IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/gii/giihei/heiwp06-2005.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The attempted merger between General Electric and Honeywell, a case study of transatlantic conflict

Author

Abstract

\cf1\f1 This paper analyzes how State aid affects and distorts competition and trade within and across jurisdictions. We identify the circumstances in which state aid is likely to involve the largest distortions. In the context of the paper distortion of competition" is interpreted as the effect on rivals\f2\rquote\f1 profits. We consider three types of state intervention, namely subsidies which affect marginal cost, entry and quality and analyse whether particular market characteristics are robust indicators of the magnitude of the distortions. We obtain the following results: (i) it appears that concentration is a fairly robust indicator; (ii) A high degree of substitution across differentiated products is not a robust indicator of the magnitude of the distortions. Its effect depends on the type of state intervention; (iii) The substitution among domestic products may have opposite effects respectively on domestic and foreign firms. In particular, when the market is not concentrated and state aid takes the form of a production subsidy, a stronger substitution among domestic products will reduce the distortions felt by the foreign firm (but increase that felt by domestic rivals); Finally, (iv) the paper demonstrates that the impact of selective State aid on market prices and competitors can depend on the particular characteristics of the market JEL Classification numbers: K21; L10; L40

Suggested Citation

  • Jose-Antonio Garcia; Damien Neven, 2005. "The attempted merger between General Electric and Honeywell, a case study of transatlantic conflict," IHEID Working Papers 06-2005, Economics Section, The Graduate Institute of International Studies.
    • Handle: RePEc:gii:giihei:heiwp06-2005
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://repec.graduateinstitute.ch/pdfs/Working_papers/HEIWP06-2005.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jeremy Grant & Damien J. Neven, 2005. "The Attempted Merger Between General Electric And Honeywell: A Case Study Of Transatlantic Conflict," Journal of Competition Law and Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 1(3), pages 595-633.
    2. Kühn, Kai-Uwe & Stillman, Robert & ,, 2004. "Economic Theories of Bundling and their Policy Implications in Abuse Cases: An Assessment in Light of the Microsoft Case," CEPR Discussion Papers 4756, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    3. Jrissy Motis & Damien Neven & Paul Seabright, 2006. "Efficiencies in Merger Control," Chapters, in: Fabienne IIzkovitz & Roderick Meiklejohn (ed.), European Merger Control, chapter 5, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    4. David S. Scharfstein & Jeremy C. Stein, 2000. "The Dark Side of Internal Capital Markets: Divisional Rent‐Seeking and Inefficient Investment," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 55(6), pages 2537-2564, December.
    5. Oecd, 2002. "Portfolio Effects in Conglomerate Mergers," OECD Journal: Competition Law and Policy, OECD Publishing, vol. 4(1), pages 59-151.
    6. 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.
    7. Beath,John & Katsoulacos,Yannis, 1991. "The Economic Theory of Product Differentiation," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521335263, October.
    8. Damien Neven, 2002. "Discrepancies Between Markets and Regulators: an Analysis of the First ten Years of EU Merger Control," IHEID Working Papers 10-2002, Economics Section, The Graduate Institute of International Studies.
    9. 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.
    10. Ravenscraft, David J. & Scherer, F. M., 1989. "The profitability of mergers," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 7(1), pages 101-116, March.
    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. Jeremy Grant & Damien J. Neven, 2005. "The Attempted Merger Between General Electric And Honeywell: A Case Study Of Transatlantic Conflict," Journal of Competition Law and Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 1(3), pages 595-633.
    2. Philipp Schumacher, 2013. "The EU’s flawed assessment of horizontal aspects in GE/Honeywell: re-visiting the last pillar of the European prohibition decision," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 35(2), pages 211-240, April.
    3. Oliver Budzinski & Katharina Wacker, 2007. "The Prohibition Of The Proposed Springer-Prosiebensat.1 Merger: How Much Economics In German Merger Control?," Journal of Competition Law and Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 3(2), pages 281-306.
    4. Mats Bergman, 2008. "Quis Custodiet Ipsos Custodes? or Measuring and Evaluating the Effectiveness of Competition Enforcement," De Economist, Springer, vol. 156(4), pages 387-409, December.
    5. Valentiny, Pál, 2019. "Közgazdaságtan a jogalkalmazásban [Forensic economics]," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(2), pages 134-162.

