Open main menu
Home
Random
Recent changes
Special pages
Community portal
Preferences
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Incubator escapee wiki
Search
User menu
Talk
Dark mode
Contributions
Create account
Log in
Editing
Anti-competitive practices
(section)
Warning:
You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you
log in
or
create an account
, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
Anti-spam check. Do
not
fill this in!
== Types == Anti-competitive behavior can be grouped into two classifications. Horizontal restraints regard anti-competitive behavior that involves competitors at the same level of the supply chain. These practices include mergers, cartels, collusions, price-fixing, price discrimination and predatory pricing. On the other hand, the second category is [[Vertical restraints#:~:text=Vertical restraints are competition restrictions,in agreements between horizontal competitors.|vertical restraint]] which implements restraints against competitors due to anti-competitive practice between firms at different levels of the supply chain e.g. supplier-distributor relationships. These practices include exclusive dealing, refusal to deal/sell, resale price maintenance and more. === Horizontal integration === [[Horizontal integration]] can result in [[economies of scale]], [[economies of density]]<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Ralph M |first=Braid |date=2017 |title=Efficiency-enhancing horizontal mergers in spatial competition |journal=Papers in Regional Science|volume=96 |issue=4 |pages=881–895 |doi=10.1111/pirs.12228 |doi-access=free |bibcode=2017PRegS..96..881B }}</ref> and be anti-competitive. When two companies with similar products or product characteristics merge horizontally, there is less competition. Horizontal mergers can also easily lead to a monopoly, reducing consumers' choices and indirectly harming consumers' interests. === Vertical integration === [[Vertical integration]] can result in [[economies of scope]] and reduce the [[hold-up problem]]<ref>Holmström, B., & Roberts, J. (1998). The Boundaries of the Firm Revisited. ''The Journal of Economic Perspectives, 4''(12), 73-94. {{JSTOR|2646895}}</ref> and be anti-competitive. In absence of [[perfect competition]] [[Chicago school of economics]] argues vertical integration may be pro-competitive by reducing [[double marginalization]].<ref>{{cite journal |title=Antitrust Regulators Release New Vertical Merger Guidelines |journal=CRS Legal Sidebar |date=21 July 2020 |pages=1–3 }}</ref>
Edit summary
(Briefly describe your changes)
By publishing changes, you agree to the
Terms of Use
, and you irrevocably agree to release your contribution under the
CC BY-SA 4.0 License
and the
GFDL
. You agree that a hyperlink or URL is sufficient attribution under the Creative Commons license.
Cancel
Editing help
(opens in new window)