Herbert Hovenkamp, Apr 01, 2006
The success of the Areeda-Turner test for predatory pricing and the U.S. Supreme Court’s adoption of demanding proof requirements in its 1993 Brooke Group decision have made it very difficult for plaintiffs to win conventional predatory pricing claims. While many challenges to exclusionary pricing continue to be made, the legal theory has evolved away from classical predation to a variety of other theories. This paper examines the state of the law of both conventional predatory pricing and these recent variants and offers some recommendations.
Featured News
Carey Bolsters Competition Law Team With New Senior Counsel
Mar 15, 2026 by
CPI
TikTok US Sale Could Deliver $10 Billion Windfall to the United States
Mar 15, 2026 by
CPI
States Press Ahead With Live Nation Antitrust Trial After Federal Settlement
Mar 15, 2026 by
CPI
US Pulls Back Draft Regulation Targeting Global AI Chip Shipments
Mar 15, 2026 by
CPI
Selecta and Bondholders Ask US Court to Dismiss Antitrust Lawsuit Over Creditor Pact
Mar 15, 2026 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – Behavioral Economics
Feb 22, 2026 by
CPI
Behavioral Antitrust in 2026
Feb 22, 2026 by
Maurice Stucke
Behavioral Economics in Competition Policy: Going Beyond Inertia and Framing Effects
Feb 22, 2026 by
Annemieke Tuinstra & Richard May
Agreeing to Disagree in Antitrust
Feb 22, 2026 by
Jorge Padilla
Recognizing What’s Around the Corner: Merger Control, Capabilities, and the New Nature of Potential Competition
Feb 22, 2026 by
Magdalena Kuyterink & David J. Teece