The document analyzes competition issues related to the proposed merger between Jet Airways and Kingfisher Airlines in India. [1] It notes that the merger would give the combined entity a 60% market share in the domestic airline market. [2] It explains that such a large horizontal merger between direct competitors is likely to raise unilateral effects concerns under competition law as it eliminates competitive constraints between the merging parties. [3] The summary concludes that the merger would likely be blocked for further investigation by the Competition Commission of India due to these unilateral effects concerns.
- Monopolistic competition describes a market with many producers offering similar but differentiated products, with each firm having some control over price. Barriers to entry are low, allowing firms to freely enter and exit the market.
- In the short run, firms maximize profits where marginal revenue equals marginal cost. In the long run with free entry and exit, firms earn zero economic profit as supply and demand equilibrate.
- Oligopoly is dominated by a few large firms. These firms are interdependent and must consider competitors' responses in decision making. Barriers to entry allow oligopolies to persist and earn economic profits.
The document discusses monopolistic competition in the toothpaste market using Crest toothpaste as an example. It notes that while Procter & Gamble has monopoly power over Crest, their power is limited because consumers can easily substitute other brands if the price rises too much. The demand for Crest is downward sloping but fairly elastic. As a result, Procter & Gamble will charge a price only slightly higher than their marginal cost.
Competition policy, cartel enforcement and leniency programDr Danilo Samà
Competition policy, cartel enforcement and leniency program
Author:
Dr Danilo Samà (LUISS “Guido Carli” University)
Abstract:
The present assessment focuses on the antitrust action in detecting and fighting oligopolistic collusion, analyzing the development of the innovative and modern leniency policy. Following the examination of the main conditions and reasons for cartel stability and sustainability, our attempt is to comprehend under which circumstances leniency program represents a functional and successful tool for preventing the formation of anti-competitive agreements.
Keywords:
cartels enforcement, competition policy, game theory, leniency program, oligopolistic markets
JEL classification:
C70; K21; L13
Year:
2008
Pages:
1-12
Citation:
Samà, Danilo (2008), Competition policy, cartel enforcement and leniency program, LUISS “Guido Carli” University, Rome, Italy, pp. 1-12.
This document discusses coordinated effects that can arise from horizontal mergers. It defines coordinated effects as occurring when a merger makes tacit collusion between firms more likely or effective. It analyzes coordinated effects using the Airtours criteria for sustainable tacit collusion and the European Commission's checklist approach. The checklist approach involves assessing whether the merger would allow firms to reach tacit agreements, whether market characteristics would allow any agreements to be sustained, and whether the merger would make coordination more likely or effective. It also differentiates coordinated effects from unilateral effects that can arise without tacit agreements between firms.
Monopolistic competition and oligopoly are two market structures between perfect competition and monopoly. Monopolistic competition is characterized by many firms with differentiated products. Firms have some market power but no barriers to entry or exit. Oligopoly is characterized by a few dominant firms where the behavior of one firm depends on its competitors. Game theory is used to analyze strategic interactions among oligopolistic firms.
There is no single model that describes oligopoly behavior. Oligopolies are characterized by a small number of firms producing either standardized or differentiated products with high barriers to entry. The decisions of oligopolistic firms are interdependent since the actions of one firm affect others. Game theory uses strategic decision making to analyze how firms in an oligopoly might respond to each other. Models include the cartel model, where firms collude to act as a monopoly, and the contestable market model, where easy entry leads to competitive pricing.
Oligopolies are markets with a small number of interdependent firms. There is no single model of oligopoly behavior. Models include the cartel model, where firms collude to act as a monopoly, and the contestable market model, where easy entry leads to competitive pricing. Game theory uses strategic decision making to analyze how firms in an oligopoly consider rivals' responses. The prisoner's dilemma demonstrates how cooperation can be difficult to achieve. Implicit collusion through price leadership or sticky prices also influences oligopoly behavior.
This document discusses why consumers should be interested in competition law. It explains that competition law aims to protect the competitive process, not competitors, by prohibiting anti-competitive practices. When firms compete through fair means like innovation and efficiency, it benefits consumers through lower prices, better quality and more choice. Competition law establishes a competition authority to investigate anti-competitive conduct like cartels, abuse of dominance, and anti-competitive mergers. Enforcement of competition law promotes consumer welfare.
- Monopolistic competition describes a market with many producers offering similar but differentiated products, with each firm having some control over price. Barriers to entry are low, allowing firms to freely enter and exit the market.
- In the short run, firms maximize profits where marginal revenue equals marginal cost. In the long run with free entry and exit, firms earn zero economic profit as supply and demand equilibrate.
- Oligopoly is dominated by a few large firms. These firms are interdependent and must consider competitors' responses in decision making. Barriers to entry allow oligopolies to persist and earn economic profits.
The document discusses monopolistic competition in the toothpaste market using Crest toothpaste as an example. It notes that while Procter & Gamble has monopoly power over Crest, their power is limited because consumers can easily substitute other brands if the price rises too much. The demand for Crest is downward sloping but fairly elastic. As a result, Procter & Gamble will charge a price only slightly higher than their marginal cost.
Competition policy, cartel enforcement and leniency programDr Danilo Samà
Competition policy, cartel enforcement and leniency program
Author:
Dr Danilo Samà (LUISS “Guido Carli” University)
Abstract:
The present assessment focuses on the antitrust action in detecting and fighting oligopolistic collusion, analyzing the development of the innovative and modern leniency policy. Following the examination of the main conditions and reasons for cartel stability and sustainability, our attempt is to comprehend under which circumstances leniency program represents a functional and successful tool for preventing the formation of anti-competitive agreements.
Keywords:
cartels enforcement, competition policy, game theory, leniency program, oligopolistic markets
JEL classification:
C70; K21; L13
Year:
2008
Pages:
1-12
Citation:
Samà, Danilo (2008), Competition policy, cartel enforcement and leniency program, LUISS “Guido Carli” University, Rome, Italy, pp. 1-12.
This document discusses coordinated effects that can arise from horizontal mergers. It defines coordinated effects as occurring when a merger makes tacit collusion between firms more likely or effective. It analyzes coordinated effects using the Airtours criteria for sustainable tacit collusion and the European Commission's checklist approach. The checklist approach involves assessing whether the merger would allow firms to reach tacit agreements, whether market characteristics would allow any agreements to be sustained, and whether the merger would make coordination more likely or effective. It also differentiates coordinated effects from unilateral effects that can arise without tacit agreements between firms.
