suit," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 26(2), pages 314-330, Summer. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  6. John Simpsom, 2001. "Did May Company's Acquisition of Associated Dry Goods Corporation Reduce Competition? An Event Study Analysis," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer, vol. 18(4), pages 351-362, June. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  7. Gugler, Klaus & Mueller, Dennis C. & Yurtoglu, B. Burcin & Zulehner, Christine, 2003. "The effects of mergers: an international comparison," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 21(5), pages 625-653, May. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
    Other versions:
  8. Kim, E Han & Singal, Vijay, 1993. "Mergers and Market Power: Evidence from the Airline Industry," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 83(3), pages 549-69, June. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  9. Slovin, Myron B. & Sushka, Marie E. & Hudson, Carl D., 1991. "Deregulation, contestability, and airline acquisitions," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 231-251, December. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  10. Barros, Pedro Pita & Clougherty, Joseph A & Seldeslachts, Jo, 2007. "Remedy for Now but Prohibit for Tomorrow: The Deterrence Effects of Merger Policy Tools," CEPR Discussion Papers 6437, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
    Other versions:
  11. Gregor Andrade & Mark Mitchell & Erik Stafford, 2001. "New Evidence and Perspectives on Mergers," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 15(2), pages 103-120, Spring. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  12. Tomaso Duso & Damien J. Neven & Lars-Hendrik Röller, 2002. "The Political Economy of European Merger Control: Evidence using Stock Market Data," CIG Working Papers FS IV 02-34, Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin (WZB), Research Unit: Competition and Innovation (CIG). [Downloadable!]
    Other versions:
  13. Lars-Hendrik Röller & Johan Stennek & Frank Verboven, 2000. "Efficiency Gains from Mergers," CIG Working Papers FS IV 00-09, Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin (WZB), Research Unit: Competition and Innovation (CIG). [Downloadable!]
    Other versions:
  14. Shahrur, Husayn, 2005. "Industry structure and horizontal takeovers: Analysis of wealth effects on rivals, suppliers, and corporate customers," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 76(1), pages 61-98, April. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  15. Albert Banal-Estañol & Jo Seldeslachts, 2005. "Merger Failures," CIG Working Papers SP II 2005-09, Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin (WZB), Research Unit: Competition and Innovation (CIG). [Downloadable!]
  16. Salant, Stephen W & Switzer, Sheldon & Reynolds, Robert J, 1983. "Losses from Horizontal Merger: The Effects of an Exogenous Change in Industry Structure on Cournot-Nash Equilibrium," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, vol. 98(2), pages 185-99, May. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  17. Brady, Una & M. Feinberg, Robert, 2000. "An examination of stock-price effects of EU merger control policy," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 18(6), pages 885-900, August. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  18. Bittlingmayer, George & Hazlett, Thomas W., 2000. "DOS Kapital: Has antitrust action against Microsoft created value in the computer industry?," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 55(3), pages 329-359, March. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  19. Fridolfsson, Sven-Olof & Stennek, Johan, 2000. "Why Mergers Reduce Profits, and Raise Share-Prices," CEPR Discussion Papers 2357, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
    Other versions:
  20. Ajeyo Banerjee & E. Woodrow Eckard, 1998. "Are Mega-Mergers Anticompetitive? Evidence from the First Great Merger Wave," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 29(4), pages 803-827, Winter. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  21. Stillman, Robert, 1983. "Examining antitrust policy towards horizontal mergers," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 11(1-4), pages 225-240, April. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  22. 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. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
    Other versions:
  23. Singal, Vijay, 1996. "Airline Mergers and Competition: An Integration of Stock and Product Price Effects," Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 69(2), pages 233-68, April. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  24. Ralph Siebert & Klaus Gugler, 2004. "Market Power versus Efficiency Effects of Mergers and Research Joint Ventures: Evidence from the Semiconductor Industry," NBER Working Papers 10323, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
    Other versions:
  25. Eckbo, B Espen, 1992. " Mergers and the Value of Antitrust Deterrence," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 47(3), pages 1005-29, July. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  26. Cabral, Luis M. B., 2003. "Horizontal mergers with free-entry: why cost efficiencies may be a weak defense and asset sales a poor remedy," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 21(5), pages 607-623, May. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
    Other versions:
  27. Aktas, Nihat & de Bodt, Eric & Roll, Richard, 2004. "Market Response to European Regulation of Business Combinations," Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 39(04), pages 731-757, December. [Downloadable!]
  28. Elzinga, Kenneth G, 1969. "The Antimerger Law: Pyrrhic Victories?," Journal of Law & Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 12(1), pages 43-78, April.
  29. Farrell, Joseph & Shapiro, Carl, 1990. "Horizontal Mergers: An Equilibrium Analysis," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 80(1), pages 107-26, March. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
    Other versions:
  30. Bruce R. Lyons, 2004. "Reform of European Merger Policy," Review of International Economics, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 12(2), pages 246-261, 05. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  31. Fee, C. Edward & Thomas, Shawn, 2004. "Sources of gains in horizontal mergers: evidence from customer, supplier, and rival firms," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 74(3), pages 423-460, December. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  32. Eckbo, B Espen & Wier, Peggy, 1985. "Antimerger Policy under the Hart-Scott-Rodino Act: A Reexamination of the Market Power Hypothesis," Journal of Law & Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 28(1), pages 119-49, April.
Full references

Cited by:
(explanations, Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.)

  1. 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. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  2. Barros, Pedro Pita & Clougherty, Joseph A & Seldeslachts, Jo, 2007. "Remedy for Now but Prohibit for Tomorrow: The Deterrence Effects of Merger Policy Tools," CEPR Discussion Papers 6437, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
    Other versions:
  3. Bruce Lyons, 2008. "An Economic Assessment of EC Merger Control: 1957–2007," Working Papers 08-17, Centre for Competition Policy, University of East Anglia. [Downloadable!]
  4. Damien Neven & Hans Zenger, 2008. "Ex Post Evaluation of Enforcement: A Principal-Agent Perspective," De Economist, Springer, vol. 156(4), pages 477-490, December. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  5. Paolo Buccirossi & Lorenzo Ciari & Tomaso Duso & Sven-Olof Fridolfsson & Giancarlo Spagnolo & Cristiana Vitale, 2008. "A Short Overview of a Methodology for the Ex-Post Review of Merger Control Decisions," De Economist, Springer, vol. 156(4), pages 453-475, December. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
Statistics
Access and download statistics

Did you know? There are NEP reports in over 80 fields that deliver new research to your email.

This page was last updated on 2009-11-19.


This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Department of Economics, College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, University of Connecticut using RePEc data on a server sponsored by the Society for Economic Dynamics.