IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/doj/eagpap/201602.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Upward Pricing Pressure as a Predictor of Merger Price Effects

Author

Listed:
  • Nathan Miller

    (Georgetown University, McDonough School of Business)

  • Marc Remer

    (Swarthmore College, Department of Economics)

  • Conor Ryan

    (University of Minnesota, Department of Economics)

  • Gloria Sheu

    (Economic Analysis Group, U.S. Department of Justice)

Abstract

We use Monte Carlo experiments to evaluate whether “upward pricing pressure” (UPP) accurately predicts the price effects of mergers, motivated by the observation that UPP is a restricted form of the first order approximation derived in Jaffe and Weyl (2013). Results indicate that UPP is quite accurate with standard log-concave demand systems, but understates price effects if demand exhibits greater convexity. Prediction error does not systematically exceed that of misspecifed simulation models, nor is it much greater than that of correctly-specifed models simulated with imprecise demand elasticities. The results also support that both UPP and the HHI change provide accurate screens for anticompetitive mergers.

Suggested Citation

  • Nathan Miller & Marc Remer & Conor Ryan & Gloria Sheu, 2016. "Upward Pricing Pressure as a Predictor of Merger Price Effects," EAG Discussions Papers 201602, Department of Justice, Antitrust Division.
    • Handle: RePEc:doj:eagpap:201602
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.justice.gov/atr/upward-pricing-pressure-predictor-merger-price-effects
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lydia Cheung, 2013. "The Upward Pricing Pressure Test for Merger Analysis: An Empirical Examination," Working Papers 2013-03, Auckland University of Technology, Department of Economics.
    2. Jerry Hausman & Gregory Leonard & J. Douglas Zona, 1994. "Competitive Analysis with Differentiated Products," Annals of Economics and Statistics, GENES, issue 34, pages 143-157.
    3. 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.
    4. repec:adr:anecst:y:1994:i:34:p:06 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. Aviv Nevo, 2000. "Mergers with Differentiated Products: The Case of the Ready-to-Eat Cereal Industry," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 31(3), pages 395-421, Autumn.
    6. Leemore Dafny & Mark Duggan & Subramaniam Ramanarayanan, 2012. "Paying a Premium on Your Premium? Consolidation in the US Health Insurance Industry," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 102(2), pages 1161-1185, April.
    7. Dennis W. Carlton & Bryan Keating, 2015. "Antitrust, Transaction Costs, and Merger Simulation with Nonlinear Pricing," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 58(2), pages 269-289.
    8. Miller, Nathan H. & Remer, Marc & Sheu, Gloria, 2013. "Using cost pass-through to calibrate demand," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 118(3), pages 451-454.
    9. Froeb, Luke & Tschantz, Steven & Werden, Gregory J., 2005. "Pass-through rates and the price effects of mergers," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 23(9-10), pages 703-715, December.
    10. 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.
    11. Dongling Huang & Christian Rojas & Frank Bass, 2008. "What Happens When Demand Is Estimated With A Misspecified Model?," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 56(4), pages 809-839, December.
    12. Berry, Steven & Pakes, Ariel, 1993. "Some Applications and Limitations of Recent Advances in Empirical Industrial Organization: Merger Analysis," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 83(2), pages 247-252, May.
    13. Orley C. Ashenfelter & Daniel S. Hosken & Matthew C. Weinberg, 2015. "Efficiencies brewed: pricing and consolidation in the US beer industry," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 46(2), pages 328-361, June.
    14. Maxime C. Cohen & Georgia Perakis & Robert S. Pindyck, 2015. "Pricing with Limited Knowledge of Demand," NBER Working Papers 21679, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    15. 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.
    16. Werden, Gregory J & Froeb, Luke M, 1994. "The Effects of Mergers in Differentiated Products Industries: Logit Demand and Merger Policy," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 10(2), pages 407-426, October.
    17. 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.
    18. Roy J. Epstein & Daniel L. Rubinfeld, 2002. "Merger Simulation: A Simplified Approach with New Applications," Industrial Organization 0201002, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    19. 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.
    20. 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.
    21. Philip Crooke & Luke Froeb & Steven Tschantz & Gregory Werden, 1999. "Effects of Assumed Demand Form on Simulated Postmerger Equilibria," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 15(3), pages 205-217, November.
    22. Nathan H. Miller & Matthew Osborne & Gloria Sheu, 2017. "Pass-through in a concentrated industry: empirical evidence and regulatory implications," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 48(1), pages 69-93, March.
    23. Sonia Jaffe & E. Glen Weyl, 2013. "The First-Order Approach to Merger Analysis," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 5(4), pages 188-218, November.
    24. Deaton, Angus S & Muellbauer, John, 1980. "An Almost Ideal Demand System," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 70(3), pages 312-326, June.
    25. Raymond Deneckere & Carl Davidson, 1985. "Incentives to Form Coalitions with Bertrand Competition," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 16(4), pages 473-486, Winter.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. 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.
    2. 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.
    3. 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.
    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. 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.
    6. 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.
    7. Mathiesen, Lars & Nilsen, Øivind Anti & Sørgard, Lars, 2011. "Merger simulations with observed diversion ratios," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 31(2), pages 83-91, June.
    8. 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.
    9. 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.
    10. Bokhari, Farasat A.S. & Mariuzzo, Franco, 2018. "Demand estimation and merger simulations for drugs: Logits v. AIDS," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 653-685.
    11. Mansley, Ryan & Miller, Nathan H. & Sheu, Gloria & Weinberg, Matthew C., 2023. "A price leadership model for merger analysis," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 89(C).
    12. 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).
    13. Tommaso Valletti & Hans Zenger, 2021. "Mergers with Differentiated Products: Where Do We Stand?," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 58(1), pages 179-212, February.
    14. 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.
    15. Yan Yang, 2019. "A New Solution to Market Definition: An Approach Based on Multi-dimensional Substitutability Statistics," Papers 1906.10030, arXiv.org.
    16. Nisvan Erkal & Daniel Piccinin, 2006. "Horizontal Mergers with Free Entry in Differentiated Oligopolies," Department of Economics - Working Papers Series 976, The University of Melbourne.
    17. Kai Hüschelrath, 2009. "Detection Of Anticompetitive Horizontal Mergers," Journal of Competition Law and Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 5(4), pages 683-721.
    18. Claudio Agostini & Eduardo Saavedra & Manuel Willington, 2012. "Economies of Scale and Merger Efficiencies: Empirical Evidence from the Chilean Pension Funds Market," ILADES-UAH Working Papers inv285, Universidad Alberto Hurtado/School of Economics and Business.
    19. Clifford Winston & Vikram Maheshri & Scott M. Dennis, 2011. "Long-Run Effects of Mergers: The Case of U.S. Western Railroads," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 54(2), pages 275-304.
    20. Hüschelrath, Kai, 2009. "Methodologische Grundlagen einer Evaluation von Wettbewerbspolitik," ZEW Discussion Papers 09-084, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • K21 - Law and Economics - - Regulation and Business Law - - - Antitrust Law
    • L13 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Oligopoly and Other Imperfect Markets
    • L41 - Industrial Organization - - Antitrust Issues and Policies - - - Monopolization; Horizontal Anticompetitive Practices

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:doj:eagpap:201602. 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: Tung Vu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/atrgvus.html .

    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.