Research Programs
More
What are you looking for?
Showing 9 of 33 Publications by Peter G. Klein
Written Testimonies & Filings We are a group of eight scholars of antitrust law and economics affiliated with the International Center for Law & Economics, a nonprofit, nonpartisan policy research center based in Portland, OR. Without taking a position on the merits of the proposed T-Mobile/Sprint merger, this letter provides a brief explication of our views on some of the important economic issues involved in the transaction’s antitrust review.
Dear Senators Grassley, Feinstein, Lee, and Klobuchar,
We are a group of eight scholars of antitrust law and economics affiliated with the International Center for Law & Economics, a nonprofit, nonpartisan policy research center based in Portland, OR. Without taking a position on the merits of the proposed T-Mobile/Sprint merger, this letter provides a brief explication of our views on some of the important economic issues involved in the transaction’s antitrust review.
At the highest level, and as discussed in more detail below, we believe that an appropriate concern for consumer welfare in the regulatory review of the transaction demands that the Federal Communications Commission (“FCC”) and the Department of Justice (“DOJ”) account for the dynamic, fast-moving nature of competition in the markets affected by the merger. Above all, this means that the agencies should shun the mechanical application of obsolete market-share and concentration presumptions that could wrongly condemn the merger.
Modern antitrust principles, sound economics, and the public interest dictate that an analysis of the proposed merger incorporate these foundational precepts:
These principles are particularly appropriate here given the clear importance to the parties’ decision to merge of their interest in launching a competitive, national 5G network. If successful, the deal could create a combined T-Mobile and Sprint that is a stronger competitor to AT&T and Verizon, which, in turn, could spur increased investment competition in the market. Realizing those objectives — which could result in enormous benefit to consumers and enhance competition in the wireless communications and broadband markets — will take time, and the process will entail business model disruption, corporate reorganization, experimentation, and significant investment.
It is crucial to ensuring that the claimed consumer benefits of this process can be realized that the proposed merger not be thwarted by regulators inappropriately focused on short-term, static effects.
Popular Media I think reference bloat is a problem, particularly in management journals (not so much in economics journals). Too many papers include tedious lists of references . . .
I think reference bloat is a problem, particularly in management journals (not so much in economics journals). Too many papers include tedious lists of references supporting even trivial or obvious points. It’s a bit like blog entries that ritually link every technical term or proper noun to its corresponding wikipedia entry. “Firms seek to position themselves and acquire resources to achieve competitive advantage (Porter, 1980; Wernerfelt, 1984; Barney, 1986).” Unless the reference is non-obvious, narrowly linked to a specific argument, etc., why include it? Readers can do their Google Scholar searches if needed.
Read the full piece here.
Popular Media In conjunction with Ronald Coase’s new book on China, he’s given a new interview to his co-author Ning Wang. (HT: Paul Walker via Mike Giberson.) Excerpt… Read the full . . .
In conjunction with Ronald Coase’s new book on China, he’s given a new interview to his co-author Ning Wang. (HT: Paul Walker via Mike Giberson.) Excerpt…
Popular Media The view that small and new firms create a disproportionate share of new jobs is one of the most important stylized facts of the entrepreneurship . . .
The view that small and new firms create a disproportionate share of new jobs is one of the most important stylized facts of the entrepreneurship literature. But, as always, the devil is in the details. Small and new firms naturally grow at a faster rate than their large, mature counterparts, ceteris paribus, simply because they have few employees to start with. But they differ on a number of other grounds and have a higher hazard rate. What’s the bottom line?
Popular Media I hope to have something intelligent and interesting to say about this year’s prize to Diamond, Mortensen, and Pissarides — not as much as last year, of course — . . .
I hope to have something intelligent and interesting to say about this year’s prize to Diamond, Mortensen, and Pissarides — not as much as last year, of course — but for now I just have a small snark. Here’s me, a couple of weeks ago…
Amicus Brief "The choice between contempt proceedings and new infringement proceedings for a newly accused device should satisfy several important objectives..."
“The choice between contempt proceedings and new infringement proceedings for a newly accused device should satisfy several important objectives: (1) maintaining consistency with legal precedent, (2) fostering efficiency and due process, and (3) preserving incentives to invent, incentives to invest in and commercialize new technologies, and third-party incentives to avoid infringement and to design around. On the particular issue in this case, these different objectives all point in the same direction.
To address these objectives, this brief argues that the court should apply a test based on the doctrine of equivalents (“DOE”). If the initial infringing device and the newly accused device are “substantially the same” in the sense of the DOE, the court should evaluate the newly accused device through contempt proceedings. Conversely, if the initial infringing device and the newly accused device are not “substantially the same” in the sense of the DOE, the court should evaluate the newly accused device through infringement proceedings. Whichever threshold is used, there are burdens on the patentee, the defendant, and the legal system. Thus it makes sense to look at keeping costs low for a given level of accuracy. We argue in this brief that application of the DOE is the appropriate mechanism for determining the appropriateness of a contempt proceeding to enforce an injunction against a newly- accused device, and that application of the doctrine here counsels in favor of affirming the District Court’s decision.”
Popular Media This fall I’m teaching “Economics of Institutions and Organizations” to first-year graduate students. The reading list is rather heavy, compared to what most students are . . .
This fall I’m teaching “Economics of Institutions and Organizations” to first-year graduate students. The reading list is rather heavy, compared to what most students are used to from their undergraduate courses and their first-year courses in microeconomics, econometrics, etc. I explain that they need to become not only avid readers, but also efficient readers, able to extract the maximum information from an academic article with the least effort. They need to learn, in other words, the art of the skim.
Popular Media Some California design students tracked the ingredients in their favorite local taco and came up with this cool image. Read the full piece here.
Some California design students tracked the ingredients in their favorite local taco and came up with this cool image.
Popular Media Many useful summaries of Williamson’s (and Ostrom’s) contributions are appearing online, such as those by Ed Glaeser, David Henderson, John Nye, Jeff Ely, and Alex Tabarrok. I think the first . . .
Many useful summaries of Williamson’s (and Ostrom’s) contributions are appearing online, such as those by Ed Glaeser, David Henderson, John Nye, Jeff Ely, and Alex Tabarrok. I think the first few pages of my “make-or-buy” chapter in the NIE Handbook provide a decent overview too. I also have some slides on transaction cost economics (part 1, part 2) that may be helpful for those seeking more detail.
