IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this paper

On the Effectiveness of Anit-Predation Rules

Listed author(s):
  • Rainer Nitsche
Registered author(s):

    Current anti-predation rules are designed to detect and prevent actions that are only taken to drive out a rival. We evaluate the performance of these rules in a simple entry game. We find that the rules used by competition authorities fail to encourage sustained competition in the market. Moreover, despite the rules an inefficient incumbent cannot be replaced by a more efficient entrant unless the difference in efficiency is extreme. One reason for these failures is that incumbents choose a strategic response to the legal environment. Large incumbents, for instance, crowd the product space. This is detrimental to welfare and consumer surplus. ZUSAMMENFASSUNG - (Die Effektivität von Wettbewerbsregeln gegen Verdrängungspreisverhalten) Wettbewerbsbehörden stützen sich auf Wettbewerbsregeln, um Unternehmen an Handlungen zu hindern, die nur dann profitabel sind, wenn sie zum Marktaustritt des Rivalen führen. Der Autor analysiert die Effektivität dieser Regeln in einem einfachen Markteintrittsspiel und zeigt, daß die Regeln keinen dauerhaften Wettbewerb im Markt erzeugen. Darüber hinaus verfehlen die Regeln ein weiteres Ziel: auch bei perfekter Durchsetzung der Regeln kann ein effizienterer Marktneuling in einem Verdrängungskampf nicht gegen das alteingesessene Unternehmen gewinnen, es sei denn, die Effizienzunterschiede sind extrem. Ein Grund für dieses Scheitern ist, dass sich die alteingesessenen Unternehmen strategisch an die rechtlichen Rahmenbedingungen anpassen. Wenn ein Markteintritt von effizienteren Unternehmen droht, so entscheiden sie sich eher für eine Angebotserhöhung als den Markteintritt zu gestatten. In dem untersuchten Spiel mindert dies Wohlfahrt und Konsumtenrente.

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    Paper provided by Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin (WZB), Research Unit: Competition and Innovation (CIG) in its series CIG Working Papers with number FS IV 02-12.

    in new window

    Length: 69 pages
    Date of creation: Nov 2002
    Handle: RePEc:wzb:wzebiv:fsiv02-12
    Contact details of provider: Postal:
    Reichpietschufer 50, 10785 Berlin, Germany

    Phone: (++49)(30) 25491-441
    Fax: (++49)(30) 25491-442
    Web page:

    More information through EDIRC

    References listed on IDEAS
    Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

    in new window

    1. Kenneth L. Judd, 1985. "Credible Spatial Preemption," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 16(2), pages 153-166, Summer.
    2. 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.
    3. Evans, A., 1990. "Competition And The Structure Of Local Bus Market," Papers 90-17, Flinders of South Australia - Discipline of Economics.
    4. Maskin, Eric & Tirole, Jean, 1988. "A Theory of Dynamic Oligopoly, II: Price Competition, Kinked Demand Curves, and Edgeworth Cycles," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 56(3), pages 571-599, May.
    5. Steven C. Salop, 1979. "Monopolistic Competition with Outside Goods," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 10(1), pages 141-156, Spring.
    6. Phlips, Louis, 1996. "On the detection of collusion and predation," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 40(3-5), pages 495-510, April.
    7. Navon, Ami & Shy, Oz & Thisse, Jacques-François, 1995. "Product Differentiation in the Presence of Positive and Negative Network Effects," CEPR Discussion Papers 1306, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    8. Kamien, Morton I & Zang, Israel, 1993. "Monopolization by Sequential Acquisition," Journal of Law, Economics and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 9(2), pages 205-229, October.
    9. N. Gregory Mankiw & Michael D. Whinston, 1986. "Free Entry and Social Inefficiency," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 17(1), pages 48-58, Spring.
    10. Alison Oldale, 1998. "Local bus deregulation and timetable instability," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 6756, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    11. Alison Oldale, 1998. "Local Bus Deregulation and Timetable Instability," STICERD - Economics of Industry Papers 21, Suntory and Toyota International Centres for Economics and Related Disciplines, LSE.
    12. Dodgson, J. S. & Newton, C. R. & Katsoulacos, Y., 1992. "A modelling framework for the empirical analysis of predatory behaviour in the bus services industry," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 22(1), pages 51-70, March.
    13. Norman, George & Thisse, Jacques-Francois, 1996. "Product Variety and Welfare under Tough and Soft Pricing Regimes," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 106(434), pages 76-91, January.
    14. Vickers, John, 1995. "Concepts of Competition," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 47(1), pages 1-23, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wzb:wzebiv:fsiv02-12. 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: (Jennifer Rontganger)

    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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 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.

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.