A PYMNTS Company

The Relevent Market: Possible and Productive

By  |  April 16, 2014

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.

    The Relevent Market: Possible and Productive – Gregory J. Werden (US Department of Justice – Antitrust Division)

    ABSTRACT: Professor Louis Kaplow capped off his series on the relevant market with a final essay in this the Antitrust Law Journal. His premise remains that relevant market is used only to help assess a firm’s market power based on its market share. He claims: (1) “there exists no valid way to make market power inferences from shares” of a multi-product market; (2) “it is impossible to determine which market definition is superior” in inferring market power “without already formulating one’s best estimate of market power”; and (3) delineating the relevant market is “counterproductive.” This essay demonstrates the relevant market’s utility. It also shows that: (1) Kaplow’s first claim rests on a distorted view of antitrust analysis and faulty economics; (2) Kaplow does not prove his second claim, but rather just that the relevant market is not needed for the purpose he allows for it; and (3) Kaplow’s third claim rests on a misapplication of the hypothetical monopolist test, faulty economics, and erroneous facts.