Research Programs
More
What are you looking for?
Showing Latest Publications
TOTM A common theme throughout the day has been the declining number of seed companies–increasing concentration–and its effect. Except no one has talked about the effect. . . .
A common theme throughout the day has been the declining number of seed companies–increasing concentration–and its effect. Except no one has talked about the effect. Other than pointing to the structural change itself, no one seems to have any evidence relating to the effect of the change. One farmer at the open mic session (coincidentally one who had been sued by Monsanto) asserted that the move from 70 seed companies to 4 represented a relevant decline in competition. But he didn’t talk about any relevant effect; he had nothing to offer on declining return on investment–no evidence that the change actually affected his bottom line.
Read the full piece here.
TOTM Bill Northey, IA Ag Sec’y, sounds a bit like an economist (ah, turns out he has a degree in ag business and an MBA . . . .
Bill Northey, IA Ag Sec’y, sounds a bit like an economist (ah, turns out he has a degree in ag business and an MBA . . . ). Yes, price of seeds has gone up, but so has yield, and so has overall value. The issue, he says, is how to divide the surplus, and he suggests that it’s dividing the pie that drives farmer concerns. That’s not at all a surprise, but it’s also not much of an antitrust issue. Unless the pie could be bigger absent, say, Monsanto’s huge investment in seeds and the resulting relatively-concentrated market structure (and basing enforcement on the theoretical possibility of that counter-factual is a perilous enterprise, as Josh and I have suggested many times), this is just a question of pecuniary transfers. Sure, they matter a lot to the parties involved and there’s always an incentive to deputize the government to put a thumb on the scale of that dispute, but that’s not a matter of allocative efficiency, and not a matter for the antitrust laws.
TOTM As readers may know, Eric Holder was added to the workshop at the last minute (see the latest agenda here). So the day starts out . . .
As readers may know, Eric Holder was added to the workshop at the last minute (see the latest agenda here). So the day starts out with Holder and Vilsack, and they are joined by Varney and Tom Miller (the Iowa AG) and a host of other politicos including Senator Grassley and Congressman Boswell.
TOTM Later this week Mike Sykuta and I will be winging our way to Iowa on behalf of the ICLE to attend the first of the . . .
Later this week Mike Sykuta and I will be winging our way to Iowa on behalf of the ICLE to attend the first of the year-long series of DOJ/USDA Workshops on Agriculture and Antitrust Enforcement Issues. You can find the agenda for the first workshop, to be held Friday, March 12 in Ankeny, Iowa, here. Intrepid reporters, we, our plan is to “live blog” the event for those of you unable to attend. This first workshop, in addition to introducing the series, will focus on farming, which means seeds, which means the dispute between DuPont and Monsanto over licensing terms and everyone’s perennial favorite: industry concentration.
TOTM TradeComet’s antitrust suit against Google has been dismissed by the S.D.N.Y. Court in which the case was being heard. The opinion is available here. The . . .
TradeComet’s antitrust suit against Google has been dismissed by the S.D.N.Y. Court in which the case was being heard. The opinion is available here.
The holding…
TOTM Usha Rodrigues and Mike Stegemoller have penned an interesting article, “Placebo Ethics,” assessing the effect of one of SOX’s disclosure provisions: The required immediate disclosure . . .
Usha Rodrigues and Mike Stegemoller have penned an interesting article, “Placebo Ethics,” assessing the effect of one of SOX’s disclosure provisions: The required immediate disclosure of waivers from a company’s code of ethics, found in Section 406 of the law. The article is concrete, informative, empirical and well-written.
Scholarship Abstract This essay criticizes the Federal Trade Commission’s defense of its use Section 5 of the FTC Act in the Intel case. The FTC’s (and . . .
This essay criticizes the Federal Trade Commission’s defense of its use Section 5 of the FTC Act in the Intel case. The FTC’s (and particularly Chairman Leibowitz’) claims that the error cost concerns that figure prominently in recent Supreme Court Sherman Act cases ought not to apply, and are not intended to apply, to government enforcers are misguided and dangerous.
TOTM The Amazon vs. Macmillan controversy has been beaten to a pulp in the blogosphere. See Megan McArdle, John Scalzi, Joshua Gans, Virginia Postrel, Lynne Kiesling, . . .
The Amazon vs. Macmillan controversy has been beaten to a pulp in the blogosphere. See Megan McArdle, John Scalzi, Joshua Gans, Virginia Postrel, Lynne Kiesling, Lynne Kielsing and Lynne Kiesling, among others. Pulp or no (get it? It’s a book/e-book pun), I haven’t seen anyone hit squarely on what I think is the crux of the issue: control rights.
TOTM I’m sure it’s an honor just to be nominated. A recent opinion from Judge Posner cites our very own Josh Wright (Joshua D. Wright & . . .
I’m sure it’s an honor just to be nominated.
A recent opinion from Judge Posner cites our very own Josh Wright (Joshua D. Wright & Todd J. Zywicki, “Three Problematic Truths About the Consumer Financial Protection Agency Act of 2009,” Lombard Street, Sept. 14, 2009, available here) (by the way, the essay has drawn a few comments, my favorite of which is definitely the one titled, “are you stupid or scumbags[?]”).
