A PYMNTS Company

Mergers That Harm Sellers

By  |  February 11, 2018

Posted by Social Science Research Network

    Get the Full Story

    Complete the form to unlock this article and enjoy unlimited free access to all PYMNTS content — no additional logins required.

    yesSubscribe to our daily newsletter, PYMNTS Today.

    By completing this form, you agree to receive marketing communications from PYMNTS and to the sharing of your information with our sponsor, if applicable, in accordance with our Privacy Policy and Terms and Conditions.

    By C. Scott Hemphill (New York University) & Nancy L. Rose (Massachusetts Institute of Technology)

    Mergers That Harm Sellers

    This article examines the antitrust treatment of mergers that harm sellers. We separately consider two mechanisms of harm, increased classical monopsony power and increased bargaining leverage. We show that lost upstream competition is a cognizable harm to the competitive process. Our central claim is that harm to sellers in an input market is sufficient to support antitrust liability. We defend this conclusion against the contrary view that demonstrated harm to the merging firms’ downstream purchasers or final consumers is an essential element of any antitrust claim. We further argue that claimed “efficiencies” premised on a reduction in buy-side competition are not efficiencies at all.
    Continue Reading…