IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/halshs-00194906.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Negotiating remedies: revealing the merger efficiency gains

Author

Listed:
  • Andreea Cosnita

    (EUREQUA - Equipe Universitaire de Recherche en Economie Quantitative - UP1 - Université Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique)

  • Jean-Philippe Tropeano

    (EUREQUA - Equipe Universitaire de Recherche en Economie Quantitative - UP1 - Université Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique)

Abstract

This paper aims to contribute to the normative economic analysis of mergers control by taking into account the possible efficiency gains for the design of structural merger remedies. We show that a larger asset transfer should be requested from a less efficient merged firm than from a more efficient one, wich conforms with the recommendations of competition policy practitioners. However, since cost savings are private information of merging firms, the Competition Authority will require them to reveal their efficiency gains, so as to tailor the optimal remedy. We propose a revelation mechanism combining the use of divestitures with the regulation of their sale price. We discuss the opportunity of such a merger policy tool, and argue that in practice it may be used to signal the efficiency gains of notified mergers.

Suggested Citation

  • Andreea Cosnita & Jean-Philippe Tropeano, 2005. "Negotiating remedies: revealing the merger efficiency gains," Post-Print halshs-00194906, HAL.
    • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:halshs-00194906
    Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://shs.hal.science/halshs-00194906
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://shs.hal.science/halshs-00194906/document
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. 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.
    2. Luis Corchón & Ramon Fauli-Oller, 2004. "To merge or not to merge: That is the question," Review of Economic Design, Springer;Society for Economic Design, vol. 9(1), pages 11-30, December.
    3. Motta,Massimo, 2004. "Competition Policy," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521016919, October.
    4. Farrell, Joseph & Shapiro, Carl, 1990. "Horizontal Mergers: An Equilibrium Analysis," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 80(1), pages 107-126, March.
    5. Seldeslachts, Jo & Clougherty, Joseph A. & Barros, Pedro Pita, 2007. "Remedy for Now but Prohibit for Tomorrow: The Deterrence Effects of Merger Policy Tools," Discussion Paper Series of SFB/TR 15 Governance and the Efficiency of Economic Systems 218, Free University of Berlin, Humboldt University of Berlin, University of Bonn, University of Mannheim, University of Munich.
    6. Helder Vasconcelos, 2010. "Efficiency Gains And Structural Remedies In Merger Control," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 58(4), pages 742-766, December.
    7. Fridolfsson, Sven-Olof & Stennek, Johan, 2005. "Hold-up of anti-competitive mergers," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 23(9-10), pages 753-775, December.
    8. Besanko, David & Spulber, Daniel F, 1993. "Contested Mergers and Equilibrium Antitrust Policy," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 9(1), pages 1-29, April.
    9. Neven, Damien J. & Roller, Lars-Hendrik, 2005. "Consumer surplus vs. welfare standard in a political economy model of merger control," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 23(9-10), pages 829-848, December.
    10. Medvedev, A., 2004. "Structural Remedies in Merger Regulation in a Cournot Framework," Discussion Paper 2004-006, Tilburg University, Tilburg Law and Economic Center.
    11. Dixit, Avinash, 1980. "The Role of Investment in Entry-Deterrence," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 90(357), pages 95-106, March.
    12. Hugo Hopenhayn & Gerard Llobet & Matthew Mitchell, 2006. "Rewarding Sequential Innovators: Prizes, Patents, and Buyouts," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 114(6), pages 1041-1068, December.
    13. Farrell, Joseph, 2003. "Negotiation and Merger Remedies: Some Problems," Competition Policy Center, Working Paper Series qt9p72k8fn, Competition Policy Center, Institute for Business and Economic Research, UC Berkeley.
    14. Bruce Lyons & Andrei Medvedev, 2007. "Bargaining over Remedies in Merger Regulation," Working Papers 07-3, Centre for Competition Policy, University of East Anglia.
