The Relevant Market: Possible and Productive

8 Pages Posted: 12 Apr 2014 Last revised: 11 Dec 2014

See all articles by Gregory J. Werden

Gregory J. Werden

Independent; George Mason University - Mercatus Center

Date Written: April 11, 2014

Abstract

Professor Louis Kaplow capped off his series on the relevant market with a final essay in this the Antitrust Law Journal. His premise remains that relevant market is used only to help assess a firm’s market power based on its market share. He claims: (1) “there exists no valid way to make market power inferences from shares” of a multi-product market; (2) “it is impossible to determine which market definition is superior” in inferring market power “without already formulating one’s best estimate of market power”; and (3) delineating the relevant market is “counterproductive.” This essay demonstrates the relevant market’s utility. It also shows that: (1) Kaplow’s first claim rests on a distorted view of antitrust analysis and faulty economics; (2) Kaplow does not prove his second claim, but rather just that the relevant market is not needed for the purpose he allows for it; and (3) Kaplow’s third claim rests on a misapplication of the hypothetical monopolist test, faulty economics, and erroneous facts.

Keywords: antitrust, relevant market

JEL Classification: K21, L40

Suggested Citation

Werden, Gregory J., The Relevant Market: Possible and Productive (April 11, 2014). Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2423933 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2423933

George Mason University - Mercatus Center ( email )

3434 Washington Blvd., 4th Floor
Arlington, VA 22201
United States

Do you have negative results from your research you’d like to share?

Paper statistics

Downloads
462
Abstract Views
4,323
Rank
114,366
PlumX Metrics