Showing 1 - 8 of 8
In its landmark ruling in Illinois Brick Co. v. Illinois in 1977, the U.S. Supreme Court restricted standing to sue for recovery of antitrust damages to direct purchasers. However, antitrust damages are typically (in part) passed on to intermediaries lower in the chain of production and...
Persistent link: https://www.econbiz.de/10011343268
Persistent link: https://www.econbiz.de/10010345592
Persistent link: https://www.econbiz.de/10003761353
Persistent link: https://www.econbiz.de/10002851571
Persistent link: https://www.econbiz.de/10001780952
In its landmark ruling in Illinois Brick Co. v. Illinois in 1977, the U.S. Supreme Court restricted standing to sue for recovery of antitrust damages to direct purchasers. However, antitrust damages are typically (in part) passed on to intermediaries lower in the chain of production and...
Persistent link: https://www.econbiz.de/10010325452
We show that incomplete cartels in quantity-setting oligopolies may increase welfare, without any efficiencies or synergies being internalized by cartel formation. The main intuition is that the cartel has an incentive to contract output and that the firms outside the cartel react to this by...
Persistent link: https://www.econbiz.de/10013105768
In its landmark ruling in Illinois Brick Co. v. Illinois, the U.S. Supreme Court restricted standing to sue for recovery of damages suffered from a breach of federal antitrust law to direct purchasers only. Even though typically antitrust injury is, at least in part, passed on to firms lower in...
Persistent link: https://www.econbiz.de/10014064647