IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/ecinqu/v30y1992i2p277-93.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Empirical Evidence on FTC Enforcement of the Merger Guidelines

Author

Listed:
  • Coate, Malcolm B
  • McChesney, Fred S

Abstract

The Justice Department's 1982/1984 guidelines identify various factors--concentration, entry barriers, ease of collusion, efficiency--that would thereafter determine whether the government will challenge a merger. Analysts have criticized enforcement agencies, however, for not following the guidelines and criticize the guidelines themselves for not identifying the weights attached to the factors. Using a 1982-86 sample of seventy horizontal mergers, the authors examine which factors influenced the Federal Trade Commission's decision to challenge mergers. The relative importance of the guidelines and other factors in merger challenges is measured and related empirical issues are also explored. Copyright 1992 by Oxford University Press.

Suggested Citation

  • Coate, Malcolm B & McChesney, Fred S, 1992. "Empirical Evidence on FTC Enforcement of the Merger Guidelines," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 30(2), pages 277-293, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:ecinqu:v:30:y:1992:i:2:p:277-93
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Guilding, Chris & McManus, Lisa, 2002. "The incidence, perceived merit and antecedents of customer accounting: an exploratory note," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 27(1-2), pages 45-59.
    2. Tomaso Duso & Damien J. Neven & Lars-Hendrik Röller, 2007. "The Political Economy of European Merger Control: Evidence using Stock Market Data," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 50(3), pages 455-489.
    3. Dong‐Hun Kim, 2010. "Making or Breaking a Deal: the Impact of Electoral Systems on Mergers & Acquisitions," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 63(3), pages 432-449, August.
    4. Jordi Gual & Núria Mas, 2011. "Industry Characteristics and Anti-Competitive Behavior: Evidence from the European Commission’s Decisions," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 39(3), pages 207-230, November.
    5. Sourafel Girma & Steve Thompson & Peter Wright, 2006. "International Acquisitions, Domestic Competition and Firm Performance," International Journal of the Economics of Business, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(3), pages 335-349.
    6. Sunel Grimbeek & Steve Koch & Richard Grimbeek, 2013. "The Consistency of Merger Decisions at the South African Competition Commission," South African Journal of Economics, Economic Society of South Africa, vol. 81(4), pages 561-580, December.
    7. Gürtler, Oliver & Kräkel, Matthias, 2009. "On the inefficiency of merger control," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 102(1), pages 53-55, January.
    8. Richard J. Grimbeek & Sunel Grimbeek & Steven F. Koch, 2011. "The Consistency of Merger Decisions in a Developing Country: The South African Competition Commission," Working Papers 201117, University of Pretoria, Department of Economics.
    9. Qing Yang & Michael Pickford, 2014. "The Merger Clearance Decision Process in New Zealand: Application of a New Two-Stage Probit Model," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 44(3), pages 299-325, May.
    10. Davies, Stephen & Olczak, Matthew & Coles, Heather, 2011. "Tacit collusion, firm asymmetries and numbers: Evidence from EC merger cases," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 221-231, March.
    11. Lars-Hendrik Röller & Johan Stennek & Frank Verboven, 2006. "Efficiency Gains from Mergers," Chapters, in: Fabienne IIzkovitz & Roderick Meiklejohn (ed.), European Merger Control, chapter 3, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    12. Stephen Davies & Matthew Olczak & Heather Coles, 2007. "Tacit collusion, firm asymmetries and numbers: evidence from EC merger cases," Working Paper series, University of East Anglia, Centre for Competition Policy (CCP) 2007-07, Centre for Competition Policy, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK..
    13. Marcos Avalos & Rafael E. De Hoyos, 2008. "An Empirical Analysis of Mexican Merger Policy," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 32(2), pages 113-130, March.
    14. Goran Serdareviæ & Petr Teplý, 2011. "The Efficiency of EU Merger Control During the Period 1990–2008," Czech Journal of Economics and Finance (Finance a uver), Charles University Prague, Faculty of Social Sciences, vol. 61(3), pages 252-276, July.
    15. Patrice Bougette & Stéphane Turolla, 2008. "Market structures, political surroundings, and merger remedies: an empirical investigation of the EC’s decisions," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 25(2), pages 125-150, April.
    16. Bergman, Mats A. & Jakobsson, Maria & Razo, Carlos, 2005. "An econometric analysis of the European Commission's merger decisions," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 23(9-10), pages 717-737, December.
    17. Robert Breunig & Flavio M. Menezes & Kelvin Jui Keng Tan, 2012. "An Empirical Investigation of the Mergers Decision Process in Australia," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 88(283), pages 459-475, December.
    18. Prince M. Changole & Willem H. Boshoff, 2022. "Non-competition Goals and Their Impact on South African Merger Control: An Empirical Analysis," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 60(3), pages 361-401, May.
    19. Mikhail Kouliavtsev, 2007. "Measuring the Extent of Structural Remedy in Section 7 Settlements: Was the US DOJ Successful in the 1990s?," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 30(1), pages 1-27, February.

    More about this item

    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:oup:ecinqu:v:30:y:1992:i:2:p:277-93. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/weaaaea.html .

    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.