    15. In-Koo Cho & David M. Kreps, 1987. "Signaling Games and Stable Equilibria," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 102(2), pages 179-221.
    16. Lars-Hendrik Röller & Christian Wey, 2003. "Merger Control in the New Economy," Netnomics, Springer, vol. 5(1), pages 5-20, May.
    17. Bensaid, Bernard & Encaoua, David & Winckler, Antoine, 1994. "Competition, cooperation and mergers: Economic and policy issues," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 38(3-4), pages 637-650, April.
    18. Compte, Olivier & Jenny, Frederic & Rey, Patrick, 2002. "Capacity constraints, mergers and collusion," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 46(1), pages 1-29, January.
    19. Matthew Mitchell, 2000. "Rewarding Sequential Innovators: Patents Prizes and Buyouts," Econometric Society World Congress 2000 Contributed Papers 1650, Econometric Society.
    20. Joseph Farrell & Carl Shapiro, 1990. "Asset Ownership and Market Structure in Oligopoly," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 21(2), pages 275-292, Summer.
    21. McAfee, R Preston & Williams, Michael A, 1992. "Horizontal Mergers and Antitrust Policy," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 40(2), pages 181-187, June.
    22. Helder Vasconcelos, 2005. "Tacit Collusion, Cost Asymmetries, and Mergers," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 36(1), pages 39-62, Spring.
    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. Juwon Kwak, 2013. "Merger settlement as a screening device," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 36(3), pages 523-540, December.
    2. Harrington, Joseph E., 2021. "There may be no pass through of a merger-related cost efficiency," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 208(C).
    3. Dertwinkel-Kalt, Markus & Wey, Christian, 2016. "Structural remedies as a signaling device," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 1-6.
    4. Patrice Bougette, 2011. "Négociation d'engagements en matière de concentrations : une perspective d'économiste," Post-Print halshs-00580669, HAL.
    5. Emilie Dargaud, 2013. "Horizontal mergers, efficiency gains and remedies," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 36(2), pages 349-372, October.
    6. Mariana Cunha & Paula Sarmento & Hélder Vasconcelos, 2014. "Uncertain Efficiency Gains and Merger Policy," FEP Working Papers 527, Universidade do Porto, Faculdade de Economia do Porto.
    7. Bougette, Patrice, 2010. "Preventing merger unilateral effects: A Nash-Cournot approach to asset divestitures," Research in Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(3), pages 162-174, September.
    8. Romahn, André & Friberg, Richard, 2012. "Ex-Post Merger Review and Divestitures," IESE Research Papers D/1056, IESE Business School.
    9. Chopard, Bertrand & Cortade, Thomas & Cosnita-Langlais, Andreea, 2015. "Success and failure of bargaining in merger control: The case of asset divestitures," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 254-259.
    10. Friberg, Richard & Romahn, André, 2015. "Divestiture requirements as a tool for competition policy: A case from the Swedish beer market," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 1-18.
    11. Peter Ormosi, 2010. "The determinants of merger litigation strategies: An empirical analysis of EC mergers," Working Paper series, University of East Anglia, Centre for Competition Policy (CCP) 2010-01, Centre for Competition Policy, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK..
    12. Mariana Cunha & Hélder Vasconcelos, 2018. "Sequential Mergers and Antitrust Authority’s Decisions in Stackelberg Markets," Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, Springer, vol. 18(3), pages 373-394, September.
    13. Ormosi, Peter L., 2012. "Tactical dilatory practice in litigation: Evidence from EC merger proceedings," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(4), pages 370-377.
    14. Ormosi, Peter L., 2012. "Claim efficiencies or offer remedies? An analysis of litigation strategies in EC mergers," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 30(6), pages 578-592.
    15. Stephen Davies & Matthew Olczak, 2010. "Assessing the Efficacy of Structural Merger Remedies: Choosing Between Theories of Harm?," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 37(2), pages 83-99, September.