Monopolistic competition and oligopoly are two market structures between perfect competition and monopoly. Monopolistic competition is characterized by many firms with differentiated products. Firms have some market power but no barriers to entry or exit. Oligopoly is characterized by a few dominant firms where the behavior of one firm depends on its competitors. Game theory is used to analyze strategic interactions among oligopolistic firms.
There is no single model that describes oligopoly behavior. Oligopolies are characterized by a small number of firms producing either standardized or differentiated products with high barriers to entry. The decisions of oligopolistic firms are interdependent since the actions of one firm affect others. Game theory uses strategic decision making to analyze how firms in an oligopoly might respond to each other. Models include the cartel model, where firms collude to act as a monopoly, and the contestable market model, where easy entry leads to competitive pricing.
Oligopolies are markets with a small number of interdependent firms. There is no single model of oligopoly behavior. Models include the cartel model, where firms collude to act as a monopoly, and the contestable market model, where easy entry leads to competitive pricing. Game theory uses strategic decision making to analyze how firms in an oligopoly consider rivals' responses. The prisoner's dilemma demonstrates how cooperation can be difficult to achieve. Implicit collusion through price leadership or sticky prices also influences oligopoly behavior.
This document discusses why consumers should be interested in competition law. It explains that competition law aims to protect the competitive process, not competitors, by prohibiting anti-competitive practices. When firms compete through fair means like innovation and efficiency, it benefits consumers through lower prices, better quality and more choice. Competition law establishes a competition authority to investigate anti-competitive conduct like cartels, abuse of dominance, and anti-competitive mergers. Enforcement of competition law promotes consumer welfare.
- An imperfectly competitive industry is one where single firms have some control over the price of their output through market power. Market power is a firm's ability to raise prices without losing all demand.
- A pure monopoly is a single firm industry where there are no close substitutes for the product and significant barriers prevent other firms from entering to compete for profits. Barriers to entry include government franchises, patents, large economies of scale, and ownership of scarce resources.
- A profit-maximizing monopolist will produce at the quantity where marginal revenue equals marginal cost to maximize profits. The monopolist restricts output and charges higher prices than under perfect competition, leading to inefficiencies.
- Monopolies have market power that allows them to raise prices without losing all demand for their products. Barriers to entry like large capital requirements, patents, and government franchises can prevent competition in imperfectly competitive industries.
- A pure monopoly is a single firm that produces a unique product and faces no competition due to barriers that prevent other firms from entering the market. As the sole producer, the monopoly is the entire industry.
- Monopolies restrict output and charge higher prices than competitive firms, leading to inefficient resource allocation and welfare losses for society. Antitrust policy aims to promote competition and limit monopolies through legislation like the Sherman Act.
Monopolistic competition and oligopoly are two market structures between perfect competition and monopoly. Monopolistic competition is characterized by many firms with differentiated products, easy entry and exit, and firms making positive profits in the short run but zero in the long run. Oligopoly is characterized by a small number of interdependent firms where the actions of one firm impact others and strategic behavior can result in inefficient outcomes.
Monopolistic competition is characterized by many small firms producing differentiated products, free entry and exit into the industry, and firms having some degree of market power. Oligopoly is characterized by a small number of large, dominant firms producing either homogeneous or differentiated products. In oligopoly, the behavior of any single firm depends greatly on the actions of other firms in the industry.
This document summarizes key aspects of oligopolies and public policy approaches. It describes how oligopolies are characterized by few dominant sellers offering similar products, which leads to interdependent and strategic decision-making. It provides examples of oligopolies like mobile networks and cement companies. It then discusses duopolies and how public policy views oligopolies as restricting trade and leading to lower output and higher prices. The main public policy approaches to oligopolies are the do-nothing view, antitrust view, and regulation view.
This document discusses the concept of oligopoly across multiple industries. It begins by defining oligopoly as a market with a small number of producers dominating the market. It then provides examples of oligopolies in industries like aviation, soft drinks, telecommunications, and electricity distribution. It examines the characteristics of oligopolies, including interdependence between firms, barriers to entry, and use of non-price competition. Specific case studies are presented on price wars in the Indian aviation industry and the soft drink oligopoly dominated by Coca-Cola and Pepsi.
This document discusses the competitive business environment. It defines competition and competitors. A competitive environment is one where there are many sellers offering similar products or services. Elements that shape the competitive environment include regulations, direct and indirect competitors, differentiation, and technology. Michael Porter's five forces model analyzes competition through examining the threat of new entrants, threat of substitutes, bargaining power of customers and suppliers, and industry rivalry. Competitive strategies include cost leadership, differentiation, and focus. Challenges to competitiveness include operations, logistics costs, customer acceptance, and understanding international markets.
The document discusses monopoly and antitrust policy. It defines concepts related to imperfect competition and market power, including industry boundaries, barriers to entry, and price discrimination. It then examines the social costs of monopoly like inefficiency and rent-seeking behavior. Finally, it outlines the development of antitrust law and policies in the US, including landmark acts like the Sherman Act and Clayton Act that aim to remedy monopolies and promote competition.
This document discusses oligopolistic market structures and provides examples of cartels. It summarizes that an oligopoly is characterized by a small number of firms producing either homogeneous or heterogeneous products. A cartel is an explicit agreement among firms in an oligopoly to fix prices, output levels, or market shares. Examples of successful cartels mentioned are OPEC and De Beers. The document also discusses collusion, game theory, and provides an example of cellular operators in India engaging in collusive practices.
The document is a report on monopoly that was submitted by two MBA students, Jaymin Patel and Jaimin Upadhyay, to the J.K. Patel Institute of Management. It contains sections on the meaning and features of monopoly, why monopolies arise, types of monopoly, why monopolies can be harmful, arguments for tolerating monopolies, optimal public policy, and two case studies on monopolies in different industries.
There are three main approaches to analyzing abuse of dominance under Article 102 - per se rule, effects analysis, and de minimis doctrine. The per se rule presumes conduct with anti-competitive object has an effect, while effects analysis assesses consumer impact. De minimis doctrine warns of matters too immaterial for court consideration. The document also outlines types of abuse like exploitative and exclusionary, and defenses like objective necessity and efficiencies. It provides an overview of different jurisprudence on analyzing abuse of dominance claims.
