IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/ijecbs/v13y2006i2p265-279.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Empirical Methods in Merger Analysis: Econometric Analysis of Pricing in FTC v. Staples

Author

Listed:
  • Orley Ashenfelter
  • David Ashmore
  • Jonathan Baker
  • Suzanne Gleason
  • Daniel Hosken

Abstract

In 1997, the US Federal Trade Commission challenged the proposed merger of two office supply superstores, Staples and Office Depot in US District Court. Both the government and merging parties presented econometric studies examining the merger's likely impact on consumer pricing, predicting a price increase of 8.6% and 0.9% respectively. This article uses the extensive public record to provide a detailed discussion of the econometric models used in the case and to show how differences between the models led to the discrepancy between these estimates.

Suggested Citation

  • Orley Ashenfelter & David Ashmore & Jonathan Baker & Suzanne Gleason & Daniel Hosken, 2006. "Empirical Methods in Merger Analysis: Econometric Analysis of Pricing in FTC v. Staples," International Journal of the Economics of Business, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(2), pages 265-279.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:ijecbs:v:13:y:2006:i:2:p:265-279
    DOI: 10.1080/13571510600784706
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.tandfonline.com/10.1080/13571510600784706
    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. Betancourt, Roger R. & Gautschi, David, 1993. "Two essential characteristics of retail markets and their economic consequences," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 21(3), pages 277-294, August.
    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. Orley Ashenfelter & Daniel Hosken & Matthew Weinberg, 2009. "Generating Evidence to Guide Merger Enforcement," CPI Journal, Competition Policy International, vol. 5.
    2. Schuetz, Jenny, 2015. "Why are Walmart and Target Next-Door neighbors?," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 38-48.
    3. Katja Seim & Michael Sinkinson, 2016. "Mixed pricing in online marketplaces," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 14(2), pages 129-155, June.
    4. Ronald W. Cotterill, 2007. "Market Definition and Market Power in the British Supermarket Industry," Food Marketing Policy Center Research Reports 098, University of Connecticut, Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Charles J. Zwick Center for Food and Resource Policy.
    5. Lawrence J. White, 2013. "Monopoly and Dominant Firms: Antitrust Economics and Policy Approaches," Working Papers 13-13, New York University, Leonard N. Stern School of Business, Department of Economics.
    6. Keith Brand & Martin Gaynor & Patrick McAlvanah & David Schmidt & Elizabeth Schneirov, 2014. "Economics at the FTC: Office Supply Retailers Redux, Healthcare Quality Efficiencies Analysis, and Litigation of an Alleged Get-Rich-Quick Scheme," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 45(4), pages 325-344, December.
    7. 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.
    8. John K. Ashton, 2012. "Do Depositors Benefit from Bank Mergers? An Examination of the UK Deposit Market," International Journal of the Economics of Business, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(1), pages 1-23, February.
    9. Yun Jeong Choi & Jee Young Kim & Min Hee You, 2017. "Radius Restriction and Firms' Survival: Evidence from the Coffee Franchise Industry," Working papers 2017rwp-115, Yonsei University, Yonsei Economics Research Institute.

    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:taf:ijecbs:v:13:y:2006:i:2:p:265-279. 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: (Chris Longhurst). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/CIJB20 .

    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.