    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. 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.
    2. Andrei Medvedev, 2004. "Structural remedies in merger regulation in a Cournot framework," CERGE-EI Working Papers wp229, The Center for Economic Research and Graduate Education - Economics Institute, Prague.
    3. Cosnita-Langlais, Andreea & Tropeano, Jean-Philippe, 2012. "Do remedies affect the efficiency defense? An optimal merger-control analysis," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 30(1), pages 58-66.
    4. Markus Dertwinkel-Kalt & Christian Wey, 2016. "Merger Remedies in Oligopoly under a Consumer Welfare Standard," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 32(1), pages 150-179.
    5. Helder Vasconcelos, 2013. "Can the failing firm defence rule be counterproductive?," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 65(2), pages 567-593, April.
    6. Mariana Cunha & Hélder Vasconcelos, 2018. "Sequential Mergers and Antitrust Authority’s Decisions in Stackelberg Markets," Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, Springer, vol. 18(3), pages 373-394, September.
    7. Helder Vasconcelos, 2010. "Efficiency Gains And Structural Remedies In Merger Control," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 58(4), pages 742-766, December.
    8. 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).
    9. Kaplow, Louis & Shapiro, Carl, 2007. "Antitrust," Handbook of Law and Economics, in: A. Mitchell Polinsky & Steven Shavell (ed.), Handbook of Law and Economics, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 15, pages 1073-1225, Elsevier.
    10. Mason, Robin & Weeds, Helen, 2013. "Merger policy, entry, and entrepreneurship," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 23-38.
    11. Duso, Tomaso & Gugler, Klaus & Yurtoglu, Burcin B., 2011. "How effective is European merger control?," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 55(7), pages 980-1006.
    12. Cosnita-Langlais, Andreea & Tropeano, Jean-Philippe, 2012. "Do remedies affect the efficiency defense? An optimal merger-control analysis," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 30(1), pages 58-66.
    13. Patrice Bougette, 2011. "Négociation d'engagements en matière de concentrations : une perspective d'économiste," Post-Print halshs-00580669, HAL.
    14. Dertwinkel-Kalt, Markus & Wey, Christian, 2012. "The effects of remedies on merger activity in oligopoly," DICE Discussion Papers 81, Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf Institute for Competition Economics (DICE).
    15. Markus Dertwinkel-Kalt & Christian Wey, 2021. "Evidence Production in Merger Control: The Role of Remedies," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 59(1), pages 1-12, August.
    16. Bojan Ristić & Dejan Trifunović, 2014. "Horizontal Mergers And Weak And Strong Competition Commissions," Economic Annals, Faculty of Economics and Business, University of Belgrade, vol. 59(202), pages 69-106, July – Se.
    17. Emilie Dargaud, 2013. "Horizontal mergers, efficiency gains and remedies," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 36(2), pages 349-372, October.
    18. Simon Loertscher & Leslie M. Marx, 2021. "Coordinated Effects in Merger Review," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 64(4), pages 705-744.
    19. Christian Steiner & Kai Hüschelrath & Jürgen Weigand, 2011. "Merger remedies involving restructuring costs in a Cournot framework," Empirica, Springer;Austrian Institute for Economic Research;Austrian Economic Association, vol. 38(3), pages 417-434, July.
    20. Andrei Medvedev, 2004. "Efficiency Defense and Administrative Fuzziness in Merger Regulation," CERGE-EI Working Papers wp234, The Center for Economic Research and Graduate Education - Economics Institute, Prague.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    structural merger remedies; merger control; asymmetric information; contrôle des fusions; remèdes structurels; information asymétrique;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • L41 - Industrial Organization - - Antitrust Issues and Policies - - - Monopolization; Horizontal Anticompetitive Practices
    • D82 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Asymmetric and Private Information; Mechanism Design
    • K21 - Law and Economics - - Regulation and Business Law - - - Antitrust Law

    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:hal:journl:halshs-00194906. 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: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    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.