Allocating Costs in Ninth Circuit Predatory Pricing Cases: Marsann Co. v. Brammall, Inc. and its Problematic Progeny, Inglis v. Continental Baking and Thales v. Matsushita

Predatory pricing remains an active area in antitrust law, and cases continue to be brought before federal and state courts, causing the economics of predatory pricing to be revisited with some frequency. Despite the fact that the Supreme Court has recently given considerable attention to predatory...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Antitrust bulletin 2009-09, Vol.54 (3), p.651-681
Main Authors: Wazzan, C. Paul, Frech, H.E.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Competition (Economics)
Economics
Federal court decisions
Laws, regulations and rules
Predatory pricing
Price cutting
Citations: Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Predatory pricing remains an active area in antitrust law, and cases continue to be brought before federal and state courts, causing the economics of predatory pricing to be revisited with some frequency. Despite the fact that the Supreme Court has recently given considerable attention to predatory pricing, it has still not resolved splits in the circuit courts regarding the appropriate measure for determining when a price is below cost. This article will briefly discuss the economics of predatory pricing and will focus on how the developing case law in the Ninth Circuit on the measurement of costs potentially leads to improper decisions from an economic perspective. The authors use Thales v. Matsushita as a case study.
ISSN:0003-603X
1930-7969
DOI:10.1177/0003603X0905400305