Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ucp/scerev/doi10.1086-675271.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Games judges don't play: predatory pricing and strategic reasoning in US antitrust

Author

Listed:
  • Nicola Giocoli
Abstract
The paper analyzes the last three decades of debates about predatory pricing in US antitrust law, starting from the literature that followed Areeda and Turner's 1975 landmark paper and ending in the beginning of this century, upon the Brooke 1993 decision. Special emphasis is given to the game-theoretic approach to predation and to the reasons why this approach has never gained attention in the courtroom. It is argued that, despite their mathematical rigor, the sophisticated stories told by strategic models to demonstrate the actual viability of predatory behavior fail to satisfy the criteria guiding court's decisions, in particular their preference for easy-to-apply rules. Predation cases are still governed by a peculiar alliance between Chicago-style price theory--which, contrary to game theory, considers predatory behavior almost always irrational--and a Harvard-style attention to the operational side of antitrust enforcement.

Suggested Citation

  • Nicola Giocoli, 2013. "Games judges don't play: predatory pricing and strategic reasoning in US antitrust," Supreme Court Economic Review, University of Chicago Press, vol. 21(1), pages 271-330.
    • Handle: RePEc:ucp:scerev:doi:10.1086/675271
    DOI: 10.1086/675271
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/675271
    Download Restriction: Access to the online full text or PDF requires a subscription.
    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/675271
    Download Restriction: Access to the online full text or PDF requires a subscription.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1086/675271?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version below or search for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Steven Rappaport, 1998. "Models and Reality in Economics," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 1258.
    2. Motta,Massimo, 2004. "Competition Policy," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521016919.
    3. Elzinga, Kenneth G, 1970. "Predatory Pricing: The Case of the Gunpowder Trust," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 13(1), pages 223-240, April.
    4. Einer Elhauge, 2007. "Harvard, Not Chicago: Which Antitrust School Drives Recent U.S. Supreme Court Decisions?," CPI Journal, Competition Policy International, vol. 3.
    5. Drew Fudenberg & Eric Maskin, 2008. "The Folk Theorem In Repeated Games With Discounting Or With Incomplete Information," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Drew Fudenberg & David K Levine (ed.), A Long-Run Collaboration On Long-Run Games, chapter 11, pages 209-230, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    6. Yamey, B S, 1972. "Predatory Price Cutting: Notes and Comments," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 15(1), pages 129-142, April.
    7. Demsetz, Harold, 2010. "How Many Cheers for Antitrust 100 Years," Ekonomicheskaya Politika / Economic Policy, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration, vol. 4, pages 189-202.
    8. Kreps, David M. & Wilson, Robert, 1982. "Reputation and imperfect information," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 27(2), pages 253-279, August.
    9. Milgrom, Paul & Roberts, John, 1982. "Predation, reputation, and entry deterrence," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 27(2), pages 280-312, August.
    10. A. Michael Spence, 1977. "Entry, Capacity, Investment and Oligopolistic Pricing," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 8(2), pages 534-544, Autumn.
    11. Drew Fudenberg & Jean Tirole, 1986. "A "Signal-Jamming" Theory of Predation," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 17(3), pages 366-376, Autumn.
    12. Gregory J. Werden, 2009. "Next Steps In The Evolution Of Antitrust Law: What To Expect From The Roberts Court," Journal of Competition Law and Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 5(1), pages 49-74.
    13. Wilson, Robert, 1992. "Strategic models of entry deterrence," Handbook of Game Theory with Economic Applications, in: R.J. Aumann & S. Hart (ed.), Handbook of Game Theory with Economic Applications, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 10, pages 305-329, Elsevier.
    14. Franklin M. Fisher, 1989. "Games Economists Play: A Noncooperative View," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 20(1), pages 113-124, Spring.
    15. William E. Kovacic & Carl Shapiro, 2000. "Antitrust Policy: A Century of Economic and Legal Thinking," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 14(1), pages 43-60, Winter.
    16. Milgrom, Paul & Roberts, John, 1987. "Informational Asymmetries, Strategic Behavior, and Industrial Organization," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 77(2), pages 184-193, May.
    17. Peltzman, Sam, 1991. "The Handbook of Industrial Organization: Review Article," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 99(1), pages 201-217, February.
    18. Giocoli, Nicola, 2005. "Mathematics as the role model for neoclassical economics (Blanqui Lecture)," MPRA Paper 33806, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    19. Bruce H. Kobayashi, 2010. "The Law and Economics of Predatory Pricing," Chapters, in: Keith N. Hylton (ed.), Antitrust Law and Economics, chapter 6, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    20. Easley, David & Masson, Robert T & Reynolds, Robert J, 1985. "Preying for Time," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(4), pages 445-460, June.
    21. repec:bla:jindec:v:45:y:1997:i:2:p:155-69 is not listed on IDEAS
