IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/revind/v46y2015i3p229-252.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Areeda–Turner and the Treatment of Exclusionary Pricing under U.S. Antitrust and EU Competition Policy

Author

Listed:
  • Stephen Martin

Abstract

The paper begins with a “readers’ guide” to Areeda and Turner (Harv Law Rev 88:697–733, 1975 ). It continues to explain the differing receptions of the price-unit cost approach to evaluating predatory pricing in U.S. antitrust policy and EU competition policy in terms of differing views on the likelihood that predation will occur and differing weights given to the probability of incorrectly condemning competition on the merits as predatory and incorrectly exonerating predatory behavior as competition on the merits. Copyright Springer Science+Business Media New York 2015

Suggested Citation

  • Stephen Martin, 2015. "Areeda–Turner and the Treatment of Exclusionary Pricing under U.S. Antitrust and EU Competition Policy," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 46(3), pages 229-252, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:revind:v:46:y:2015:i:3:p:229-252
    DOI: 10.1007/s11151-015-9458-z
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s11151-015-9458-z
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11151-015-9458-z?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    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. Reder, Melvin W, 1982. "Chicago Economics: Permanence and Change," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 20(1), pages 1-38, March.
    2. Richard Ericson & Ariel Pakes, 1995. "Markov-Perfect Industry Dynamics: A Framework for Empirical Work," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 62(1), pages 53-82.
    3. William Comanor & H. Frech, 2015. "Economic Rationality and the Areeda–Turner Rule," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 46(3), pages 253-268, May.
    4. Baumol, William J & Bradford, David F, 1970. "Optimal Departures from Marginal Cost Pricing," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 60(3), pages 265-283, June.
    5. Phlips, Louis, 1996. "On the detection of collusion and predation," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 40(3-5), pages 495-510, April.
    6. David Genesove & Wallace Mullin, 2006. "Predation and Its Rate of Return: The Sugar Industry, 1887Ð1914," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 37(1), pages 47-69, Spring.
    7. Weiman, David F & Levin, Richard C, 1994. "Preying for Monopoly? The Case of Southern Bell Telephone Company, 1894-1912," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 102(1), pages 103-126, February.
    8. Burns, Malcolm R, 1986. "Predatory Pricing and Acquisition Cost of Competitors," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 94(2), pages 266-296, April.
    9. Herbert Hovenkamp, 2015. "The Areeda–Turner Test for Exclusionary Pricing: A Critical Journal," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 46(3), pages 209-228, May.
    10. R. Schmalensee & R. Willig (ed.), 1989. "Handbook of Industrial Organization," Handbook of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, edition 1, volume 1, number 1.
    11. Fiona Scott Morton, 1997. "Entry and Predation: British Shipping Cartels 1879–1929," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 6(4), pages 679-724, December.
    12. Michel Poitevin, 1989. "Financial Signalling and the "Deep-Pocket" Argument," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 20(1), pages 26-40, Spring.
    13. James Dalton & Louis Esposito, 2011. "Standard Oil and Predatory Pricing: Myth Paralleling Fact," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 38(3), pages 245-266, May.
    14. Joel M. Podolny & Fiona M. Scott Morton, 1999. "Social Status, Entry and Predation: The Case of British Shipping Cartels 1879–1929," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 47(1), pages 41-67, March.
    15. Ordover, Janusz A. & Saloner, Garth, 1989. "Predation, monopolization, and antitrust," Handbook of Industrial Organization, in: R. Schmalensee & R. Willig (ed.), Handbook of Industrial Organization, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 9, pages 537-596, Elsevier.
    16. Nicola Giocoli, 2015. "Old lady charm: explaining the persistent appeal of Chicago antitrust," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 22(1), pages 96-122, March.
    17. Clark, John Bates, 1894. "The Modern Appeal to Legal Forces in Economic Life," History of Economic Thought Papers clark1894, McMaster University Archive for the History of Economic Thought.
    18. Yamey, B S, 1972. "Predatory Price Cutting: Notes and Comments," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 15(1), pages 129-142, April.
    19. David Genesove & Wallace P. Mullin, 2006. "Predation and its rate of return: the sugar industry, 1887–1914," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 37(1), pages 47-69, March.
