IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/jcomle/v2y2006i3p533-548..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Form- Versus Effects-Based Approaches To The Abuse Of A Dominant Position: The Case Of Ticketmaster Ireland

Author

Listed:
  • Paul K. Gorecki

Abstract

The paper applies a form-based and an effects-based approach to determine whether allegations that TicketMaster Ireland's exclusive contracts with the two leading promoters on the island of Ireland resulted in high or excessive prices for the ticketing services provided by TicketMaster Ireland to consumers. The form-based approach strongly supported the allegations of high prices based on exclusive contracts, while the effects-based analysis found, correctly, that countervailing buyer power, efficiencies and other factors meant that TicketMaster Ireland was neither dominant nor that its conduct was anticompetitive. The paper concludes with some suggestions as to the more general implications for the burden of proof in such exclusive contract cases.

Suggested Citation

  • Paul K. Gorecki, 2006. "Form- Versus Effects-Based Approaches To The Abuse Of A Dominant Position: The Case Of Ticketmaster Ireland," Journal of Competition Law and Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 2(3), pages 533-548.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:jcomle:v:2:y:2006:i:3:p:533-548.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/joclec/nhl014
    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. Denis Waelbroeck, 2005. "Michelin II: A Per Se Rule Against Rebates by Dominant Companies?," Journal of Competition Law and Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 1(1), pages 149-171.
    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. Muriel Fadairo & Jianyu Yu, 2014. "Economic Rationales of Exclusive Dealing ; Empirical Evidence from the French Distribution Networks," Working Papers 1405, Groupe d'Analyse et de Théorie Economique Lyon St-Étienne (GATE Lyon St-Étienne), Université de Lyon.

    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. Philippe Choné & Laurent Linnemer, 2016. "Nonlinear pricing and exclusion:II. Must-stock products," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 47(3), pages 631-660, August.
    2. Calzolari, Giacomo & Denicolo, Vincenzo, 2010. "Competitive quantity discounts," CEPR Discussion Papers 8144, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    3. Eberhard Feess & Ansgar Wohlschlegel, 2010. "All-Unit Discounts and the Problem of Surplus Division," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 37(3), pages 161-178, November.
    4. Frank Maier-Rigaud & Ulrich Schwalbe, 2013. "Do Retroactive Rebates Imply Lower Prices for Consumers?," Working Papers 2013-ECO-10, IESEG School of Management.
    5. Ganslandt, Mattias, 2008. "Intellectual Property Rights and Competition Policy," Working Paper Series 726, Research Institute of Industrial Economics.
    6. Calzolari, Giacomo & Denicolò, Vincenzo, 2011. "On the anti-competitive effects of quantity discounts," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 29(3), pages 337-341, May.

    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:oup:jcomle:v:2:y:2006:i:3:p:533-548.. 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/jcle .

    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.