The social costs of monopoly and regulationAkash Shrestha
The traditional analysis of the costs of monopoly concentrates on the deadweight loss involved, monopoly rents being considered merely a transfer to the monopolist from the consumer surplus that would exist under competition. Some years ago, that analysis was challenged by Posner (1975), who presented an ingenious argument that monopoly rents in fact measure the resources lost to society through rent seeking activities and thus should be counted in the costs of monopoly. That argument has recently been used by staff members of the Federal Trade Commission (Long et al. 1982, chap. 3, esp. pp. 77, 97, 104; see also Tollison, Higgins, and Shugart 1983, pp. 23-44) in an attempt to estimate the benefits potentially flowing from the use of the FTC's line-of-business program in antitrust enforcement.
There are several key characteristics of oligopolies:
- They consist of a small number of mutually interdependent firms. Each firm must consider the reactions of other firms to its decisions.
- They exhibit both competition and potential cooperation between firms. Firms may engage in strategic decision-making and pricing based on competitors' expected responses.
- There is no single model of oligopoly behavior. Behavior may range from competitive pricing under contestable market models to monopoly-like pricing under cartel models.
This document provides an overview of monopolistic competition and oligopoly market structures. It discusses key characteristics of each including:
1) Monopolistic competition is characterized by many small sellers, differentiated products, and easy entry and exit. Firms compete through non-price factors like advertising and product quality.
2) Oligopoly is dominated by a few large firms producing either homogeneous or differentiated products. Entry is difficult due to barriers like economies of scale. Firms must consider competitors' potential reactions in their pricing decisions.
3) Game theory, such as the prisoner's dilemma, can model strategic interactions between oligopolistic competitors who are mutually interdependent. Firms must choose strategies without communicating directly with rivals.
Monopolistic competition is an imperfect market structure between pure monopoly and perfect competition. It is characterized by many firms producing differentiated products and free entry and exit. In the long run, firms will enter and exit the market until economic profits are zero, but monopolistically competitive firms still operate with excess capacity and charge prices above marginal costs. This results in deadweight loss but regulating product differentiation would be difficult. Advertising and brand names are used by firms to differentiate products but their effects on competition and consumer choice are debated.
Automotive report on the right track (april 2013)Sarah Jordan
The document discusses intellectual property (IP) protection strategies for automotive companies expanding into BRICS countries like Brazil, Russia, India, and China. It recommends thoroughly researching each country's IP laws and obtaining specialist legal advice. For China specifically, it warns that the "first to file" trademark system can allow others to register a company's trademarks, and provides an overview of China's patent types including invention patents, utility models, and design patents. It also stresses the importance of detailed record keeping to support IP enforcement in China if needed. Overall, the document advises planning IP strategies carefully before introducing technologies into new global markets.
Playmobil agreed to stop fixing retail prices of its toys after an antitrust investigation by the Department of Justice. The DOJ charged Playmobil with establishing minimum resale prices for retailers and threatening to terminate dealers that did not comply. Under a settlement, Playmobil will be prohibited from setting minimum advertised prices or entering retail price agreements for 10 years. While price fixing reduces competition, economists argue that resale price maintenance can address legitimate issues like preventing free-riding among retailers.
Competition and oligopoly in telecommunications industry in the EUVitor Santos
This work arose in the course of Advanced Microeconomics taught by Ms. Prof. Dr. Alina Badulescu at the University of Oradea.
The work focuses on the telecommunications market, through market analysis and study of oligopolistic characteristics.
The document lists various thinking skills and creative thinking skills. Some examples of thinking skills mentioned are comparing and contrasting, categorizing, determining reliable sources, making predictions, inferences and explanations. Examples of creative thinking skills include creating analogies, generating new ideas, and creating metaphors. It then provides a long list of 16 moral values with descriptions, including kindness, self-reliance, humility, mutual respect, love, justice, freedom, courage, honesty, diligence, cooperation, moderation, gratitude, rationality and public spirit.
The document provides instructions for participants to view images of various brands and rate their perception of each brand on a scale from 0 to 7. Participants are told to go with their initial gut reaction as each slide will only be displayed briefly. They then view slides of brands A through O and are asked to enter their ratings on a google spreadsheet. Finally, participants are prompted with discussion questions about the thoughts and feelings that came up during the task, their perceptions of the brands, how those perceptions were acquired, and the values associated with some of the brands.
This document outlines a lesson plan for teaching empathy to 10th grade social studies students. It discusses the key steps of preparation, presentation, contemplation, and practice/application. The value to be inculcated is empathy. The topic is about life in equatorial regions. The presentation section details how concepts about equatorial climate, vegetation, inhabitants, and hardships will be explained using a PowerPoint. Students will then discuss in groups and apply what they learned by writing about hardships of living in equatorial regions or how to help people there. Homework involves creating a scrapbook on life in equatorial regions.
- An imperfectly competitive industry is one where single firms have some control over the price of their output through market power. Market power is a firm's ability to raise prices without losing all demand.
- A pure monopoly is a single firm industry where there are no close substitutes for the product and significant barriers prevent other firms from entering to compete for profits. Barriers to entry include government franchises, patents, large economies of scale, and ownership of scarce resources.
- A profit-maximizing monopolist will produce at the quantity where marginal revenue equals marginal cost to maximize profits. The monopolist restricts output and charges higher prices than under perfect competition, leading to inefficiencies.
- Monopolies have market power that allows them to raise prices without losing all demand for their products. Barriers to entry like large capital requirements, patents, and government franchises can prevent competition in imperfectly competitive industries.
- A pure monopoly is a single firm that produces a unique product and faces no competition due to barriers that prevent other firms from entering the market. As the sole producer, the monopoly is the entire industry.
- Monopolies restrict output and charge higher prices than competitive firms, leading to inefficient resource allocation and welfare losses for society. Antitrust policy aims to promote competition and limit monopolies through legislation like the Sherman Act.
Monopolistic competition and oligopoly are two market structures between perfect competition and monopoly. Monopolistic competition is characterized by many firms with differentiated products, easy entry and exit, and firms making positive profits in the short run but zero in the long run. Oligopoly is characterized by a small number of interdependent firms where the actions of one firm impact others and strategic behavior can result in inefficient outcomes.
