MARKET DEFINITION: AN ANALYTICAL OVERVIEW
Throughout the history of US antitrust litigation, the outcome of more cases has surely turned on market definition than on any other substantive issue. Market definition is often the most critical step in evaluating market power and determining whether business conduct has or likely will have antic...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Antitrust law journal 2007-01, Vol.74 (1), p.129-173 |
---|---|
1. Verfasser: | |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 173 |
---|---|
container_issue | 1 |
container_start_page | 129 |
container_title | Antitrust law journal |
container_volume | 74 |
creator | Baker, Jonathan B. |
description | Throughout the history of US antitrust litigation, the outcome of more cases has surely turned on market definition than on any other substantive issue. Market definition is often the most critical step in evaluating market power and determining whether business conduct has or likely will have anticompetitive effects. This survey addresses the reasons for undertaking market definition in antitrust analysis and methods of doing so. It discusses how the process of market definition should be conducted, with attention to the practical difficulties of doing so. Among other things, it explains why markets should be defined based solely with reference to demand substitution, leaving supply substitution considerations for other steps of competitive effects analysis, and identifies five types of evidence as to buyer substitution. The article also discusses the appropriate scope of markets (including supermarkets) and explains why four approaches sometimes employed for market definition (price correlations, shipment flows, critical loss analysis, and cluster markets) should be avoided. In addition, it analyzes how market definition differs depending on whether the alleged harm is prospective or retrospective and depending upon whether the anticompetitive theory involves collusion or exclusion. |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>jstor_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_197276624</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><jstor_id>27897544</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>27897544</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-g235t-b67d32176b9012cf90da924410944d62610002d75ce5468c439f66ff697913b43</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNotjk1LxDAURYMoWEd_glDcuQgkL8nLxF0ZMxqsLQx1xFXpV8Sidkw7C_-9HUa4cDeHe-4JiUAAUqO1PCURY0xQZArPycU49oxxxoFH5PY52TzZIr63a5e5wuXZXZxkc5L0rXCrJI3zrd1snX29JGe--hy7q_9ekJe1LVaPNM0fDiB9B6EmWqNuBXCNtZkNjTesrQxIyZmRskVAPl-BVqumUxKXjRTGI3qPRhsuaikW5Oa4uwvDz74bp7If9uF7VpbcaNCIcICuj1A_TkMod-Hjqwq_Jeil0UpK8Qfr8UE4</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>197276624</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>MARKET DEFINITION: AN ANALYTICAL OVERVIEW</title><source>HeinOnline Law Journal Library</source><source>Business Source Complete</source><source>Jstor Complete Legacy</source><creator>Baker, Jonathan B.</creator><creatorcontrib>Baker, Jonathan B.</creatorcontrib><description>Throughout the history of US antitrust litigation, the outcome of more cases has surely turned on market definition than on any other substantive issue. Market definition is often the most critical step in evaluating market power and determining whether business conduct has or likely will have anticompetitive effects. This survey addresses the reasons for undertaking market definition in antitrust analysis and methods of doing so. It discusses how the process of market definition should be conducted, with attention to the practical difficulties of doing so. Among other things, it explains why markets should be defined based solely with reference to demand substitution, leaving supply substitution considerations for other steps of competitive effects analysis, and identifies five types of evidence as to buyer substitution. The article also discusses the appropriate scope of markets (including supermarkets) and explains why four approaches sometimes employed for market definition (price correlations, shipment flows, critical loss analysis, and cluster markets) should be avoided. In addition, it analyzes how market definition differs depending on whether the alleged harm is prospective or retrospective and depending upon whether the anticompetitive theory involves collusion or exclusion.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0003-6056</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2326-9774</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Chicago: American Bar Association</publisher><subject>Aluminum ; Antitrust ; Antitrust laws ; Business conditions ; Collusion ; Competition ; Elasticity of demand ; Litigation ; Market demand ; Market power ; Market prices ; Market share ; Price increases ; Product markets ; Studies ; Supply</subject><ispartof>Antitrust law journal, 2007-01, Vol.74 (1), p.129-173</ispartof><rights>Copyright 2007 American Bar Association</rights><rights>Copyright American Bar Association 2007</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/27897544$$EPDF$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/27897544$$EHTML$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,777,781,800,57998,58231</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Baker, Jonathan B.