Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Considerations of Countervailing Power

  • Published:
Review of Industrial Organization Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The 2010 Horizontal Merger Guidelines set forth the current antitrust enforcement practices but do not address mergers that result in bilateral monopoly. We show that, given the presence of lawful, enduring market power, such mergers may improve social welfare. As a result, these mergers deserve careful scrutiny before condemning them as anticompetitive. In this paper, we address this issue and suggest an economically sound enforcement policy.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Baker J. B., Farrell J., Shapiro C. (2008) Merger to monopoly to serve a single buyer: Comment. Antitrust Law Journal 75(2): 637–646

    Google Scholar 

  • Blair R. D., Coffin K. L. (2005) Physician collective bargaining, state legislation, and the state action doctrine. Cordozo Law Review 26(5): 1731–1759

    Google Scholar 

  • Blair R. D., DePasquale C. (2010) Monopsony and countervailing power in the market for nurses. Antitrust Healthcare Chronicle 24(2): 2–7

    Google Scholar 

  • Blair R. D., Harrison J. L. (2010) Monopsony in law and economics. Cambridge University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Blair R. D., Herndon J. B. (2004) Physician cooperative bargaining ventures: An economic analysis. Antitrust Law Journal 71(3): 989–1016

    Google Scholar 

  • Blair R. D., Kaserman D. L., Romano R. E. (1989) A pedagogical treatment of bilateral monopoly. Southern Economic Journal 55(4): 831–841

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bowley A. L. (1928) On bilateral monopoly. Economic Journal 38(December): 651–659

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Campbell T. (2007) Bilateral monopoly in mergers. Antitrust Law Journal 74(3): 521–536

    Google Scholar 

  • Campbell T. (2008) Bilateral monopoly: Further comment. Antitrust Law Journal 75(2): 647–655

    Google Scholar 

  • Carlton, D. W., & Israel, M. (2011). Proper treatment of buyer power in merger review. Review of Industrial Organization. doi:10.1007/s11151-011-9313-9.

  • Friedman R. D. (1986) Antitrust analysis and bilateral monopoly. Wisconsin Law Review 1986(5): 873–918

    Google Scholar 

  • U.S. Department of Justice and the Federal Trade Commission. (2010). Horizontal Merger Guidelines. Retrieved from http://www.justice.gov/atr/public/guidelines/hmg-2010.html.

  • Williamson O. E. (1968) Economies as an antitrust defense: The welfare trade-offs. American Economic Review 58(1): 18–36

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Economics, University of Florida, P.O. BOX 117140, Gainesville, FL, 32611-7140, USA

    Roger D. Blair

  2. Ross School of Business, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA

    Christina DePasquale

Authors
  1. Roger D. Blair
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Christina DePasquale
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Roger D. Blair.

Additional information

We thank our respective institutions for financial support.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Blair, R.D., DePasquale, C. Considerations of Countervailing Power. Rev Ind Organ 39, 137–143 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11151-011-9314-8

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11151-011-9314-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation