Sep 01, 2005
A firm may reduce its prices in an attempt to destroy its rivals or to deter new entry. Although the Sherman Act has long been construed to prohibit this practice, the case law on predatory pricing has been characterized by vagueness and a paucity of economic analysis. In this Article, Professors Areeda and Turner analyze the predatory pricing offense in terms of its economic underpinnings. After briefly reviewing the fundamental economic concepts of cost-measurement and profit-maximization, the authors examine the relationship between a firms prices and its costs in order to define a rational dividing line between legitimately competitive prices and prices that are properly regarded as predatory. They then apply their analytical framework to possible techniques of predation other than general price reductions.
Links to Full Content
Featured News
Trump Vows to Block Nippon Steel’s Acquisition of US Steel
Dec 4, 2024 by
CPI
Microsoft Demands FTC Investigation into Alleged Antitrust Probe Leak
Dec 3, 2024 by
CPI
American Express Must Face Class Action Lawsuit, US Judge Rules
Dec 3, 2024 by
CPI
Ted Cruz Seeks Probe into European Influence on US AI Laws
Dec 3, 2024 by
CPI
Microsoft Faces £1.2 Billion Lawsuit in UK Over Cloud Software Licensing Practices
Dec 3, 2024 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – Moats & Entrenchment
Nov 29, 2024 by
CPI
Assessing the Potential for Antitrust Moats and Trenches in the Generative AI Industry
Nov 29, 2024 by
Allison Holt, Sushrut Jain & Ashley Zhou
How SEP Hold-up Can Lead to Entrenchment
Nov 29, 2024 by
Jay Jurata, Elena Kamenir & Christie Boyden
The Role of Moats in Unlocking Economic Growth
Nov 29, 2024 by
CPI
Overcoming Moats and Entrenchment: Disruptive Innovation in Generative AI May Be More Successful than Regulation
Nov 29, 2024 by
Simon Chisholm & Charlie Whitehead