</creatorcontrib><title>MARKET DEFINITION: AN ANALYTICAL OVERVIEW</title><title>Antitrust law journal</title><description>Throughout the history of US antitrust litigation, the outcome of more cases has surely turned on market definition than on any other substantive issue. Market definition is often the most critical step in evaluating market power and determining whether business conduct has or likely will have anticompetitive effects. This survey addresses the reasons for undertaking market definition in antitrust analysis and methods of doing so. It discusses how the process of market definition should be conducted, with attention to the practical difficulties of doing so. Among other things, it explains why markets should be defined based solely with reference to demand substitution, leaving supply substitution considerations for other steps of competitive effects analysis, and identifies five types of evidence as to buyer substitution. The article also discusses the appropriate scope of markets (including supermarkets) and explains why four approaches sometimes employed for market definition (price correlations, shipment flows, critical loss analysis, and cluster markets) should be avoided. In addition, it analyzes how market definition differs depending on whether the alleged harm is prospective or retrospective and depending upon whether the anticompetitive theory involves collusion or exclusion.</description><subject>Aluminum</subject><subject>Antitrust</subject><subject>Antitrust laws</subject><subject>Business conditions</subject><subject>Collusion</subject><subject>Competition</subject><subject>Elasticity of demand</subject><subject>Litigation</subject><subject>Market demand</subject><subject>Market power</subject><subject>Market prices</subject><subject>Market share</subject><subject>Price increases</subject><subject>Product markets</subject><subject>Studies</subject><subject>Supply</subject><issn>0003-6056</issn><issn>2326-9774</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2007</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid/><recordid>eNotjk1LxDAURYMoWEd_glDcuQgkL8nLxF0ZMxqsLQx1xFXpV8Sidkw7C_-9HUa4cDeHe-4JiUAAUqO1PCURY0xQZArPycU49oxxxoFH5PY52TzZIr63a5e5wuXZXZxkc5L0rXCrJI3zrd1snX29JGe--hy7q_9ekJe1LVaPNM0fDiB9B6EmWqNuBXCNtZkNjTesrQxIyZmRskVAPl-BVqumUxKXjRTGI3qPRhsuaikW5Oa4uwvDz74bp7If9uF7VpbcaNCIcICuj1A_TkMod-Hjqwq_Jeil0UpK8Qfr8UE4</recordid><startdate>20070101</startdate><enddate>20070101</enddate><creator>Baker, Jonathan B.</creator><general>American Bar Association</general><scope/></search><sort><creationdate>20070101</creationdate><title>MARKET DEFINITION: AN ANALYTICAL OVERVIEW</title><author>Baker, Jonathan B.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-g235t-b67d32176b9012cf90da924410944d62610002d75ce5468c439f66ff697913b43</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2007</creationdate><topic>Aluminum</topic><topic>Antitrust</topic><topic>Antitrust laws</topic><topic>Business conditions</topic><topic>Collusion</topic><topic>Competition</topic><topic>Elasticity of demand</topic><topic>Litigation</topic><topic>Market demand</topic><topic>Market power</topic><topic>Market prices</topic><topic>Market share</topic><topic>Price increases</topic><topic>Product markets</topic><topic>Studies</topic><topic>Supply</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Baker, Jonathan B.</creatorcontrib><jtitle>Antitrust law journal</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Baker, Jonathan B.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>MARKET DEFINITION: AN ANALYTICAL OVERVIEW</atitle><jtitle>Antitrust law journal</jtitle><date>2007-01-01</date><risdate>2007</risdate><volume>74</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>129</spage><epage>173</epage><pages>129-173</pages><issn>0003-6056</issn><eissn>2326-9774</eissn><abstract>Throughout the history of US antitrust litigation, the outcome of more cases has surely turned on market definition than on any other substantive issue. Market definition is often the most critical step in evaluating market power and determining whether business conduct has or likely will have anticompetitive effects. This survey addresses the reasons for undertaking market definition in antitrust analysis and methods of doing so. It discusses how the process of market definition should be conducted, with attention to the practical difficulties of doing so. Among other things, it explains why markets should be defined based solely with reference to demand substitution, leaving supply substitution considerations for other steps of competitive effects analysis, and identifies five types of evidence as to buyer substitution. The article also discusses the appropriate scope of markets (including supermarkets) and explains why four approaches sometimes employed for market definition (price correlations, shipment flows, critical loss analysis, and cluster markets) should be avoided. In addition, it analyzes how market definition differs depending on whether the alleged harm is prospective or retrospective and depending upon whether the anticompetitive theory involves collusion or exclusion.</abstract><cop>Chicago</cop><pub>American Bar Association</pub><tpages>45</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0003-6056 |
ispartof | Antitrust law journal, 2007-01, Vol.74 (1), p.129-173 |
issn | 0003-6056 2326-9774 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_197276624 |
source | HeinOnline Law Journal Library; Business Source Complete; Jstor Complete Legacy |
subjects | Aluminum Antitrust Antitrust laws Business conditions Collusion Competition Elasticity of demand Litigation Market demand Market power Market prices Market share Price increases Product markets Studies Supply |
title | MARKET DEFINITION: AN ANALYTICAL OVERVIEW |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-19T19%3A36%3A47IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-jstor_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=MARKET%20DEFINITION:%20AN%20ANALYTICAL%20OVERVIEW&rft.jtitle=Antitrust%20law%20journal&rft.au=Baker,%20Jonathan%20B.&rft.date=2007-01-01&rft.volume=74&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=129&rft.epage=173&rft.pages=129-173&rft.issn=0003-6056&rft.eissn=2326-9774&rft_id=info:doi/&rft_dat=%3Cjstor_proqu%3E27897544%3C/jstor_proqu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=197276624&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_jstor_id=27897544&rfr_iscdi=true |