Posted by D. Daniel Sokol
Markus Dertwinkel-Kalt, Justus Haucap, Ruhr-University of Bochum and Christian Wey, DIW discuss Input price discrimination (bans), entry and welfare
ABSTRACT: Katz (1987), DeGraba (1990), and Yoshida (2000) have formulated theories that price discrimination bans in intermediary goods markets tend to have positive effects on allocative, dynamic and productive efficiency, respectively. We show that none of these results is robust vis-à-vis endogenous changes in downstream market structure. An upstream monopolist’s ability to price discriminate can intensify competition through entry (by a technically inefficient entrant), resulting in socially preferable market outcomes. In contrast, discrimination bans tend to blockade entry of relatively inefficient firms , thereby strengthening downstream market concentration.
Featured News
Justice Department Moves to End NCAA Transfer Rule
May 30, 2024 by
CPI
Kenya’s Competition Authority Proposes Tougher Regulations on Big Tech
May 30, 2024 by
CPI
KKR Secures EU Antitrust Approval for $24 Billion Acquisition of Telecom Italia’s Fixed-Line Network
May 30, 2024 by
CPI
European Court Sides with Tech Giants in Italian Regulatory Dispute
May 30, 2024 by
CPI
US Steel and Nippon Steel Secure International Approvals for $14.9B Merger
May 30, 2024 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – Merger Guidelines Retrospective
May 21, 2024 by
CPI
Mergers of Complements
May 21, 2024 by
CPI
Personality Traits, Private Equity, and Merger Analysis
May 21, 2024 by
CPI
The 2023 Merger Guidelines: Lessons in the Importance of Incipiency, Modern Economics, and Monopsony
May 21, 2024 by
CPI
The 2023 Merger Guidelines: Sharpening Merger Analysis
May 21, 2024 by
CPI