Law Commons^™

Making Rules Vs Ruling, Ramsi Woodcock

Law Faculty Popular Media

In an effort to fight inflation, the Federal Open Market Committee raised interest rates to 20% over the course of 1980 and 1981, triggering a recession that threw more than 4 million Americans, many in well-paying manufacturing jobs, out of work.

As it continues to do today, the committee met in secret and explained its rate decisions in a handful of paragraphs.

None of the millions of Americans thrown out of work—or the many businesses driven to bankruptcy—sued the FOMC. No one argued that the FOMC’s power to disrupt the American economy was an unconstitutional delegation of legislative authority. No …

Antitrust Can't Tame Inequality, Let Alone Inflation, Ramsi Woodcock

Law Faculty Popular Media

The Biden administration’s plans to take antitrust action to head off inflation are splitting progressives, with some openly rejecting the notion that monopolies are to blame for surging prices and others arguing that even if the initiative fails to tame inflation, more antitrust enforcement can only be a good thing.

What both sides should be questioning is not whether applying antitrust to inflation is too much of a good thing, but whether antitrust is good for progressives at all. Because, as I explain in a recent paper, an inconvenient truth about competition is that it breeds inequality — something economists …

Personalizing Prices To Redistribute Wealth In Antitrust And Public Utility Rate Regulation, Ramsi A. Woodcock

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

The information age is enabling firms with even small amounts of market power to personalize the prices they charge to each consumer in the market. Left to their own devices, firms will use this new power to increase profits by charging prices personalized to the maximum that each consumer is willing to pay. But government can also use the new power to personalize prices to equalize wealth—by insisting that firms personalize high prices to the rich and low prices to the poor—and most of the legal rules needed to do so are already in place. Both the antitrust laws and …

The Real Monopoly Is In The Boardroom, Ramsi Woodcock

Law Faculty Popular Media

We have always thought of the problem of monopoly as a problem of size or of markets. We say that Facebook is a monopoly because it is too big, or because it is in the nature of networked markets to reward scale.

But what if the problem of monopoly were really a problem of firm governance?

We don’t hate monopolies in themselves; we hate them for what they do. They charge us higher prices or deliver us lower-quality products. They pay us less or make our jobs harder.

But what a monopolist does is determined not by its size …

What Those Shocking Texas Power Bills Have In Common With Uber Surges, Broadway Tickets, And Airfare, Ramsi Woodcock

Law Faculty Popular Media

You might think that the $17,000 bills that Texas electricity providers are sending to customers who kept their lights on during last week’s historic storm reflect red state libertarian ideology run amuck. But you would be wrong.

They are actually the product of the exact same approach to markets reflected in the congestion-pricing plan for midtown Manhattan adopted by the New York State legislature in 2019, in the way Broadway priced tickets for shows like The Lion King and Wicked before the pandemic, and the way airlines have been pricing seats for years.

The problem is not ideological but intellectual, …

Hidden Rules Of A Modest Antitrust, Ramsi Woodcock

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

Reforming antitust’s rule of reason by shifting burdens of proof to defendants will not solve antitrust’s enforcement drought. For the drought is due in part to the cost to enforcers of identifying rule of reason cases to bring and not just to the cost of winning the cases that enforcers do bring. Enforcement costs matter because enforcers’ budgets are limited—they have failed for a long time to keep up with GDP—and the rule of reason’s emphasis on case-specific effects makes it costly for enforcers to identify good cases to bring. The Supreme Court’s adoption of the rule of reason approach …

Google And Shifting Conceptions Of What It Means To Improve A Product, Ramsi Woodcock

Law Faculty Popular Media

Judges sometimes claim that they do not pick winners when they decide antitrust cases. Nothing could be further from the truth.

Competitive conduct by its nature harms competitors, and so if antitrust were merely to prohibit harm to competitors, antitrust would then destroy what it is meant to promote.

What antitrust prohibits, therefore, is not harm to competitors but rather harm to competitors that fails to improve products. Only in this way is antitrust able to distinguish between the good firm that harms competitors by making superior products that consumers love and that competitors cannot match and the bad firm …

Toward A Per Se Rule Against Price Gouging, Ramsi Woodcock

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

Price gouging is the use of high prices to ration access to a good in unexpectedly short supply. Because sellers can always recoup their costs by choosing not to ration with price and instead allowing the good to sell out, price gouging harms consumers: it transfers wealth from consumers to firms unnecessarily. This harm to consumers could violate the antitrust laws in two ways. First, it could serve as the basis for a per se rule against algorithmic price gouging — surge pricing — because the superhuman speeds with which surge pricing algorithms respond to shortages effectively shorten the period …

The Hidden Shortages Of The Market Economy, Ramsi Woodcock

Law Faculty Popular Media

If you think shortages—in goods like toilet paper, meat, and masks—came in with the pandemic, think again.

