Accounting for Two-Sided Business Reality Reduces False Negatives as Well as False Positives in Antitrust Decisions Involving Platform Enterprises
Posted by Social Science Research Network
By David S. Evans (Global Economics Group) & Richard Schmalensee (Massachusetts Institute of Technology)
The two-sided analysis of platform businesses isn’t pro-defendant or pro-plaintiff. By accounting for business reality and modern economics, it helps courts and enforcement agencies reach the right decision and thereby reduce the likelihood of false negatives as well as false positives. Sometimes two-sided analysis is essential for uncovering how conduct harms competition and consumers. Other times it helps establish that conduct is innocuous or beneficial. Fears, and hopes, that two-sided analysis will discourage enforcement efforts are misplaced.
Featured News
Japan’s Nippon Steel Eyes Year-End Close on $15B US Steel Deal Amid Political Uncertainty
Nov 7, 2024 by
CPI
Canada Orders Dissolution of TikTok’s Business Amid National Security Concerns
Nov 7, 2024 by
CPI
India Raids Amazon, Flipkart Seller Offices in Foreign Investment Probe
Nov 7, 2024 by
CPI
Canada’s Competition Bureau Seeks Public Feedback on Updated Merger Guidelines
Nov 7, 2024 by
CPI
FTC Adopts Stricter Reporting Rules for Mergers, Delays Expected in 2025
Nov 7, 2024 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – Remedies Revisited
Oct 30, 2024 by
CPI
Fixing the Fix: Updating Policy on Merger Remedies
Oct 30, 2024 by
CPI
Methodology Matters: The 2017 FTC Remedies Study
Oct 30, 2024 by
CPI
U.S. v. AT&T: Five Lessons for Vertical Merger Enforcement
Oct 30, 2024 by
CPI
The Search for Antitrust Remedies in Tech Leads Beyond Antitrust
Oct 30, 2024 by
CPI