Research Programs
More
What are you looking for?
Showing Latest Publications
TOTM So Dr. Miles is dead. May he rest in peace. No great surprises in the majority opinion in Leegin. Justice Kennedy, quite rightly, emphasized points . . .
So Dr. Miles is dead. May he rest in peace.
No great surprises in the majority opinion in Leegin. Justice Kennedy, quite rightly, emphasized points we have asserted numerous times on this blog. Most notably…
Read the full piece here.
TOTM Well we’re coming down to the wire, folks. The Supreme Court is wrapping up its term any day now, and no still no word on . . .
Well we’re coming down to the wire, folks. The Supreme Court is wrapping up its term any day now, and no still no word on Leegin. Tom Goldstein from SCOTUSBLOG tells us the decision’s coming on Thursday. He also predicts that the author will be Justice Stevens, who has an antitrust background and hasn’t written an opinion since March.
TOTM John Mackey posts a remarkable public response to the FTC, including the complete text and extended exegesis of one of the inflammatory hot docs that . . .
John Mackey posts a remarkable public response to the FTC, including the complete text and extended exegesis of one of the inflammatory hot docs that prompted the FTC’s action. But most amazing of all is this comment…
TOTM 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 . . .
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.
TOTM 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 . . .
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.
TOTM 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 . . .
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.
TOTM 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 . . .
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…
TOTM 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 . . .
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.
TOTM It appears that the FTC is moving to stop the proposed Whole Foods/Wild Oats merger. Read the full piece here.
It appears that the FTC is moving to stop the proposed Whole Foods/Wild Oats merger.