Shortages are periods during which demand exceeds supply, and they’re an inescapable feature of all markets, all the time.

When an investor bids up the price of Apple stock because none is available at current prices, that’s a shortage. When a homeowner receives multiple bids for her home, that’s a shortage. When there are “only three left in stock” on Amazon and four users click “buy,” that, too, is a shortage.

We don’t notice these quotidian shortages because sellers usually respond to them …

The Economics Of Shortages, Ramsi Woodcock

Law Faculty Popular Media

The price of food increased 2.6% in April, the largest single-month increase since 1974, but food industry executives are insisting that the country has enough food. So why are prices going up?

The explanation provided by the industry is that consumers are buying more than they need, creating shortages.

But a shortage is not a good excuse for increasing prices. Contrary to what you might have learned in Econ 101, there’s only one reason for which a shortage should give rise to higher prices: profiteering, as I explain in a forthcoming law review article.

If shortage were the only explanation …

The Antitrust Case For Consumer Primacy In Corporate Governance, Ramsi Woodcock

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

Consumers have been left out of the great debate over the mission of the firm, in which advocates of shareholder value maximization face off against advocates of corporate social responsibility, who would allow management leeway to allocate profits to workers and other non-shareholder insiders of the firm. The consumer welfare standard adopted by antitrust law in the 1970s requires that the firm allocate its profits neither to shareholders nor to workers or other firm insiders. Instead, the standard requires that firms strive to have no profits at all, by charging the lowest possible prices for the best quality products. Such …

The Efficient Queue And The Case Against Dynamic Pricing, Ramsi Woodcock

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

Surge pricing—using data and algorithms to raise prices in response to unexpected increases in demand—has spread across the economy in recent years, from Amazon, to Disney World, to commuter highways, not to mention Uber, which is infamous for surge pricing rides. Companies claim that surge pricing equilibrates supply and demand, but that is impossible, at least in the short run when demand unexpectedly outstrips supply. What surge pricing really does is to ration existing supplies based on ability to pay. That is both distributively unjust and potentially inefficient. It is also anticompetitive in the sense that it reduces the power …

The Virulence Of Free Trade, Ramsi Woodcock

Law Faculty Popular Media

Specialists know that the antitrust courses taught in law schools and economics departments have an alter ego in business curricula: the course on business strategy. The two courses cover the same material, but from opposite perspectives. Antitrust courses teach how to end monopolies; strategy courses teach how to construct and maintain them.

Strategy students go off and run businesses, and antitrust students go off and make government policy. That is probably the proper arrangement if the policy the antimonopolists make is domestic. We want the domestic economy to run efficiently, and so we want domestic policymakers to think about monopoly—and …

Digital Monopoly Without Regret, Ramsi Woodcock

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

Attacks on Amazon, Google, and Facebook have tended to ignore a key lesson of the theory of monopolistic competition: that big is not always bad. A monopolist grows large because consumers prefer the firm’s products. The only question for the antitrust laws is whether consumers prefer the monopolist’s products because the monopolist has improved its products relative to those of competitors, or because the monopolist has degraded the products of competitors without improving its own. Only product-degrading conduct is socially harmful and violative of the antitrust laws. Although a complete accounting of conduct by Amazon, Google or Facebook is not …

Big Ink V. Bigger Tech, Ramsi Woodcock

Law Faculty Popular Media

When in 2011 Paul Krugman attacked the press for bending over backwards to give equal billing to conservative experts on social security, even though the conservatives were plainly wrong, I celebrated. Social security isn’t the biggest part of the government’s budget, and calls to privatize it in order to save the country from bankruptcy were blatant fear mongering. Why should the press report those calls with a neutrality that could mislead readers into thinking the position reasonable?