Monopolistic competition is characterized by many small firms producing differentiated products, free entry and exit into the industry, and firms having some degree of market power. Oligopoly is characterized by a small number of large, dominant firms producing either homogeneous or differentiated products. In oligopoly, the behavior of any single firm depends greatly on the actions of other firms in the industry.
This document summarizes key aspects of oligopolies and public policy approaches. It describes how oligopolies are characterized by few dominant sellers offering similar products, which leads to interdependent and strategic decision-making. It provides examples of oligopolies like mobile networks and cement companies. It then discusses duopolies and how public policy views oligopolies as restricting trade and leading to lower output and higher prices. The main public policy approaches to oligopolies are the do-nothing view, antitrust view, and regulation view.
This document discusses the concept of oligopoly across multiple industries. It begins by defining oligopoly as a market with a small number of producers dominating the market. It then provides examples of oligopolies in industries like aviation, soft drinks, telecommunications, and electricity distribution. It examines the characteristics of oligopolies, including interdependence between firms, barriers to entry, and use of non-price competition. Specific case studies are presented on price wars in the Indian aviation industry and the soft drink oligopoly dominated by Coca-Cola and Pepsi.
This document discusses the competitive business environment. It defines competition and competitors. A competitive environment is one where there are many sellers offering similar products or services. Elements that shape the competitive environment include regulations, direct and indirect competitors, differentiation, and technology. Michael Porter's five forces model analyzes competition through examining the threat of new entrants, threat of substitutes, bargaining power of customers and suppliers, and industry rivalry. Competitive strategies include cost leadership, differentiation, and focus. Challenges to competitiveness include operations, logistics costs, customer acceptance, and understanding international markets.
The document discusses monopoly and antitrust policy. It defines concepts related to imperfect competition and market power, including industry boundaries, barriers to entry, and price discrimination. It then examines the social costs of monopoly like inefficiency and rent-seeking behavior. Finally, it outlines the development of antitrust law and policies in the US, including landmark acts like the Sherman Act and Clayton Act that aim to remedy monopolies and promote competition.
This document discusses oligopolistic market structures and provides examples of cartels. It summarizes that an oligopoly is characterized by a small number of firms producing either homogeneous or heterogeneous products. A cartel is an explicit agreement among firms in an oligopoly to fix prices, output levels, or market shares. Examples of successful cartels mentioned are OPEC and De Beers. The document also discusses collusion, game theory, and provides an example of cellular operators in India engaging in collusive practices.
The document is a report on monopoly that was submitted by two MBA students, Jaymin Patel and Jaimin Upadhyay, to the J.K. Patel Institute of Management. It contains sections on the meaning and features of monopoly, why monopolies arise, types of monopoly, why monopolies can be harmful, arguments for tolerating monopolies, optimal public policy, and two case studies on monopolies in different industries.
There are three main approaches to analyzing abuse of dominance under Article 102 - per se rule, effects analysis, and de minimis doctrine. The per se rule presumes conduct with anti-competitive object has an effect, while effects analysis assesses consumer impact. De minimis doctrine warns of matters too immaterial for court consideration. The document also outlines types of abuse like exploitative and exclusionary, and defenses like objective necessity and efficiencies. It provides an overview of different jurisprudence on analyzing abuse of dominance claims.
The social costs of monopoly and regulationAkash Shrestha
The traditional analysis of the costs of monopoly concentrates on the deadweight loss involved, monopoly rents being considered merely a transfer to the monopolist from the consumer surplus that would exist under competition. Some years ago, that analysis was challenged by Posner (1975), who presented an ingenious argument that monopoly rents in fact measure the resources lost to society through rent seeking activities and thus should be counted in the costs of monopoly. That argument has recently been used by staff members of the Federal Trade Commission (Long et al. 1982, chap. 3, esp. pp. 77, 97, 104; see also Tollison, Higgins, and Shugart 1983, pp. 23-44) in an attempt to estimate the benefits potentially flowing from the use of the FTC's line-of-business program in antitrust enforcement.
There are several key characteristics of oligopolies:
- They consist of a small number of mutually interdependent firms. Each firm must consider the reactions of other firms to its decisions.
- They exhibit both competition and potential cooperation between firms. Firms may engage in strategic decision-making and pricing based on competitors' expected responses.
- There is no single model of oligopoly behavior. Behavior may range from competitive pricing under contestable market models to monopoly-like pricing under cartel models.
This document provides an overview of monopolistic competition and oligopoly market structures. It discusses key characteristics of each including:
1) Monopolistic competition is characterized by many small sellers, differentiated products, and easy entry and exit. Firms compete through non-price factors like advertising and product quality.
2) Oligopoly is dominated by a few large firms producing either homogeneous or differentiated products. Entry is difficult due to barriers like economies of scale. Firms must consider competitors' potential reactions in their pricing decisions.
3) Game theory, such as the prisoner's dilemma, can model strategic interactions between oligopolistic competitors who are mutually interdependent. Firms must choose strategies without communicating directly with rivals.
Monopolistic competition is an imperfect market structure between pure monopoly and perfect competition. It is characterized by many firms producing differentiated products and free entry and exit. In the long run, firms will enter and exit the market until economic profits are zero, but monopolistically competitive firms still operate with excess capacity and charge prices above marginal costs. This results in deadweight loss but regulating product differentiation would be difficult. Advertising and brand names are used by firms to differentiate products but their effects on competition and consumer choice are debated.
Automotive report on the right track (april 2013)Sarah Jordan
The document discusses intellectual property (IP) protection strategies for automotive companies expanding into BRICS countries like Brazil, Russia, India, and China. It recommends thoroughly researching each country's IP laws and obtaining specialist legal advice. For China specifically, it warns that the "first to file" trademark system can allow others to register a company's trademarks, and provides an overview of China's patent types including invention patents, utility models, and design patents. It also stresses the importance of detailed record keeping to support IP enforcement in China if needed. Overall, the document advises planning IP strategies carefully before introducing technologies into new global markets.
