Barry Nalebuff, Nov 01, 2009
Elhauge (2009) provides a wide-ranging article that is impressive both in its clarity and its holistic attack on the practice of bundling and tying. In this commentary, I will focus my attention on one aspect of his presentation, namely the effect of price discrimination via metering and tying on consumer welfare and total welfare. Elhauge makes the claim that we should not suppose that the total welfare effects of price discrimination are positive. Even if they are, he suggests that this perspective is too narrow; a price-discriminating monopolist will make more money and so may incur greater ex ante costs to secure its market position. And if total welfare still rises after taking these costs into account, Elhauge makes the further argument that antitrust is and should be focused on consumer welfare, not total welfare. In that domain, the presumption should be that price discrimination lowers consumer welfare.
Featured News
Apartment Giants AvalonBay, Equity Weigh $50 Billion Merger
Apr 30, 2026 by
CPI
Apple Challenges Indian Competition Regulator Over Financial Data Demand in Antitrust Case
Apr 30, 2026 by
CPI
EU Judges Leave Final Decision on Portuguese Football Hiring Pact to National Court
Apr 30, 2026 by
CPI
State AGs Form Bipartisan Task Force To Support Guardrails Around AI
Apr 30, 2026 by
CPI
Brazil Opens Antitrust Case Into Alleged Airline Price Coordination
Apr 30, 2026 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – Unilateral Effects
Apr 28, 2026 by
CPI
A Net Present Value Approach to Merger Analysis
Apr 28, 2026 by
Joseph J Simons & Malcolm Coate
Generative AI and Competitive Disruption: Increasingly Relevant for Merger Analysis?
Apr 28, 2026 by
Andrea Coscelli, Emily Chissell, Nitika Bagaria & Tega Akati-Udi
Non-Price Unilateral Effects In Media Mergers
Apr 28, 2026 by
Lapo Filistrucchi & Teresa Oriani
Ecosystem Mergers and Unilateral Effects? A Framework for Assessing the Ecosystem Theory of Harm
Apr 28, 2026 by
Ethel Fonseca, George Tucker & Helder Vasconcelos