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Nicola Giocoli, 2015. "Old lady charm: explaining the persistent appeal of Chicago antitrust," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 22(1), pages 96-122, March.
    2. Michael Funk & Christian Jaag, 2018. "The More Economic Approach To Predatory Pricing," Journal of Competition Law and Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 14(2), pages 292-310.
    3. Valentiny, Pál, 2019. "Közgazdaságtan a jogalkalmazásban [Forensic economics]," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(2), pages 134-162.
    4. Neri Salvadori & Rodolfo Signorino, 2016. "Competition," Chapters, in: Gilbert Faccarello & Heinz D. Kurz (ed.), Handbook on the History of Economic Analysis Volume III, chapter 6, pages 70-81, Edward Elgar Publishing.
      • Salvadori, Neri & Signorino, Rodolfo, 2011. "Competition," MPRA Paper 38387, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    5. Aldo Montesano, 2012. "Price collusion with free entry: the parasitic competition," International Review of Economics, Springer;Happiness Economics and Interpersonal Relations (HEIRS), vol. 59(1), pages 41-65, March.
    6. Signorino, Rodolfo, 2012. "Old lady charm: a comment," MPRA Paper 39211, University Library of Munich, Germany.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Argenton, C., 2010. "Predation Under Perfect Information," Other publications TiSEM c64644e5-2aae-4e41-9a47-a, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    2. William Comanor & H. Frech, 2015. "Economic Rationality and the Areeda–Turner Rule," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 46(3), pages 253-268, May.
    3. Giocoli, Nicola, 2008. "Three alternative (?) stories on the late 20th-century rise of game theory," MPRA Paper 33808, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    4. Richard Schmalensee, 2012. "“On a Level with Dentists?” Reflections on the Evolution of Industrial Organization," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 41(3), pages 157-179, November.
    5. Kaplow, Louis & Shapiro, Carl, 2007. "Antitrust," Handbook of Law and Economics, in: A. Mitchell Polinsky & Steven Shavell (ed.), Handbook of Law and Economics, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 15, pages 1073-1225, Elsevier.
    6. Nicola Giocoli, 2015. "Old lady charm: explaining the persistent appeal of Chicago antitrust," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 22(1), pages 96-122, March.
    7. James Dalton & Louis Esposito, 2011. "Standard Oil and Predatory Pricing: Myth Paralleling Fact," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 38(3), pages 245-266, May.
    8. Chiara Fumagalli & Massimo Motta, 2013. "A Simple Theory of Predation," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 56(3), pages 595-631.
    9. Kenneth G. Elzinga & David E. Mills, 2014. "Antitrust Predation and The Antitrust Paradox," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 57(S3), pages 181-200.
    10. Argenton, Cédric, 2019. "Colluding on excluding," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 194-206.
    11. Gagen, Michael, 2013. "Isomorphic Strategy Spaces in Game Theory," MPRA Paper 46176, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    12. Bayer, Christian, 2007. "Investment timing and predatory behavior in a duopoly with endogenous exit," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 31(9), pages 3069-3109, September.
    13. Bagwell, Kyle & Wolinsky, Asher, 2002. "Game theory and industrial organization," Handbook of Game Theory with Economic Applications, in: R.J. Aumann & S. Hart (ed.), Handbook of Game Theory with Economic Applications, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 49, pages 1851-1895, Elsevier.
    14. Brennan, Timothy J., 2000. "The Economics of Competition Policy: Recent Developments and Cautionary Notes in Antitrust and Regulation," Discussion Papers 10716, Resources for the Future.
    15. Drew Fudenberg & David K. Levine, 2008. "Reputation And Equilibrium Selection In Games With A Patient Player," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Drew Fudenberg & David K Levine (ed.), A Long-Run Collaboration On Long-Run Games, chapter 7, pages 123-142, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    16. Du, Chuang, 2012. "Solving payoff sets of perfect public equilibria: an example," MPRA Paper 38622, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    17. K. Schmidt, 1999. "Reputation and Equilibrium Characterization in Repeated Games of Conflicting Interests," Levine's Working Paper Archive 626, David K. Levine.
    18. Dilip Abreu & David G. Pearce, 2006. "Reputational Wars of Attrition with Complex Bargaining Postures," Levine's Working Paper Archive 122247000000001218, David K. Levine.
    19. Fiona Scott Morton, 1997. "Entry and Predation: British Shipping Cartels 1879–1929," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 6(4), pages 679-724, December.
    20. Mason, Robin & Weeds, Helen, 2013. "Merger policy, entry, and entrepreneurship," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 23-38.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • B21 - Schools of Economic Thought and Methodology - - History of Economic Thought since 1925 - - - Microeconomics
    • L41 - Industrial Organization - - Antitrust Issues and Policies - - - Monopolization; Horizontal Anticompetitive Practices
    • K21 - Law and Economics - - Regulation and Business Law - - - Antitrust Law

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ucp:scerev:doi:10.1086/675271. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Journals Division (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/SCER .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.