IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/revind/v54y2019i4d10.1007_s11151-019-09680-y.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Dubious Antitrust Argument for Breaking Up the Internet Giants

Author

Listed:
  • Robert W. Crandall

    (Technology Policy Institute, Washington DC)

Abstract

Recent calls for using the antitrust laws to break up the large Internet giants are misplaced for a number of reasons. First, similar efforts against oil, tobacco, motion-picture, and telecommunications monopolies have not proved to be beneficial to economic welfare. Second, the failure to break up Microsoft using Section 2 has not proved to be a mistake: competition in operating systems and Internet browsers has flourished recently. Finally, a Section 2 case against Amazon, Facebook, or Google could not succeed if it focused on the digital advertising market. Even in a case based on market power on the other side of their platforms, a structural remedy—a break-up—would not improve economic welfare in the long run.

Suggested Citation

  • Robert W. Crandall, 2019. "The Dubious Antitrust Argument for Breaking Up the Internet Giants," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 54(4), pages 627-649, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:revind:v:54:y:2019:i:4:d:10.1007_s11151-019-09680-y
    DOI: 10.1007/s11151-019-09680-y
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11151-019-09680-y
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11151-019-09680-y?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gao, Xiaohui & Ritter, Jay R. & Zhu, Zhongyan, 2013. "Where Have All the IPOs Gone?," Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 48(6), pages 1663-1692, December.
    2. Page, William H. & Lopatka, John E., 2007. "The Microsoft Case," University of Chicago Press Economics Books, University of Chicago Press, number 9780226644639, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Rabah Arezki & Vianney Dequiedt & Rachel Yuting Fan & Carlo Maria Rossotto, 2021. "Liberalization, Technology Adoption, and Stock Returns: Evidence from Telecom," Working Papers hal-03174354, HAL.
    2. Ding, Rong & Ko, Chiu Yu & Shen, Bo, 2022. "Partial compatibility in two-sided markets: Equilibrium and welfare analysis," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 116(C).
    3. repec:aei:rpaper:1008544122 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Rabah Arezki & Vianney Dequiedt & Rachel Yuting Fan & Carlo Maria Rossotto, 2021. "Working Paper 352 - Liberalization, Technology Adoption, and Stock Returns: Evidence from Telecom," Working Paper Series 2478, African Development Bank.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Josh Lerner & Ramana Nanda, 2020. "Venture Capital's Role in Financing Innovation: What We Know and How Much We Still Need to Learn," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 34(3), pages 237-261, Summer.
    2. Marc Berninger & Markus Klug & Dirk Schiereck, 2018. "Börsenrückzüge infolge steigender Corporate-Governance-Anforderungen – Empirische Evidenz von 13 europäischen Kapitalmärkten [Delistings due to Increased Corporate Governance Requirements – Empiric," Schmalenbach Journal of Business Research, Springer, vol. 70(4), pages 351-391, December.
    3. Michael Ewens & Joan Farre-Mensa, 2020. "The Deregulation of the Private Equity Markets and the Decline in IPOs," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 33(12), pages 5463-5509.
    4. Valérie Revest & Alessandro Sapio, 2016. "Graduation and sell-out strategies in the Alternative Investment Market," Discussion Papers 4_2016, CRISEI, University of Naples "Parthenope", Italy.
    5. Greene, Daniel, 2016. "The wealth of private firm owners following reverse mergers," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 56-75.
    6. Michael Ewens & Joan Farre-Mensa, 2022. "Private or Public Equity? The Evolving Entrepreneurial Finance Landscape," Annual Review of Financial Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 14(1), pages 271-293, November.
    7. Paula Garda & Volker Ziemann, 2014. "Economic Policies and Microeconomic Stability: A Literature Review and Some Empirics," OECD Economics Department Working Papers 1115, OECD Publishing.
    8. Aktas, Nihat & Cousin, Jean-Gabriel & Ozdakak, Ali & Zhang, Junyao, 2016. "Industry IPOs, growth opportunities, and private target acquisitions," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 193-209.
    9. Anderson, Christopher W. & Huang, Jian & Torna, Gökhan, 2017. "Can investors anticipate post-IPO mergers and acquisitions?," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 496-521.
    10. Bo Becker & Victoria Ivashina, 2023. "Disruption and Credit Markets," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 78(1), pages 105-139, February.
    11. Daniel Aobdia & Luminita Enache & Anup Srivastava, 2021. "Changes in Big N auditors’ client selection and retention strategies over time," Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, Springer, vol. 56(2), pages 715-754, February.
    12. Robert Prilmeier & René M. Stulz, 2019. "Securities Laws, Bank Monitoring, and the Choice Between Cov-lite Loans and Bonds for Highly Levered," NBER Working Papers 25467, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    13. Vojislav Maksimovic & Gordon M. Phillips & Liu Yang, 2017. "Do Public Firms Respond to Investment Opportunities More than Private Firms? The Impact of Initial Firm Quality," NBER Working Papers 24104, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    14. Duong, Huu Nhan & Goyal, Abhinav & Kallinterakis, Vasileios & Veeraraghavan, Madhu, 2021. "Market manipulation rules and IPO underpricing," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 67(C).
    15. Dambra, Michael & Field, Laura Casares & Gustafson, Matthew T., 2015. "The JOBS Act and IPO volume: Evidence that disclosure costs affect the IPO decision," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 116(1), pages 121-143.
    16. Doidge, Craig & Karolyi, G. Andrew & Stulz, René M., 2017. "The U.S. listing gap," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 123(3), pages 464-487.
    17. Decker, Ryan A. & Haltiwanger, John & Jarmin, Ron S. & Miranda, Javier, 2016. "Where has all the skewness gone? The decline in high-growth (young) firms in the U.S," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 4-23.
    18. Ahrends, Meike & Drobetz, Wolfgang & Puhan, Tatjana Xenia, 2018. "Cyclicality of growth opportunities and the value of cash holdings," Journal of Financial Stability, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 74-96.
    19. William H. Janeway & Ramana Nanda & Matthew Rhodes-Kropf, 2021. "Venture Capital Booms and Start-Up Financing," Annual Review of Financial Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 13(1), pages 111-127, November.
    20. Cécile Carpentier & Jean‐Marc Suret, 2018. "Three Decades of IPO Markets in Canada: Evolution, Risk and Return," Accounting Perspectives, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 17(1), pages 123-161, March.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Antitrust; Internet; Media;
    All these keywords.

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:kap:revind:v:54:y:2019:i:4:d:10.1007_s11151-019-09680-y. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.