    20. Jovanovic, Boyan, 1982. "Selection and the Evolution of Industry," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 50(3), pages 649-670, May.
    21. Stephen Martin, 2002. "Spillovers, Appropriability, and R&D," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 75(1), pages 1-32, January.
    22. Timothy F. Bresnahan & Peter C. Reiss, 1987. "Do Entry Conditions Vary across Markets?," Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Economic Studies Program, The Brookings Institution, vol. 18(3, Specia), pages 833-882.
    23. R. Schmalensee & R. Willig (ed.), 1989. "Handbook of Industrial Organization," Handbook of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, edition 1, volume 2, number 2.
    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. Jeroen Hinloopen & Stephen Martin, 2015. "Introduction: 40 Years of Areeda–Turner," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 46(3), pages 205-207, 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. Natália Barbosa, 2003. "What drives new firms into an industry? An integrative model of entry," NIMA Working Papers 23, Núcleo de Investigação em Microeconomia Aplicada (NIMA), Universidade do Minho.
    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. Mark L.J. Wright & Esteban Rossi-Hansberg, 2004. "Firm Size Dynamics in the Aggregate Economy," 2004 Meeting Papers 878, Society for Economic Dynamics.
    4. Mark J. Roberts & Dylan Supina, 1997. "Output Price and Markup Dispersion in Micro Data: The Roles of Producer Heterogeneity and Noise," NBER Working Papers 6075, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    5. Fabio Pieri, 2018. "Vertical organization of production and firm growth," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 27(1), pages 83-106.
    6. Audretsch, David B & Klomp, Luuk & Thurik, A R Roy, 1997. "Do Services Differ From Manufacturing? The Post-Entry Performance of Firms in Dutch Services," CEPR Discussion Papers 1718, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    7. Dosi, Giovanni & Nelson, Richard R., 2010. "Technical Change and Industrial Dynamics as Evolutionary Processes," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 0, pages 51-127, Elsevier.
    8. Stephen Martin, 2018. "Behavioral antitrust," Chapters, in: Victor J. Tremblay & Elizabeth Schroeder & Carol Horton Tremblay (ed.), Handbook of Behavioral Industrial Organization, chapter 15, pages 404-454, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    9. Hugo A. Hopenhayn, 2011. "Firm Microstructure and Aggregate Productivity," Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 43(s1), pages 111-145, August.
    10. Fabio Pieri, 2015. "Vertical organization of production and firm growth behavior," Working Papers 1508, Department of Applied Economics II, Universidad de Valencia.
    11. Mark J Roberts & Dylan Supina, 1997. "Output Price And Markup Dispersion In Micro Data: The Roles Of Producer And Heterogeneity And Noise," Working Papers 97-10, Center for Economic Studies, U.S. Census Bureau.
    12. John Hutchinson & Jozef Konings & Patrick Walsh, 2010. "The Firm Size Distribution and Inter-Industry Diversification," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 37(2), pages 65-82, September.
    13. Eric W. Zitzewitz, 2003. "Competition and Long–run Productivity Growth in the UK and US Tobacco Industries, 1879–1939," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 51(1), pages 1-33, March.
    14. Arnab Bhattacharjee & Sumit K. Majumdar, 2011. "How much does industry matter in an emerging market economy?," Dundee Discussion Papers in Economics 256, Economic Studies, University of Dundee.
    15. Valentiny, Pál, 2019. "Közgazdaságtan a jogalkalmazásban [Forensic economics]," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(2), pages 134-162.
    16. Jason R. Blevins & Ahmed Khwaja & Nathan Yang, 2018. "Firm Expansion, Size Spillovers, and Market Dominance in Retail Chain Dynamics," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(9), pages 4070-4093.
    17. 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.
    18. 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.
    19. Tomas J. Philipson & Richard A. Posner, 2009. "Antitrust in the Not-for-Profit Sector," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 52(1), pages 1-18, February.
    20. Almas Heshmati, 2003. "Productivity Growth, Efficiency and Outsourcing in Manufacturing and Service Industries," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 17(1), pages 79-112, February.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Areeda–Turner rule; Predatory pricing; Antitrust; Competition policy; L12; L41;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • L12 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Monopoly; Monopolization Strategies
    • L41 - Industrial Organization - - Antitrust Issues and Policies - - - Monopolization; Horizontal Anticompetitive Practices

    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:kap:revind:v:46:y:2015:i:3:p:229-252. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.