Antitrust analysis with upward pricing pressure and cost efficiencies


Autoři: Jéssica Dutra aff001;  Tarun Sabarwal aff002
Působiště autorů: Economists Incorporated, Washington, DC, United States of America aff001;  Economics Department, The University of Kansas, Lawrence, KS, United States of America aff002
Vyšlo v časopise: PLoS ONE 15(1)
Kategorie: Research Article
prolekare.web.journal.doi_sk: 10.1371/journal.pone.0227418

Souhrn

We investigate the accuracy of UPP as a tool in antitrust analysis when there are cost efficiencies from a horizontal merger. We include merger-specific cost efficiencies in a tractable manner in the model and extend the standard UPP formulation to account for these efficiencies. The efficacy of the new UPP formulations is analyzed using Monte Carlo simulation of 40,000 mergers (8 scenarios, 5,000 mergers in each scenario). We find that the new UPP formulations yield substantial gains in prediction of post-merger prices, and there are substantial gains in merger screening accuracy as well. Moreover, the new UPP formulations outperform the standard UPP formulation at higher thresholds for all the standard cases in the paper. The results are robust to several additional analyses. The results show that including cost efficiencies in a manner guided by the theoretical model may yield substantial improvements in accuracy of UPP as a tool in antitrust analysis.

Klíčová slova:

Approximation methods – Data processing – Employment – European Union – Public policy – Research errors – Simulation and modeling – Monte Carlo method


Zdroje

1. Farrell J, Shapiro C. Antitrust evaluation of horizontal mergers: An economic alternative to market definition. The BE Journal of Theoretical Economics. 2010;10(1).

2. Jaffe S, Weyl EG. The first-order approach to merger analysis. American Economic Journal: Microeconomics. 2013;5(4):188–218.

3. Buccirossi P. Handbook of Antitrust Economics. MIT Press; 2008.

4. Ivaldi M, Jullien B, Rey P, Seabright P, Tirole J. The economics of unilateral effects. Interim report for DG competition, European Commission. 2003.

5. Werden GJ. Unilateral competitive effects of horizontal mergers I: Basic concepts and models. Issues in Competition Law and Policy. 2010.

6. Shapiro C. The 2010 horizontal merger guidelines: From hedgehog to fox in forty years. Antitrust Law Journal. 2010;77(1):49–107.

7. Werden GJ, Froeb LM. The effects of mergers in differentiated products industries: Logit demand and merger policy. Journal of Law, Economics, & Organization. 1994;10(2):407–426.

8. Werden GJ, Froeb LM. Simulation as an alternative to structural merger policy in differentiated products industries. In: The Economics of the Antitrust Process, Topics in Regulatory Economics and Policy Series. Springer; 1996.

9. Hausman JA, Leonard GK. Economic analysis of differentiated products mergers using real world data. Geo Mason L Rev. 1996;5:321–343.

10. Berry S, Pakes A. Some applications and limitations of recent advances in empirical industrial organization: Merger analysis. The American Economic Review. 1993;83(2):247–252.

11. Epstein RJ, Rubinfeld DL. Merger simulation: A simplified approach with new applications. Antitrust Law Journal. 2001;69:883–919.

12. Werden GJ, Froeb LM, Scheffman DT. A Daubert discipline for merger simulation. Antitrust. 2003;18:89–95.

13. Weinberg MC, Hosken D. Evidence on the accuracy of merger simulations. Review of Economics and Statistics. 2013;95(5):1584–1600. doi: 10.1162/REST_a_00347

14. Budzinski O, Ruhmer I. Merger simulation in competition policy: A survey. Journal of Competition Law & Economics. 2009;6(2):277–319. doi: 10.1093/joclec/nhp014

15. Schmalensee R. Should new merger guidelines give UPP market definition? CPI Antitrust Chronicle. 2009;12(1):1–7.

16. Farrell J, Shapiro C. Upward Pricing Pressure and critical loss analysis: Response. Antitrust Chronicle. 2011;1:1–17.

17. Werden GJ. A robust test for consumer welfare enhancing mergers among sellers of differentiated products. The Journal of Industrial Economics. 1996;44(4):409–413. doi: 10.2307/2950522

18. Willig R. Unilateral competitive effects of mergers: Upward Pricing Pressure, product quality, and other extensions. Review of Industrial Organization. 2011;39(1-2):19–38. doi: 10.1007/s11151-011-9307-7

19. Moresi S, Salop SC. vGUPPI: Scoring unilateral pricing incentives in vertical mergers. Antitrust Law Journal. 2013;79:185–214.

20. Miller NH, Remer M, Ryan C, Sheu G. On the first order approximation of counterfactual price effects in oligopoly models, Working Paper. 2013.

21. Hausman J, Leonard G, Zona JD. Competitive analysis with differenciated products. Annales d’Economie et de Statistique. 1994;(34):159–180. doi: 10.2307/20075951

22. Nevo A. Mergers with differentiated products: The case of the ready-to-eat cereal industry. The RAND Journal of Economics. 2000;31(3):395–421.

