Chapter 11 Predatory Conduct

  • Richard S. Markovits
Chapter

Abstract

To my knowledge, no economist or lawyer has ever explicitly defined the concept “predatory conduct.” However, both economists and lawyers have consistently defined “predatory conduct” in use to be a subspecies of the conduct prohibited by the Sherman Act. More specifically, the characterization of conduct as “predatory” has always implied that its perpetrator’s (perpetrators’) ex ante perception that was ex ante profitable was ceteris paribus critically inflated by its (their) belief that it would or might reduce the absolute attractiveness of the offers against which it (they) would have to compete by driving an established rival’s QV investment out, by inducing an established rival to sell out to the predator(s) at a distressed price, by deterring a potential competitor or established firm from making an additional QV investment in the predator’s (predators’) ARDEPPS, or (by extension) by inducing the owner of an extant QV investment or the prospective maker of a planned QV investment to change its QV investment’s location to a position further away in product-space from the QV investment(s) of the predator(s) where the phrase “ceteris paribus critically inflated” indicates that the effect in question would have rendered the relevant behavior ex ante profitable though ex ante economically inefficient in an otherwise-Pareto-perfect economy.

Keywords

Resale Price Maintenance Unfair Competition Dominant Firm Predatory Price System Rivalry 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Richard S. Markovits
    • 1
  1. 1.School of LawThe University of TexasAustinUSA

Personalised recommendations