    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. Jrisy Motis, 2007. "Mergers and Acquisitions Motives," Working Papers 0730, University of Crete, Department of Economics.
    2. 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.
    3. 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.
    4. 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.
    5. Jovanovic, Dragan & Wey, Christian, 2012. "An equilibrium analysis of efficiency gains from mergers," DICE Discussion Papers 64, Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf Institute for Competition Economics (DICE).
    6. Patrice Bougette & Stéphane Turolla, 2006. "Merger Remedies at the European Commission: A Multinomial Logit Analysis," Post-Print halshs-00466606, HAL.
    7. Tomaso Duso & Klaus Gugler & Florian Szücs, 2013. "An Empirical Assessment of the 2004 EU Merger Policy Reform," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 123(11), pages 596-619, November.
    8. 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.
    9. Sven Heim & Kai Hüschelrath & Ulrich Laitenberger, 2016. "The Duration of the EC Merger Control Process: Determinants and the Impact of the 2004 Merger Regulation Reform," International Journal of the Economics of Business, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(1), pages 37-62, February.
    10. 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..
    11. Stöhr, Annika, 2021. "Price effects of horizontal mergers: A retrospective on retrospectives," Ilmenau Economics Discussion Papers 151, Ilmenau University of Technology, Institute of Economics.
    12. Mats Bergman & Malcolm Coate & Maria Jakobsson & Shawn Ulrick, 2010. "Comparing Merger Policies in the European Union and the United States," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 36(4), pages 305-331, June.
    13. Patrice Bougette & Florent Venayre, 2008. "Contrôles a priori et a posteriori des concentrations : comment augmenter l'efficacité des politiques de concurrence," Revue d'économie industrielle, De Boeck Université, vol. 0(1), pages 9-40.
    14. Albert Banal‐Estañol & Jo Seldeslachts, 2011. "Merger Failures," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 20(2), pages 589-624, June.
    15. Martynova, M. & Renneboog, L.D.R., 2005. "Takeover Waves : Triggers, Performance and Motives," Discussion Paper 2005-029, Tilburg University, Tilburg Law and Economic Center.
    16. Martynova, M. & Renneboog, L.D.R., 2006. "Mergers and Acquisitions in Europe," Discussion Paper 2006-6, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
    17. Martynova, M. & Renneboog, L.D.R., 2006. "The Performance of the European Market for Corporate Control : Evidence from the 5th Takeover Wave," Discussion Paper 2006-118, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
    18. Aktas, Nihat & Bodt, Eric de & Roll, Richard, 2004. "European M&A Regulation is Protectionist," University of California at Los Angeles, Anderson Graduate School of Management qt9gd3x41d, Anderson Graduate School of Management, UCLA.
    19. Martynova, Marina & Renneboog, Luc, 2008. "A century of corporate takeovers: What have we learned and where do we stand?," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 32(10), pages 2148-2177, October.
    20. Luke Garrod & Bruce Lyons, 2011. "Early Settlement and Errors in Merger Control," Working Paper series, University of East Anglia, Centre for Competition Policy (CCP) 2011-05, Centre for Competition Policy, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK..

    More about this item

    Keywords

    State aids; EU Antitrust; distortions of competition;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • K21 - Law and Economics - - Regulation and Business Law - - - Antitrust Law
    • L10 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - General
    • L40 - Industrial Organization - - Antitrust Issues and Policies - - - General

    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:gii:giihei:heiwp06-2005. 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: Dorina Dobre (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ieheich.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.