Playmobil agreed to stop fixing retail prices of its toys after an antitrust investigation by the Department of Justice. The DOJ charged Playmobil with establishing minimum resale prices for retailers and threatening to terminate dealers that did not comply. Under a settlement, Playmobil will be prohibited from setting minimum advertised prices or entering retail price agreements for 10 years. While price fixing reduces competition, economists argue that resale price maintenance can address legitimate issues like preventing free-riding among retailers.
Competition and oligopoly in telecommunications industry in the EUVitor Santos
This work arose in the course of Advanced Microeconomics taught by Ms. Prof. Dr. Alina Badulescu at the University of Oradea.
The work focuses on the telecommunications market, through market analysis and study of oligopolistic characteristics.
The document lists various thinking skills and creative thinking skills. Some examples of thinking skills mentioned are comparing and contrasting, categorizing, determining reliable sources, making predictions, inferences and explanations. Examples of creative thinking skills include creating analogies, generating new ideas, and creating metaphors. It then provides a long list of 16 moral values with descriptions, including kindness, self-reliance, humility, mutual respect, love, justice, freedom, courage, honesty, diligence, cooperation, moderation, gratitude, rationality and public spirit.
The document provides instructions for participants to view images of various brands and rate their perception of each brand on a scale from 0 to 7. Participants are told to go with their initial gut reaction as each slide will only be displayed briefly. They then view slides of brands A through O and are asked to enter their ratings on a google spreadsheet. Finally, participants are prompted with discussion questions about the thoughts and feelings that came up during the task, their perceptions of the brands, how those perceptions were acquired, and the values associated with some of the brands.
This document outlines a lesson plan for teaching empathy to 10th grade social studies students. It discusses the key steps of preparation, presentation, contemplation, and practice/application. The value to be inculcated is empathy. The topic is about life in equatorial regions. The presentation section details how concepts about equatorial climate, vegetation, inhabitants, and hardships will be explained using a PowerPoint. Students will then discuss in groups and apply what they learned by writing about hardships of living in equatorial regions or how to help people there. Homework involves creating a scrapbook on life in equatorial regions.
This document lists 16 moral values that could be used for lesson planning: kindness, self-reliance, humility, mutual respect, love, justice, freedom, courage, cleanliness of body and mind, honesty/integrity, diligence, cooperation, moderation, gratitude, rationality, and public-spiritedness. Each value is further defined by 2-6 descriptors. For example, kindness includes being compassionate, considerate, generous, understanding and forgiving; while mutual respect involves respecting parents, elders, peers, leaders, neighbors, laws, beliefs and cultures.
The document summarizes the key differences between the Kurikulum Standard Sekolah Rendah (KSSR) and Kurikulum Standard Sekolah Menengah (KSSM) curriculums in Malaysia. KSSR focuses on developing students' basic language skills and was implemented in 2011, while KSSM aims to better prepare students for the job market and was launched in 2017. Both curriculums have advantages like improving skills and assessments, but also disadvantages such as increased workload for teachers. Suggestions are provided to address issues like providing teacher training support.
[Demo Teaching] Designed Lesson Plan in Values Education for Teachers - Edu53Tan Denise
This document outlines a lesson plan for a 2nd grade visual art class about the universe, moon, and stars. The objectives are for students to describe a monument to Yuri Gagarin, recite a poem about the universe, work in groups to make mobile artworks of the moon and stars to hang from the ceiling, and discuss their artwork. Activities include learning about Gagarin, reciting the poem, making mobile art in groups with paper moons and stars, and reflecting on the experience of creating a classroom "universe".
This document provides guidance on preparing for the English SPM Paper 1 exam. It gives 10 reasons to study English for the SPM exam and outlines the exam format which includes sections on directed writing, continuous writing, and common mistakes. It offers tips for each section such as reading the question carefully, having a plan and outline, using proper paragraphs and punctuation. Specific examples are given for starting a composition on the topic of road accidents in Malaysia, such as using a question and answer, newspaper headlines, dialogue, opinions, quotations, and stating facts. The document aims to help students understand the exam structure and how to structure strong responses.
This lesson plan provides an overview of teaching a lesson on the properties of water in science class. The objectives are for students to understand the polarity and hydrogen bonding of water molecules and how this affects water's properties. The lesson includes presentations, discussions, and hands-on activities like observing how detergent affects the surface tension of water and using chromatography paper to demonstrate capillary action. Students make predictions and observations. The lesson aims to explain why water and oil don't mix and how substances dissolve based on their hydrophilic/hydrophobic properties.
Fair's Fair is the New Form 1 literature component for secondary schools in Malaysia. It is a short story about how three friends worked together to go to the fair.
The document outlines a detailed lesson plan for a health class that focuses on educating students about the types of quackery, including having students identify and provide examples of medical, nutrition, and device quackery. The lesson plan involves warm-up activities, a presentation to introduce the topic of quackery, breaking students into groups to discuss and provide examples of different types of quackery, and a concluding individual writing assessment.
The document discusses European Union competition law regarding mergers. It defines different types of mergers like horizontal, vertical, and conglomerate mergers. It explains the purpose of merger control is to maintain competition and prevent the formation of monopolies that could harm consumer welfare. Merger control evaluates whether a merger could allow the merging companies to unilaterally exercise power over the market and reduce competition. Theories of potential competitive harm from mergers include unilateral or non-coordinated effects where competition between the merging companies' products is eliminated.
Mergers Acquisitions and Other Restructuring Activities 9th Edition DePamphil...lujepyce
Full download : http://alibabadownload.com/product/mergers-acquisitions-and-other-restructuring-activities-9th-edition-depamphilis-solutions-manual/
Mergers Acquisitions and Other Restructuring Activities 9th Edition DePamphilis Solutions Manual
Competition law prohibits agreements and practices that restrict competition in the marketplace. This includes per se offenses like price fixing, output restrictions, and market allocation. Competition authorities analyze other agreements under the rule of reason, weighing the pro-competitive effects against anti-competitive effects. Unlawful monopolization involves the willful acquisition or maintenance of market power through predatory or anticompetitive conduct. Horizontal agreements between competitors are more likely to restrict competition than vertical agreements between companies at different stages of production.
The document discusses competition law and policy in India. It provides definitions of key concepts like competition and dominant position. It describes the objectives of competition law as promoting economic efficiency and consumer welfare. The Competition Act 2002 aims to prevent anti-competitive practices by firms like cartels, abuse of dominance, and regulate mergers and acquisitions. It established the Competition Commission of India as a regulatory body with quasi-judicial powers.
