In Monday’s Credit Suisse v. Billing decision, the Supreme Court held that the federal securities laws implicitly precluded the application of antitrust law to the defendants’ alleged misconduct. The plaintiffs, buyers of newly issued securities, had accused the defendants, underwriting firms that had collectively marketed and distributed those securities, of violating Section 1 of the Sherman Act by agreeing to sell the securities only on the condition that buyers engage in various other transactions. The underwriter defendants sought dismissal of the complaint on grounds that the federal securities laws impliedly preclude application of the antitrust laws to the conduct in question.

Read the full piece here. 

As Manfred reports over at the Antitrust Review, the judge has unsealed the FTC’s complaint against Whole Foods. This unredacted version reveals an unhealthy reliance on hot docs by the FTC’s staff. I won’t belabor the point.  But when you’re looking at marketing materials and reports to the board to identify anticompetitive intent (hmmm.  I didn’t know intent was relevant in merger cases . . . .) through “fighting words” and “smoking guns,” you’re barking up the wrong tree. It is little or no evidence of likely anticompetitive effect that Whole Food’s outspoken CEO claims that purchasing Wild Oats will remove “forever or almost forever” the threat to Whole Food’s market.

Read the full piece here.

Geoff nailed it on the Whole Foods/Wild Oats affair last week. Always a day late and a dollar short, I’ve just written my own short piece on the FTC’s effort to block the merger of these two fancy grocers.

Read the full piece here.

My future colleague, Danny Sokol (who’ll be visiting at Missouri Law next year), is one of the authors of the fantastic Antitrust & Competition Policy Blog. Danny requested that I post the following…

Read the full piece here.

Geoff’s post last week on the FTC’s move to block the Whole Foods/Wild Oats merger poked fun at a stupid pun appearing in the agency’s press release: “If Whole Foods is allowed to devour Wild Oats, it will mean higher prices, reduced quality, and fewer choices for consumers. That is a deal consumers should not be required to swallow.” Geoff called the remark “very punny.” I, too, thought the remark was a bit too cute when I read it last Wednesday on the FTC’s website. A number of news articles on the FTC’s decision (e.g., here, here, and here) quoted the same pun from the press release. One assumes it was formulated as a soundbite for news stories.

Read the full piece here.

It appears that the FTC is moving to stop the proposed Whole Foods/Wild Oats merger.

Read the full piece here.

One of the more interesting parts of Senator Herbert Kohl’s recent Antitrust interview, in which he also discussed airline mergers, concerned antitrust’s treatment of media consolidation.

Read the full piece here.

I’ve previously tiraded about paternalism in my beloved Chicago. I won’t beat that dead horse, but I just can’t ignore the latest liberty restriction imposed by our esteemed aldermaniacs. The members of the aldermen’s Buildings Committee recently voted to extend the city’s smoking ban to performers in theatrical productions.

Read the full piece here.

See here.

My favorite line of the exchange comes from Rizzo in response to Thaler’s inclusion of private choices by firms to adopt automatic savings plans as examples of “libertarian paternalism”…

Read the full piece here.