IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/irlaec/v31y2011i2p142-146.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Single-product versus uniform SSNIPs

Author

Listed:
  • Daljord, Øystein
  • Sørgard, Lars

Abstract

It is common to apply a SSNIP test with a uniform price increase on all products in the candidate market. We show that in situations with asymmetries - for example variations in revenues - a uniform SSNIP test may suggest that the relevant market should include more products even though it could be profitable to increase the price of only one product in the candidate market. Our results are illustrated with some findings from a survey in a local grocery market.

Suggested Citation

  • Daljord, Øystein & Sørgard, Lars, 2011. "Single-product versus uniform SSNIPs," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 31(2), pages 142-146, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:irlaec:v:31:y:2011:i:2:p:142-146
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0144818811000214
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

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

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Malcolm Coate & Joseph Simons, 2009. "Critical Loss vs. Diversion Analysis: Clearing up the Confusion," Antitrust Chronicle, Competition Policy International, vol. 12.
    2. Epstein, Roy J. & Rubinfeld, Daniel, 2012. "Merger Simulation: A Simplified Approach with New Applications," Department of Economics, Working Paper Series qt2k9116ph, Department of Economics, Institute for Business and Economic Research, UC Berkeley.
    3. Farrell Joseph & Shapiro Carl, 2010. "Antitrust Evaluation of Horizontal Mergers: An Economic Alternative to Market Definition," The B.E. Journal of Theoretical Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 10(1), pages 1-41, March.
    4. Øystein Daljord & Lars Sørgard & Øyvind Thomassen, 2008. "The Ssnip Test And Market Definition With The Aggregate Diversion Ratio: A Reply To Katz And Shapiro," Journal of Competition Law and Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 4(2), pages 263-270.
    5. Rubinfeld, Daniel L. & Epstein, Roy J., 2001. "Merger Simulation: A Simplified Approach with New Applications," Competition Policy Center, Working Paper Series qt2sq9s8c8, Competition Policy Center, Institute for Business and Economic Research, UC Berkeley.
    6. Epstein, Roy J. & Rubinfeld, Daniel, 2001. "Merger Simulation: A Simplified Approach with New Applications," Department of Economics, Working Paper Series qt1c65s24r, Department of Economics, Institute for Business and Economic Research, UC Berkeley.
    7. Epstein, Roy J. & Rubinfeld, Daniel L., 2001. "Merger Simulation: A Simplified Approach with New Applications," Department of Economics, Working Paper Series qt9jt389nb, Department of Economics, Institute for Business and Economic Research, UC Berkeley.
    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. Lydia Cheung, 2017. "Brand-level diversion ratios from product-level data," New Zealand Economic Papers, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 51(2), pages 177-192, May.

    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. Oliver Budzinski & Isabel Ruhmer, 2010. "Merger Simulation In Competition Policy: A Survey," Journal of Competition Law and Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 6(2), pages 277-319.
    2. Kaplow, Louis & Shapiro, Carl, 2007. "Antitrust," Handbook of Law and Economics, in: A. Mitchell Polinsky & Steven Shavell (ed.), Handbook of Law and Economics, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 15, pages 1073-1225, Elsevier.
    3. Marie Goppelsroeder & Maarten Pieter Schinkel & Jan Tuinstra, 2008. "Quantifying The Scope For Efficiency Defense In Merger Control: The Werden‐Froeb‐Index," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 56(4), pages 778-808, December.
    4. Nathan H. Miller & Gloria Sheu, 2021. "Quantitative Methods for Evaluating the Unilateral Effects of Mergers," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 58(1), pages 143-177, February.
    5. Miller, Nathan H. & Remer, Marc & Ryan, Conor & Sheu, Gloria, 2017. "Upward pricing pressure as a predictor of merger price effects," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 216-247.
    6. Jéssica Dutra & Tarun Sabarwal, 2020. "Antitrust analysis with upward pricing pressure and cost efficiencies," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(1), pages 1-31, January.
    7. Jerome Foncel & Marc Ivaldi & Jrisy Motis, 2008. "An Econometric Workbench for Comparing the Substantive and Dominance Tests in Horizontal Merger Analysis," Working Papers 0833, University of Crete, Department of Economics.
    8. Yan Yang, 2019. "A New Solution to Market Definition: An Approach Based on Multi-dimensional Substitutability Statistics," Papers 1906.10030, arXiv.org.
    9. Nisvan Erkal & Daniel Piccinin, 2006. "Horizontal Mergers with Free Entry in Differentiated Oligopolies," Department of Economics - Working Papers Series 976, The University of Melbourne.
    10. Oliver Budzinski, 2008. "A Note on Competing Merger Simulation Models in Antitrust Cases: Can the Best Be Identified?," MAGKS Papers on Economics 200803, Philipps-Universität Marburg, Faculty of Business Administration and Economics, Department of Economics (Volkswirtschaftliche Abteilung).
    11. Stenborg, Markku, 2004. "Are There Biases in the Market Definition Procedure?," Discussion Papers 903, The Research Institute of the Finnish Economy.
    12. Gary Gorton & Matthias Kahl & Richard Rosen, 2005. "Eat or Be Eaten: A Theory of Mergers and Merger Waves," NBER Working Papers 11364, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    13. Nathan H. Miller & Marc Remer & Conor Ryan & Gloria Sheu, 2016. "Pass-Through and the Prediction of Merger Price Effects," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 64(4), pages 683-709, December.
    14. Jessica Dutra & Tarun Sabarwal, 2018. "Cost Efficiencies and Upward Pricing Pressure," WORKING PAPERS SERIES IN THEORETICAL AND APPLIED ECONOMICS 201901, University of Kansas, Department of Economics.
    15. Richard Dagen & Daniel Richards, 2006. "Merger Theory and Evidence: The Baby-Food Case Reconsidered," Discussion Papers Series, Department of Economics, Tufts University 0602, Department of Economics, Tufts University.
    16. Peter Davis & Pasquale Schiraldi, 2014. "The flexible coefficient multinomial logit (FC-MNL) model of demand for differentiated products," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 45(1), pages 32-63, March.
    17. Oliver Budzinski & Arndt Christiansen, 2007. "The Oracle/PeopleSoft Case: Unilateral Effects, Simulation Models and Econometrics in Contemporary Merger Control," Marburg Working Papers on Economics 200702, Philipps-Universität Marburg, Faculty of Business Administration and Economics, Department of Economics (Volkswirtschaftliche Abteilung).
    18. Nguyen, Ly & Wilson, Norbert L.W., 2017. "Healthy Foods: Tax or Voucher?," 2017 Annual Meeting, July 30-August 1, Chicago, Illinois 258491, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    19. Lundmark, Robert & Wårell, Linda, 2008. "Horizontal mergers in the iron ore industry--An application of PCAIDS," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 129-141, September.
    20. Doose, Anna Maria, 2013. "Methods for calculating cartel damages: A survey," Ilmenau Economics Discussion Papers 83, Ilmenau University of Technology, Institute of Economics.

    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:eee:irlaec:v:31:y:2011:i:2:p:142-146. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/irle .

    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.