IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ucp/jlawec/doi10.1086-721268.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Retrospective Analysis of the AT&T/Time Warner Merger

Author

Listed:
  • Dennis W. Carlton
  • Georgi V. Giozov
  • Mark A. Israel
  • Allan L. Shampine

Abstract

This article provides a retrospective of a litigated vertical merger: the 2018 AT&T/Time Warner merger, which was challenged by the US Department of Justice, litigated, and permitted to proceed by the court. We describe and evaluate in detail the economic model used by the government’s expert and then focus our empirical work on the accuracy of the predictions made by that model. We also discuss evidence related to the Comcast/NBC Universal merger, which involved the same theory of harm and was allowed to proceed with a remedy similar to the contractual commitment that AT&T/Time Warner unilaterally adopted. We conclude that the evidence from the time of trial showed the theory of harm to be weak and the specific empirical predictions made by the government’s expert to be wrong. Postmerger evidence confirms that conclusion, as does new evidence from the earlier Comcast/NBC Universal merger.

Suggested Citation

  • Dennis W. Carlton & Georgi V. Giozov & Mark A. Israel & Allan L. Shampine, 2022. "A Retrospective Analysis of the AT&T/Time Warner Merger," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 65(S2), pages 461-498.
    • Handle: RePEc:ucp:jlawec:doi:10.1086/721268
    DOI: 10.1086/721268
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/721268
    Download Restriction: Access to the online full text or PDF requires a subscription.
    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/721268
    Download Restriction: Access to the online full text or PDF requires a subscription.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1086/721268?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.

    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:ucp:jlawec:doi:10.1086/721268. 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: Journals Division (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/JLE .

    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.