IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/lue/wpaper/355.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Relevance and Detection Problems of Margin Squeeze – The Case of German Gasoline Prices

Author

Listed:
  • Christoph Kleineberg

    (Leuphana University Lueneburg, Germany)

  • Thomas Wein

    (Leuphana University Lueneburg, Germany)

Abstract

In contrast to the United States, Germany decided to add margin squeeze as a legal offense to German competition law. In response to this, the problems in the gasoline market have caused major debates. This paper examines the pricing strategies by gasoline retailers and discusses the difficulties experienced by regulators dealing with cases of margin squeeze occurrence of the phenomenon and outlines the dilemma of the margin squeeze. First the three possibilities to detect margin squeezes are presented. Afterwards the problems in applying the concept in case of the gasoline market, for which it was initially designed, are discussed. On the one hand, there are very few obvious cases in the gasoline market in which retail prices and wholesale prices are a clear indicator for margin squeeze. On the other hand, applying the “equally-efficient” approach always involves assumptions of having knowledge of the companies’ cost functions. When applying the “equally-efficient”- approach, there are cases of margin squeezes at the cost of having only educated guesses and no solid proof. When considering the wholesale price to detect margin squeeze cases on the gasoline retail market, there are nearly no cases of margin squeezes. The difficulty to find a proper way of calculating equal efficiency or reasonable efficiency and the lack of margin squeeze cases when referring to wholesale and retail prices of gasoline constitute the dilemma of the element of offence “margin squeeze”.

Suggested Citation

  • Christoph Kleineberg & Thomas Wein, 2015. "Relevance and Detection Problems of Margin Squeeze – The Case of German Gasoline Prices," Working Paper Series in Economics 355, University of Lüneburg, Institute of Economics.
  • Handle: RePEc:lue:wpaper:355
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.leuphana.de/fileadmin/user_upload/Forschungseinrichtungen/ifvwl/WorkingPapers/lue/pdf/wp_355_Upload.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. George A. Hay & Kathryn McMahon, 2012. "The Diverging Approach to Price Squeezes in the United States and Europe," Journal of Competition Law and Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 8(2), pages 259-296.
    2. Jan Bouckaert & Frank Verboven, 2004. "Price Squeezes in a Regulatory Environment," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 26(3), pages 321-351, August.
    3. John Vickers, 2005. "Abuse of Market Power," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 115(504), pages 244-261, June.
    4. J. Gregory Sidak, 2008. "Abolishing The Price Squeeze As A Theory Of Antitrust Liability," Journal of Competition Law and Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 4(2), pages 279-309.
    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. Christoph Kleineberg & Thomas Wein, 2017. "Verdrängungspreise an Tankstellen?," Working Paper Series in Economics 375, University of Lüneburg, Institute of Economics.

    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. Christoph Kleineberg & Thomas Wein, 2017. "Verdrängungspreise an Tankstellen?," Working Paper Series in Economics 375, University of Lüneburg, Institute of Economics.
    2. Rey, Patrick & Jullien, Bruno & Saavedra, Claudia, 2014. "The Economics of Margin Squeeze," CEPR Discussion Papers 9905, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    3. Justus Haucap & Torben Stühmeier, 2016. "Competition and antitrust in Internet markets," Chapters, in: Johannes M. Bauer & Michael Latzer (ed.), Handbook on the Economics of the Internet, chapter 9, pages 183-210, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    4. Thomas Wein, 2014. "Preventing Margin Squeeze: An Unsolvable Puzzle for Competition Policy? The Case of the German Gasoline Market," Working Paper Series in Economics 309, University of Lüneburg, Institute of Economics.
    5. Yuta Kittaka & Noriaki Matsushima & Fuyuki Saruta, 2021. "Competition between physical and electronic content retailers," ISER Discussion Paper 1123, Institute of Social and Economic Research, Osaka University.
    6. Zhijun Chen, 2021. "Price Squeezes as an Exploitative Abuse," Monash Economics Working Papers 2021-05, Monash University, Department of Economics.
    7. Stephen Martin & Jan Vandekerckhove, 2013. "Market Performance Implications of the Transfer Price Rule," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 80(2), pages 466-487, October.
    8. Kittaka, Yuta & Matsushima, Noriaki & Saruta, Fuyuki, 2022. "Negative effect of price-matching policy on traditional retailers in a dual-channel supply chain with different content formats," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 161(C).
    9. 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.
    10. Stennek, Johan & Tangerås, Thomas, 2006. "Competition vs. Regulation in Mobile Telecommunications," Working Paper Series 685, Research Institute of Industrial Economics.
    11. 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.
    12. Gaudin, Germain & Saavedra, Claudia, 2014. "Ex ante margin squeeze tests in the telecommunications industry: What is a reasonably efficient operator?," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(2), pages 157-172.
    13. Simshauser, Paul & Whish-Wilson, Patrick, 2017. "Price discrimination in Australia's retail electricity markets: An analysis of Victoria & Southeast Queensland," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 92-103.
    14. Howell, Bronwyn, 2008. "The End or the Means? The Pursuit of Competition in Regulated Telecommunications Markets," Working Paper Series 4002, Victoria University of Wellington, The New Zealand Institute for the Study of Competition and Regulation.
    15. Howell, Bronwyn, 2009. "Politics and the Pursuit of Efficiency in New Zealand's Telecommunications Sector 1987-2008," Working Paper Series 19134, Victoria University of Wellington, The New Zealand Institute for the Study of Competition and Regulation.
    16. Simshauser, Paul, 2018. "Price discrimination and the modes of failure in deregulated retail electricity markets," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 54-70.
    17. Nazmus Sakib & Federica Appiotti & Filippo Magni & Denis Maragno & Alberto Innocenti & Elena Gissi & Francesco Musco, 2018. "Addressing the Passenger Transport and Accessibility Enablers for Sustainable Development," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-21, March.
    18. van Damme, E.E.C. & Larouche, P. & Müller, W., 2006. "Abuse of a Dominant Position : Cases and Experiments," Other publications TiSEM 7e471876-96e7-46c7-a956-e, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    19. repec:hal:spmain:info:hdl:2441/1op860fg2l8f4p3acvk2hj0tmn is not listed on IDEAS
    20. Bougette, Patrice & Deschamps, Marc & Marty, Frã‰Dã‰Ric, 2015. "When Economics Met Antitrust: The Second Chicago School and the Economization of Antitrust Law," Enterprise & Society, Cambridge University Press, vol. 16(2), pages 313-353, June.
    21. van Damme, E.E.C., 2004. "Pragmatic Privatization : The Netherlands 1982-2002," Discussion Paper 2004-007, Tilburg University, Tilburg Law and Economic Center.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • K21 - Law and Economics - - Regulation and Business Law - - - Antitrust Law
    • L12 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Monopoly; Monopolization Strategies
    • L42 - Industrial Organization - - Antitrust Issues and Policies - - - Vertical Restraints; Resale Price Maintenance; Quantity Discounts

    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:lue:wpaper:355. 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: Joachim Wagner (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://leuphana.de/institute/ivwl.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.