Affordable Access

Access to the full text

Burdens and Balancing in Multisided Markets: The First Principles Approach of Ohio v. American Express

Authors
  • Wright, Joshua D.1
  • Yun, John M.1
  • 1 George Mason University, Antonin Scalia Law School, 3301 Fairfax Drive, Arlington, VA, 22201, USA , Arlington (United States)
Type
Published Article
Journal
Review of Industrial Organization
Publisher
Springer US
Publication Date
Jan 10, 2019
Volume
54
Issue
4
Pages
717–740
Identifiers
DOI: 10.1007/s11151-019-09677-7
Source
Springer Nature
Keywords
License
Yellow

Abstract

Multisided platforms have distinct and critical features that set them apart from single-sided markets. This realization has led to a split among courts, antitrust practitioners, and economists as to the best method to assess whether mergers or conduct that involve platforms result in the creation or maintenance of monopoly power and violate the antitrust laws. Some argue that each side of a platform constitutes a separate relevant product market. Others argue for a single, integrated market that incorporates all sides. We argue that any prima facie antitrust assessment of competitive harm must incorporate the impact to consumers on all sides regardless of market definition. We also explain why output effects should be the primary emphasis of competitive effects analyses. The Supreme Court recently and correctly adopted this approach in Ohio v. American Express.

Report this publication

Statistics

Seen <100 times