23. Miller NH, Remer M, Ryan C, Sheu G. Pass-Through and the Prediction of Merger Price Effects. The Journal of Industrial Economics. 2016;64(4):683–709. doi: 10.1111/joie.12131

24. Cheung L. An Empirical Comparison Between the Upward Pricing Pressure Test and Merger Simulation in Differentiated Product Markets. Journal of Competition Law & Economics. 2016;12(4):701–734. doi: 10.1093/joclec/nhw026

25. Garmon C. The accuracy of hospital merger screening methods. The RAND Journal of Economics. 2017;48(4):1068–1102. doi: 10.1111/1756-2171.12215

26. Miller NH, Remer M, Ryan C, Sheu G. Upward Pricing Pressure as a predictor of merger price effects. International Journal of Industrial Organization. 2017;52:216–247. doi: 10.1016/j.ijindorg.2017.01.010

27. Gifford DJ, Kudrle RT. The Atlantic Divide in Antitrust: An Examination of US and EU Competition Policy. University of Chicago Press; 2015.

28. Kinne K. Efficiencies in merger analysis. Intereconomics. 1999;34(6):297–302. doi: 10.1007/BF02929896

29. Crane DA. Rethinking Merger Efficiencies. Michigan Law Review. 2011;110(3):347–391.

30. Farrell J, Shapiro C. Scale economies and synergies in horizontal merger analysis. Antitrust Law Journal. 2001;68(3):685–710.

31. Deneckere R, Davidson C. Incentives to form coalitions with Bertrand competition. The RAND Journal of Economics. 1985;16(4):473–486.

32. Warren-Boulton FR. Merger Policy and Enforcement at the Antitrust Division: The Economist’s View. Antitrust Law Journal. 1985;54:109–115.

33. Simons JJ, Coate MB. Upward Pressure on Price analysis: issues and implications for merger policy. European Competition Journal. 2010;6(2):377–396. doi: 10.5235/174410510792283745

34. Pardo-Garcia C, Sempere-Monerris JJ. Equilibrium mergers in a composite good industry with efficiencies. SERIEs. 2015;6(1):101–127. doi: 10.1007/s13209-014-0121-y

35. Miller NH, Remer M, Sheu G. Using cost pass-through to calibrate demand. Economics Letters. 2013;118(3):451–454. doi: 10.1016/j.econlet.2012.12.021

36. Li T, Rosenman R. Estimating hospital costs with a generalized Leontief function. Health Economics. 2001;10(6):523–538. doi: 10.1002/hec.605 11550293

37. Cohn E, Rhine SL, Santos MC. Institutions of higher education as multi-product firms: Economies of scale and scope. The Review of Economics and Statistics. 1989;71(2):284–290. doi: 10.2307/1926974

38. Martínez-Budría E, Jara-Díaz S, Ramos-Real FJ. Adapting productivity theory to the quadratic cost function. An application to the Spanish electric sector. Journal of Productivity Analysis. 2003;20(2):213–229. doi: 10.1023/A:1025184306832

39. Diewert WE. An application of the Shephard duality theorem: A generalized Leontief production function. Journal of Political Economy. 1971;79(3):481–507. doi: 10.1086/259764

40. Hall RE. The specification of technology with several kinds of output. Journal of Political Economy. 1973;81(4):878–892. doi: 10.1086/260086

41. Caves DW, Christensen LR, Tretheway MW. Flexible cost functions for multiproduct firms. The Review of Economics and Statistics. 1980;62(3):477–481. doi: 10.2307/1927120

42. Taragin C, Sandfort M. Tools for Antitrust Practitioners. 2019.

43. Björnerstedt J, Verboven F. Merger simulation with nested Logit demand. The Stata Journal. 2014;14(3):511–540. doi: 10.1177/1536867X1401400304

44. Coate MB. Benchmarking The Upward Pricing Pressure Model with Federal Trade Commission Evidence. Journal of Competition Law & Economics. 2011;7(4):825–846. doi: 10.1093/joclec/nhr014


Článok vyšiel v časopise

PLOS One


2020 Číslo 1

Najčítanejšie v tomto čísle

Tejto téme sa ďalej venujú…


Kurzy

Zvýšte si kvalifikáciu online z pohodlia domova

Význam nutraceutik u kardiovaskulárních onemocnění
nový kurz
Autori:

Faktory ovlivňující léčbu levotyroxinem

Kurz originály vs. generika

Autori: MUDr. Petr Výborný, CSc., FEBO

Autori: MUDr. Jiří Horažďovský, Ph.D

Všetky kurzy
Prihlásenie
Zabudnuté heslo

Nemáte účet?  Registrujte sa

Zabudnuté heslo

Zadajte e-mailovú adresu, s ktorou ste vytvárali účet. Budú Vám na ňu zasielané informácie k nastaveniu nového hesla.

Prihlásenie

Nemáte účet?  Registrujte sa