The document discusses competition and competition policy in India. It defines competition as situations in markets where sellers strive for buyers to achieve business goals. Competition policy aims to promote efficiency and maximize welfare. The Competition Act of 2002 established a commission to prevent anti-competitive practices, promote competition, protect consumers, and ensure freedom of trade. The Act prohibits anti-competitive agreements and abuse of dominant positions. It regulates combinations and promotes competition advocacy. The Commission has powers like issuing cease/desist orders and imposing penalties.
This document discusses the definition of corporate mergers in Zimbabwe's Competition Act. It argues that the current statutory definition, which defines a merger as the acquisition of a controlling interest in a competitor, supplier, customer or other person, is broad enough to cover all transactions, including those between economically unrelated parties. However, the opinion in a past case (Caledonia Holdings) incorrectly interpreted and applied the legal rule of eiusdem generis to exclude so-called conglomerate mergers from the scope of the Act. While this opinion was accepted, it provides sufficient reason to argue for a clearer statutory definition of corporate mergers and acquisitions in the Competition Act to avoid different interpretations. The document proposes a clear statutory definition to address this issue
The document summarizes India's Competition Act of 2002 and outlines its objectives to promote fair competition in the market. It discusses different anti-competitive practices like cartels and abuse of dominance that the Act prohibits. It also describes the roles and powers of the Competition Commission of India in regulating combinations, enforcing the Act through penalties, and advocating for competitive markets through non-enforcement measures.
Merger Review process has evolved over a period of time. This is evident from the changing focus on consideration of efficiencies in merger analysis. However, a cross-country comparison shows that as of date consideration of efficiency has become almost an integral part of merger review. The article details this discussion.
Competition Law seeks to protect the process of competition for the ultimate benefit of the citizens, allowing for lower prices, better products and choices for consumers.
Economies (Efficiencies) – An Essential Consideration in Merger Analysis - KK...KK SHARMA LAW OFFICES
While the purport of competition law is to preserve and promote competition, the
essential object of competition is to ensure optimal allocation of available resources,
produce more while using less resources and thus, achieve efficient market
outcomes. Generally, the efficiency is accepted as a defence in competition law.
Ignorance of economies (efficient use of resources) by competition law and
competition enforcement agencies would prejudice the very object of preserving
competition. However, one should also acknowledge that scientific quantification and weighing of efficiencies are complex tasks.
Economies (Efficiencies) – An Essential Consideration in Merger AnalysisKK SHARMA LAW OFFICES
The document discusses the evolving consideration of efficiencies (economies) in merger analysis under competition law. It notes that while competition law aims to preserve competition, the essential objective is efficient market outcomes. Most jurisdictions now accept efficiencies as a justification for approving mergers. However, quantifying and weighing efficiencies can be complex. The document examines how the US, Canada, and Australia incorporate efficiencies in their merger analysis, representing three approaches: as part of substantive assessment, as a defense, and through authorization. It concludes there is need for transitional economies like India to recognize efficiencies in competition law and policy.
The document summarizes India's Competition Act of 2002. The Act aims to promote fair competition in the market and protect consumer interests. It prohibits anti-competitive agreements between businesses like price fixing. It also prevents abuse of dominant market positions. The Act regulates mergers and acquisitions that could reduce competition. Review of combinations is subject to thresholds based on company turnover to encourage business growth. The Competition Commission of India enforces the Act and ensures open competition.
The document provides an analysis of India's Competition Act of 2003. It summarizes the key objectives of the act which are to promote fair competition, prevent anti-competitive practices, and protect consumer interests. It also discusses the main provisions around anti-competitive agreements, abuse of dominant market positions, and exceptions provided under the act.
The document discusses competition law and policy in India. It defines competition and outlines the benefits of competition for companies, consumers, and the government. However, it notes that these benefits are lost without fair competition or if a monopoly exists. It then discusses key aspects of competition law and policy in India such as the objectives to promote economic efficiency and protect consumers, types of anti-competitive agreements and abuse of dominance, the role and powers of the Competition Commission of India, and penalties for anti-competitive behavior.
Here is an analysis of the proposed merger between United Insurance Company and Shama Pl:
Valuation Process:
- Determine the pre-merger value of each company using standard valuation methods like DCF, comparable company analysis, precedent transaction analysis etc.
- Estimate synergies from the merger like cost savings, revenue enhancements, tax benefits etc. Quantify the net present value of synergies.
- Allocate synergies between the combining companies based on relative size, synergies realized from each function etc.
- Add allocated synergies to the pre-merger value of each company to arrive at post-merger value.
- Determine exchange ratio for the merger based on post-merger values.
National Webinar at the Centre for Corporate and Competition Law at Symbiosis Law School, Hyderabad on the topic ”Abuse of Dominance in Competition Law” on 27th August, 2021 by Shri Dhanendra Kumar, 1st Chairperson, Competition Commission of India (CCI).
This document summarizes Article 102 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, which prohibits the abuse of a dominant market position. It defines key terms like "undertakings", "dominant position", and "substantial part of the internal market". It discusses types of competitors including actual competitors based on market share, and potential competitors. It also outlines factors that can influence competition such as barriers to entry, countervailing buyer power, and the degree of market power held by a dominant undertaking.
1) The document discusses Porter's five forces model for analyzing industry competition. The five competitive forces are the threat of new entrants, rivalry among existing competitors, bargaining power of buyers, bargaining power of suppliers, and threat of substitute products.
2) Within Porter's framework, strong competitive forces are threats that depress profits while weak forces are opportunities to earn greater profits.
3) The document provides details on each of the five competitive forces, how to assess their strength, and their implications for industry competition and company profitability.
1) A firm holds a dominant position if it can behave independently of competitors, suppliers, customers, and consumers. Market share is one indicator but not sufficient on its own.
2) While not illegal to hold a dominant position, it confers special responsibility to avoid impairing competition. Dominance is assessed using market shares, constraints on pricing, and other factors like product differentiation.
3) Market shares above 40% are an indication of dominance, though shares below this can also indicate dominance depending on other market conditions and constraints from competitors. Both volume and value shares are considered.
