IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/een/camaaa/2012-25.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Coerced Reciprocal Dealing and the Leverage Theory

Author

Listed:
  • Kalyn Coatney
  • Sherrill Shaffer

Abstract

Recent international mergers have potentially revived interest in a long-standing concern of U.S. courts that, under certain conditions, a conglomerate that buys from and sells products to its intermediary supplier may be able to profitably leverage its downstream market power to restrict competition in the upstream market and harm welfare via coerced reciprocal dealing. Economists have debated the court precedent, invoking the leverage theory established from various models of tying arrangements, a cousin of coerced reciprocal dealing. We develop the first explicit model of coerced reciprocal dealings to investigate the validity of the leverage theory. Our results support the concerns.

Suggested Citation

  • Kalyn Coatney & Sherrill Shaffer, 2012. "Coerced Reciprocal Dealing and the Leverage Theory," CAMA Working Papers 2012-25, Centre for Applied Macroeconomic Analysis, Crawford School of Public Policy, The Australian National University.
    • Handle: RePEc:een:camaaa:2012-25
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://cama.crawford.anu.edu.au/sites/default/files/publication/cama_crawford_anu_edu_au/2021-06/25_coatney_shaffer_2012.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Whinston, Michael D, 1990. "Tying, Foreclosure, and Exclusion," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 80(4), pages 837-859, September.
    2. Walters, Stephen J K, 1986. "Reciprocity Reexamined: The Consolidated Foods Case," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 29(2), pages 423-438, October.
    3. Lorie, James H & Halpern, Paul, 1970. "Conglomerates: The Rhetoric and the Evidence," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 13(1), pages 149-166, April.
    4. Goldberg, Lawrence G, 1973. "The Effect of Conglomerate Mergers on Competition," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 16(1), pages 137-158, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Marie-Noëlle Calès & Laurent Granier & Nadège Marchand, 2012. "Competition between Clearing Houses on the European Market," Post-Print halshs-00959121, HAL.
    2. Dennis Mueller, 1996. "Antimerger policy in the United States: History and lessons," Empirica, Springer;Austrian Institute for Economic Research;Austrian Economic Association, vol. 23(3), pages 229-253, October.
    3. Sébastien Galanti & Anne-Gaël Vaubourg, 2020. "Unbundling financial services: The case of brokerage and investment research," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 40(1), pages 473-484.
    4. Jihui Chen & Qiang Fu, 2017. "Do exclusivity arrangements harm consumers?," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 51(3), pages 311-339, June.
    5. Qing Hu & Tomomichi Mizuno, 2021. "Positive Effects of Bundling on Rival's Profit and Social Welfare in a Vertical Relationship," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 41(1), pages 85-92.
    6. Fontagné, Lionel & Secchi, Angelo & Tomasi, Chiara, 2018. "Exporters’ product vectors across markets," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 150-180.
    7. Koning, Kendall J. & Yankelevich, Aleksandr, 2018. "From internet “Openness” to “Freedom”: How far has the net neutrality pendulum swung?," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 37-45.
    8. Alexei Alexandrov & Özlem Bedre-Defolie, 2014. "The Equivalence of Bundling and Advance Sales," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 33(2), pages 259-272, March.
    9. Layne-Farrar, Anne & Salinger, Michael A., 2016. "Bundling of RAND-committed patents," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(6), pages 1155-1164.
    10. Dennis W. Carlton & Michael Waldman, 2002. "The Strategic Use of Tying to Preserve and Create Market Power in Evolving Industries," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 33(2), pages 194-220, Summer.
    11. Zhiyong Liu & Yue Qiao, 2012. "Abuse of Market Dominance Under China’s 2007 Anti-monopoly Law: A Preliminary Assessment," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 41(1), pages 77-107, August.
    12. Brennan, Timothy J., 2000. "The Economics of Competition Policy: Recent Developments and Cautionary Notes in Antitrust and Regulation," Discussion Papers 10716, Resources for the Future.
    13. Kadner-Graziano, Alessandro S., 2023. "Mergers of Complements: On the Absence of Consumer Benefits," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 89(C).
    14. Andrea Greppi & Domenico Menicucci, 2021. "On Bundling and Entry Deterrence," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 58(4), pages 561-581, June.
    15. Heubrandner, Florian & Skiera, Bernd, 2010. "Time preference and the welfare effects of tie-in sales," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 108(3), pages 314-317, September.
    16. Bruno Jullien & Alessandro Pavan, 2013. "Platform Competition under Dispersed Information," Discussion Papers 1568, Northwestern University, Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science.
    17. Markus Reisinger & Jens Schmidt & Nils Stieglitz, 2021. "How Complementors Benefit from Taking Competition to the System Level," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(8), pages 5106-5123, August.
    18. Qianbo Yin & Baojun Jiang & Sean Xiang Zhou, 2023. "Effects of consumers' context‐dependent preferences on product bundling," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 32(6), pages 1674-1691, June.
    19. Cao, Qingning & Geng, Xianjun & Zhang, Jun, 2015. "Strategic Role of Retailer Bundling in a Distribution Channel," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 91(1), pages 50-67.
    20. Rochet, Jean Charles & Tirole, Jean, 2008. "Tying in two-sided markets and the honor all cards rule," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 26(6), pages 1333-1347, November.

    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:een:camaaa:2012-25. 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: Cama Admin (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/asanuau.html .

    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.