IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/revind/v38y2011i4p387-404.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Does Antitrust Enforcement in High Tech Markets Benefit Consumers? Stock Price Evidence from FTC v. Intel

Author

Listed:
  • Joshua Wright

    ()

Abstract

No abstract is available for this item.

Suggested Citation

  • Joshua Wright, 2011. "Does Antitrust Enforcement in High Tech Markets Benefit Consumers? Stock Price Evidence from FTC v. Intel," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 38(4), pages 387-404, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:kap:revind:v:38:y:2011:i:4:p:387-404
    DOI: 10.1007/s11151-011-9297-5
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s11151-011-9297-5
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    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. Blair, Roger D. & Kaserman, David L., 2009. "Antitrust Economics," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, edition 2, number 9780195135350.
    2. Bruce Kobayashi, 2005. "The Economics of Loyalty Rebates and Antitrust Law in the United States," CPI Journal, Competition Policy International, vol. 1.
    3. David S. Evans & Albert L. Nichols & Richard Schmalensee, 2005. "U.S. v. Microsoft: Did Consumers Win?," NBER Working Papers 11727, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. Mann, Jeoffrey & Wright, Joshua, 2010. "Innovation and the Limits of antitrust," Economic Policy, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration, vol. 6, pages 99-123.
    5. Benjamin Klein, 2001. "The Microsoft Case: What Can a Dominant Firm Do to Defend Its Market Position?," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 15(2), pages 45-62, Spring.
    6. Michael D. Whinston, 2001. "Exclusivity and Tying in U.S. v. Microsoft: What We Know, and Don't Know," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 15(2), pages 63-80, Spring.
    7. 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.
    8. Cooper, James C. & Froeb, Luke M. & O'Brien, Dan & Vita, Michael G., 2005. "Vertical antitrust policy as a problem of inference," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 23(7-8), pages 639-664, September.
    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. Michael Peneder & Martin Woerter, 2014. "Competition, R&D and innovation: testing the inverted-U in a simultaneous system," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 24(3), pages 653-687, July.
    2. Giacomo Calzolari & Vincenzo Denicolò, 2015. "Exclusive Contracts and Market Dominance," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 105(11), pages 3321-3351, November.
    3. Kalyn Coatney & Jesse Tack, 2014. "The Impacts of an Antitrust Investigation: A Case Study in Agriculture," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 44(4), pages 423-441, June.

    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. Radke, Marc-Peter, 2001. "Law and economics of Microsoft vs. U.S. Department of Justice - New paradigm for antitrust in network markets or inefficient lock-in of antitrust policy?," Violette Reihe: Schriftenreihe des Promotionsschwerpunkts "Globalisierung und Beschäftigung" 16/2001, University of Hohenheim, Carl von Ossietzky University Oldenburg, Evangelisches Studienwerk.
    2. Krishnamurthy, Sandeep, 2009. "CASE: Mozilla vs. Godzilla — The Launch of the Mozilla Firefox Browser," Journal of Interactive Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 23(3), pages 259-271.
    3. Zigic, Kresimir & Maçi, Ilir, 2011. "Competition policy and market leaders," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 28(3), pages 1042-1049, May.
    4. Kuroda, Toshifumi & Koguchi, Teppei & Ida, Takanori, 2019. "Identifying the effect of mobile operating systems on the mobile services market," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 86-95.
    5. Steven J. Davis & Jack MacCrisken & Kevin M. Murphy, 2001. "Economic Perspectives on Software Design: PC Operating Systems and Platforms," NBER Working Papers 8411, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    6. Thomas W. Hazlett & Joshua D. Wright, 2017. "The Effect of Regulation on Broadband Markets: Evaluating the Empirical Evidence in the FCC’s 2015 “Open Internet” Order," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 50(4), pages 487-507, June.
    7. Bastiaan Overvest, 2012. "A note on collusion and resale price maintenance," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 34(1), pages 235-239, August.
    8. 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.
    9. Krolikowski, Marcin W. & Adhikari, Hari P. & Malm, James & Sah, Nilesh B., 2017. "Inter-firm linkages and M&A returns," The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 135-146.
    10. James E. Prieger & Wei‐Min Hu, 2012. "Applications Barrier To Entry And Exclusive Vertical Contracts In Platform Markets," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 50(2), pages 435-452, April.
    11. Atkas, Nihat & Bodt, Eric de & Roll, Richard, 2001. "Market Response to European Regulation," University of California at Los Angeles, Anderson Graduate School of Management qt0qc9p8gf, Anderson Graduate School of Management, UCLA.
    12. Xulia González, 2015. "Empirical Regularities in the Vertical Restraints of Manuacturing Firms," Atlantic Economic Journal, Springer;International Atlantic Economic Society, vol. 43(2), pages 181-194, June.
    13. David Spector, 2011. "Exclusive contracts and demand foreclosure," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 42(4), pages 619-638, December.
    14. Christopher S. Yoo, 2017. "Avoiding the Pitfalls of Net Uniformity: Zero Rating and Nondiscrimination," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 50(4), pages 509-536, June.
    15. Roman Inderst & Greg Shaffer, 2010. "Market‐share contracts as facilitating practices," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 41(4), pages 709-729, December.
    16. Xie, En & Reddy, K.S. & Liang, Jie, 2017. "Country-specific determinants of cross-border mergers and acquisitions: A comprehensive review and future research directions," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 52(2), pages 127-183.
    17. Fumagalli, Chiara & Motta, Massimo & Persson, Lars, 2005. "Exclusive Dealing, Entry and Mergers," CEPR Discussion Papers 4902, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    18. Loertscher, Simon & Reisinger, Markus, 2009. "Competitive E?ects of Vertical Integration with Downstream Oligopsony and Oligopoly," Discussion Paper Series of SFB/TR 15 Governance and the Efficiency of Economic Systems 278, Free University of Berlin, Humboldt University of Berlin, University of Bonn, University of Mannheim, University of Munich.
    19. J.W.B. Bos & I. Chan & J. Kolari & J. Yuan, 2009. "A Fallacy of Division: The Failure of Market Concentration as a Measure of Competition in U.S. Banking," Working Papers 09-33, Utrecht School of Economics.
    20. Zhang, Jianhong & Zhou, Chaohong & Ebbers, Haico, 2011. "Completion of Chinese overseas acquisitions: Institutional perspectives and evidence," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 20(2), pages 226-238, April.

    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:kap:revind:v:38:y:2011:i:4:p:387-404. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Sonal Shukla) or (Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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 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.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.