Similar to Jet Kingfisher Merger By Mm Sharma (20)
This document provides a summary of developments in competition law from India and around the world. Some key points:
- In India, the Competition Commission of India (CCI) issued its first decision allowing banks to charge prepayment penalties on home loans, in a 4-2 majority decision.
- Internationally, the European Commission launched an antitrust investigation against Google for allegedly abusing its dominant position in online search. It also fined 11 air cargo carriers €799 million for operating a price fixing cartel.
- In other news, the CCI ordered investigations into complaints against real estate developers in India and a potential cartel in the Indian airline industry over increasing fares.
The document is the July-August 2010 edition of the Competition Law Bulletin published by Vaish Associates. It provides the following summaries:
1. It summarizes recent cases heard by the Competition Commission of India (CCI) and the Competition Appellate Tribunal (COMPAT), including orders passed by CCI for closure of certain cases and a decision dismissing a case against the Department of Telecommunications.
2. It provides brief international and national news updates on competition law-related matters, including decisions by regulatory bodies in the US, EU, and other countries.
3. It announces upcoming conferences and seminars addressed by partners and associates of Vaish Associates.
The document discusses the growing role of economics in competition law assessments. It notes that competition law is concerned with how markets operate and how the behavior of firms affects competition and consumers, which are economic issues. It explains that economics helps understand market definition, entry barriers, and market power, which are key concepts in competition law. The document then provides an overview of the evolution of the role of economics in US and European competition law and jurisprudence over time, from initial structural approaches to more modern emphasis on consumer welfare and total welfare.
This document summarizes cartel cases and enforcement efforts around the world, with a focus on lessons for India. It discusses how cartels negatively impact markets and consumers. It provides examples of major international cartel cases investigated and fined by competition authorities in the European Union, United States, and other countries. It also briefly discusses three cartel cases investigated in India under previous competition law. The document aims to increase awareness of cartels as an economic offense and highlight factors for India's new Competition Commission to consider in cartel investigations.
The document discusses the growing role of economics in competition law assessments. It notes that competition law is concerned with studying markets and ensuring competition benefits consumers. Applying competition law involves identifying markets, assessing competition, and how firm actions affect competition and consumers - which are economic issues. The key concepts of market definition, market power, and entry barriers require economic analysis. The document then provides a brief history of the evolving role of economics in US and European competition law and jurisprudence, from early structuralism to the modern emphasis on consumer welfare and total welfare under the influence of the Chicago School. It concludes that economic analysis is now essential in competition law.
1. A-380 Competition Law Reports [Vol. 1
Jet-Kingfisher Merger—Competition Issues
Comdt. (Retd.) M.M. Sharma*
Blatant or sensational promotion associated with Jet-Kingfisher merger has
left market with innumerable doubts be it be the stakeholders or consumers
regarding the possible effects of this alliance. What this means to the
competition regime when the alliance has been made to shed costs and improve
efficiency and when the Competition Commission is non-functional. The author
Comdt. M.M. Sharma tend to analyse the deal in the light of the various
competition issues primarily the issue of merger and as to whether the deal
is anti-competitive.
Now that the soon to be defunct better choice and lower prices for the
regulator, the MRTP Commission has consumers and since the consumers,
ordered its investigative wing, the DG i.e. the air travelers in India had just
(I&R) to commence inquiry into the begun to enjoy the fruits of this
most talked about Merger of Jet Air competition due to the open sky policy
Ways and Kingfisher Airlines, India’s of the government in the post-
two largest airlines with a post- liberalization era leading to the
merger combined market share of emergence of the so-called low-cost
60 per cent, it is just the time to carriers, which made the common
understand the finer competition man’s dream of flying a reality though
issues involved in this “Merger” and for a short period, as in the absence
its likely impact on consumers. The of a fully functional and real
“Merger” will, of course, be justified competition regulator, the competition
on the ground of achieving efficiency, commission of India, no agency of the
which in economic terms, means government (including the MR TP
lowering of marginal costs of operation Commission) was really competent to
of both airlines, coupled with the examine the “appreciable adverse
global economic crisis leading to effect on competition in the relevant
difficulty in raising the capital, the market” (for which the competition
rising aviation fuel bill and their commission is created and mandated
outstanding dues to oil companies for) due to the Merger of Air-Deccan
et al. with Kingfisher and Jet-Sahara
While the operational constraints of which not only reduced the number
the airlines may not be doubted, it is of players but also led to a rise in air
imperative to understand the impact fares of select city pairs.
of the Merger on competition in the But does every Merger which reduces
relevant market. Let us not forget the number of players in the market anti-
obvious that competition means competitive? Not really so. For
92 A-380 Oct. 08 - Dec. 08
2. 2008] Jet-Kingfisher Merger—Competition Issues A-381
instance, a Merger among small rather not hesitate in calling this
players to give competition to a large delay in making the competition
sized player is always pro-competitive commission fully functional as a
and efficiency enhancing for such carefully planned marriage of
marginal players. But a Merger convenience between the political
between a large and a small player, powers that be and the already large
as happened in the airlines sector in business houses to avoid
India, does raise competition “unnecessary” scrutiny of their anti-
concerns as it makes an already big competition business practices, like
player bigger and such merged entity in the developed world, in view of the
is likely to have a tendency to abuse obvious advantage to both in view of
its dominance for increasing its the forth coming general elections in
profits by indulging in any of the anti- India. This can happen only in India!
competitive practices, such as, So what are the competition issues
imposing unfair or discriminatory involved in a Merger of two airline
conditions, limiting or restricting companies offering almost identical
services to the selected few, denying products and services? The answer
market access to other players or to is to be found in the competition
even enter into other product or economics, which is now the essential
services markets through their tool for the ant-trust regulators the
dominant position in one product or world over. Such mergers between
services market. For example, if direct competitors are known as
permitted, the business class horizontal mergers in the competition
travelers in Kingfisher airlines will be economic parlance and such mergers
routinely served only kingfisher are known to give rise to two types of
beers! All these business practices, competitive harms – unilateral effects
which may be better known in the and coordinated effects.
