| September 2014, Volume 4, Number 9 |
 |
 |
|
| A WSJ essay extolling the virtues of monopoly created a lot of interest this month, as did articles on two powerful competition czars, FTC economists debating theory, two ECJ credit card cases, a controversial approach to abuse of dominance by a Commission Hearing Officer, and other pieces on Amazon, failing defense, pharm, data security, and collusion. |
|
|
|
|
|
Competition is for Losers
Monopoly is therefore not a pathology or an exception. Monopoly is the condition of every successful business.
Peter Thiel (Wall Steet Journal) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
A new Commissioner for Competition
Does all this suggest that competition law will be playing more of an instrumental role and would be more permeable to influences from other policy areas?
Alfonso Lamadrid (Chillin’ Competition) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
MasterCard miffed as CJEU dismisses appeal
The judgment also examines some interesting legal points, including in particular relating to the use of “counterfactuals” in competition cases.
Tom Coates (Competition Bulletin) |
|
|
|
|
Intel and the fight for the soul of EU competition law
An article that will certainly have a significant impact in the discussions on the convenience of following a “more economic approach” to abuse of dominance (and that is likely to be highly controversial, particularly among competition law economists).
Wouter Wils (via Alfonso Lamadrid, Chillin’ Competition) |
|
|
|
|
Contradictions, Amazon and Attention
When Amazon provides the world’s largest bookstore — and it is getting larger and larger — how do authors compete in the market for attention?
Joshua Gans (Digitopoly) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