Corporate world as “tricks of trade”
are prohibited under the Competition Unilateral effects arise where the
Act, 2002, and are against the spirit mergers create an incentive for the
of competition, which is the backbone merged entity to increase prices and
of a free market economy. There have where the profitability of that price
been many cases in the developed does not depend on the
world where the competition (or, as accommodating response by other
some still prefer to call it as “anti- firms in the market. The basic theory
trust”) regulators have imposed heavy of unilateral effects is that the “lost”
fines on companies indulging in such competition due to merger between
practices, which resulted in lessening two direct competitors gives rise to an
of competition in the relevant market. incentive to increased prices that did
The recent example of Microsoft, which not exist prior to that merger due to
was fined heavily both in US as well the “internalisation” of lost sales.
as in the EU, after a prolonged legal Apart from increase by the new
battle should serve as a forewarning merged entity, there is another round
and can reasonably be cited as a of increase of prices by other firms in
precedent by the competition the market to keep pace with the new
commission in any future verdict found competitive equilibrium in
against such practices, which are what is called “second round” effect
routinely used in India in the absence thus, consumers stand to lose in all
of the competition regulator. I would situations post-merger because it is
Oct. 08 - Dec. 08 93
3. A-382 Competition Law Reports [Vol. 1
interest. In this unilateral effects
The degree of closeness theory of competitive harm, the ability
of competition between of the merged entity to increase prices
the merging firms decides does not depend upon a cooperative
the extent of harm to response from the remaining
competition due to competing firms and hence, it is so
unilateral effects. called as unilateral effects or non-
coordinated effects. According to this
not only the merged entities which theory, such a horizontal merger
would be an incentive to increased gives rise to a situation of a “single
price but in the post-merger firm dominance” which also has a
equilibrium, the other firms will direct relation to market shares held
increase price as well. However, the by the merging parties prior and
only positive aspect or Defence for the subsequent to the merger. In some
unilateral effects theory of harm is the western jurisdictions where the some
likely efficiency gains for the merged of parties’ market share is less than
entity that is where the merger gives a certain threshold, the merger is not
rise to reductions in marginal costs likely to be viewed as harmful.
for one or both of the merging firms, The Herfindahl-Hirschman Index
this can offset the incentive to (HHI) is usually applied throughout
increase price. But, in order to be able the world to measure the level of
to Act as such, the reduction in concentration in the market and is
marginal costs or the efficiency must the sum of the square of each firm’s
be relatively very large. The market share in the relevant market.
competitive harms due to unilateral In the EU as well as in the US, safe
effects are likely to be more prominent harbours for permitting maximum
in case of merger between firms mergers are prescribed in terms of the
selling homogenous products or value of HHI. For instance, in terms
services or even between firms selling of HHI, the safe harbours in EU, is if
close substitutable products or the HHI is between 1,000 to 2,000 and
services. In fact, the degree of the delta (i.e., the change in HHI) is
closeness of competition between the less than 250; or if the HHI exceeds
merging firms decides the extent of 2,000 and the delta is below 1501,
harm to competition due to unilateral whereas in the US, if the delta is less
effects. A merger between firms that than 100, merger is unlikely to raise
are each other’s close competitors or concern if the post-merger HHI is in
whose products are close substitutes the range of 1,000 to1,800 and if the
is more harmful than merger between delta is less than 50, the merger is
firms whose products are distant unlikely to raise concern if the
substitutes. As it eliminates the post-merger HHI is above 1,800.2
competitive constraint which exists In terms of the market shares, the
between the parties prior to the safe harbours employed in EC is
merger thereby reducing the effective that where firms have a combined
competition in the market which is market share below 25 per cent, a
always detrimental to the consumers’ merger between them is unlikely to
1 EC Commission guidelines on horizontal mergers, 2004[ECMR] (paragraph 20)
2 US Horizontal Merger Guidelines (revised 1997)
94 Oct. 08 - Dec. 08
4. 2008] Jet-Kingfisher Merger—Competition Issues A-383
lead to unilateral anti-competitive
effects. (Recital 32 of ECMR.) 1
The “merger” between JET-
Whereas in the US, merger Airways and Kingfisher
guidelines indicate that unilateral Airlines, both with a
effect would not normally be a concern combined pre-merger market
where the combined market share share of 60 per cent, the two
of the merging parties is less than largest domestic airlines in
35 per cent.2 India, is almost certainly,
Coordinated effects theory of likely to be blocked for a
competitive harm, on the other hand, detailed investigation under
is based on “tacit” collusions between Section 6(2A) read with
firms who do not actually merge but Section 29 of the
behave almost like a cartel in an Competition Act as this
oligopolistic market. This type of
merger is, prima-facie, likely
coordination between firms in the
to raise unilateral effects
same relevant market is arrived
without any formal contact between concerns
the colluding parties and is most
difficult to detect unlike cartels, eve able to “detect” the cheating and
in the most advance jurisdiction and “punish” such a firm by reverting back
depends heavenly on economic to competitive prices for certain period
analysis. Symmetry in cost structures in the selected territories of
and/or capacities, some degree in distribution of the said firm as a
transparency either in prices, punishment.
outputs and homogeneity of products Applying the above economics
are some of the factors that facilitate principles to the “merger” between
such tacit coordination. In this theory JET-Airways and Kingfisher Airlines,
of competitive harm, the situation of both with a combined pre-merger
collective dominance is achieved due market share of 60 per cent, the two
to “coordination between firms” largest domestic airlines in India, is
without actually entering into a almost certainly, likely to be blocked
formal merger but resulting to the for a detailed investigation under
same harm to the competition, i.e. Section 6(2A) read with Section 29 of
reducing effective competition in the the Competition Act as this merger is,
market. The effect of such dominance prima-facie, likely to raise unilateral
is also the same, i.e. increase in effects concerns, as stated above. It
prices. This type of collusion is more may be noticed that although the
akin to a cartel though it lacks a Competition Act, 2002 or the draft
formal understanding or meeting of Competition Commission of India
minds between the parties as (Combination) Regulations, available
happens in the case of a cartel. Like on the official website of the said
a cartel, the participants in the Commission does not prescribe any
market identify certain “terms of safe harbours in terms of either pre-
coordination”, e.g. the posted prices merger combined market shares or
and if any firm in this tacit HHI (like the ECMR or the US
coordination deviates from the terms horizontal merger guidelines), yet the
of the coordination or in other words Commission will be bound to take into
cheats, the other participants are account the “market share of each of
Oct. 08 - Dec. 08 95