Journalists’ ethic of balanced reporting looked, at the time, like gross negligence at best, and deceit at worst. But lost in the pathos …

Advertising As Monopolization In The Information Age, Ramsi Woodcock

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

Economists have long recognized that advertising has two main functions: to inform and to persuade. In the information age, the information function is obsolete, because consumers can get all the product information they want from a quick Google search. That makes virtually all advertising today purely persuasive in function. The courts have long recognized that purely persuasive advertising is anticompetitive, because it induces consumers to buy products that they do not really prefer, harming consumers and placing sellers of consumers’ preferred products at a competitive disadvantage. Antitrust enforcers must respond to the obsolescence of the information function of advertising by …

Congestion Pricing Is Class Warfare. Here's A Better Idea., Ramsi Woodcock

Law Faculty Popular Media

Plans are afoot to charge drivers to enter Manhattan. But we need a fairer way to reduce traffic.

The Elephant In The Market Power Debate, Ramsi Woodcock

Law Faculty Popular Media

Profits are the ultimate sign of market power. But for the past 40 years, economists and antitrust practitioners have disparaged the measurement of profit margins as unreliable. That needs to change, and new scholarship showing rising margins across the economy is leading the way.

Advertising Is Obsolete -- Here's Why It's Time To End It, Ramsi Woodcock

Law Faculty Popular Media

Since it first became clear that Russian agents spent thousands of dollars a month on political advertising on social media in the runup to the 2016 presidential election, Americans have been asking how the powerful advertising infrastructure run by Google and Facebook could have been thrown open to foreign agents.

But fewer have stopped to ask whether there is a good reason for this infrastructure to exist at all. Why, exactly, is it a good thing for Facebook and Google to be selling advertising to anyone, let alone Russian agents?

The obvious answer seems to be so that legitimate advertisers, …

Ohio V. Amex, Supply Chain Fairness, And The Inadequacy Of Antitrust's Consumer Welfare Standard, Ramsi Woodcock

Law Faculty Popular Media

he Supreme Court’s decision in Ohio v. American Express last week demonstrates the inadequacy of antitrust’s consumer welfare standard, which limits enforcers to challenging only anticompetitive behavior that harms consumers. Under that standard, the Court could not condemn Amex’s blatantly anticompetitive limits on the ability of merchants to encourage consumers to use less expensive credit cards because the limits sapped the bargaining power of one level of the supply chain (merchants) in their negotiations with another (a credit card company), but did not obviously harm consumers. What antitrust needs is a standard that protects the bargaining power of Americans from …

The Obsolescence Of Advertising In The Information Age, Ramsi Woodcock

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

The vast amount of product information available to consumers through online search renders most advertising obsolete as a tool for conveying product information. Advertising remains useful to firms only as a tool for persuading consumers to purchase advertised products. In the mid-twentieth century, courts applying the antitrust laws held that such persuasive advertising is anticompetitive and harmful to consumers, but the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) was unable to pursue an antitrust campaign against persuasive advertising for fear of depriving consumers of advertising’s information value. Now that the information function of most advertising is obsolete, the FTC should renew its campaign …

The Antitrust Duty To Charge Low Prices, Ramsi Woodcock

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

Over the past forty years, antitrust has come to embrace a goal of consumer welfare maximization that cannot be achieved solely through condemnation of collusive or exclusionary conduct. To address cases in which firms achieve the power to raise prices and harm consumers without engaging in collusive or exclusionary conduct, antitrust should impose a general duty on businesses to charge a price no higher than economic cost. Courts would not need to set prices to enforce this duty, because violations would be punishable only by nominal damages, and shame, rather than by an injunction setting a reasonable price. Although the …

Antitrust As Corporate Governance: Why A Firm's Mission Is To Earn No Profit, Ramsi Woodcock

Law Faculty Popular Media

The consumer welfare standard in antitrust law requires that firms maximize the margin between price and product quality, a quantity called consumer welfare by economists. This standard, adopted in the 1970s, resolves the long-running debate about which corporate constituency has a right to the profits of the firm, because profits and consumer welfare are a zero-sum game: Profits can be generated only by reducing the margin between price and quality, in effect redistributing wealth from consumers to firms. The rule that consumer welfare must be maximized therefore means that profits must be minimized. The consumer welfare standard requires that firms …

Irma Price Gouging Highlights Sad Truth: Consumer Fleecing Is The New Normal, Ramsi Woodcock

Law Faculty Popular Media

By bringing desperation to so many, Hurricane Irma is revealing a sad fact about many American companies, and not just airlines: that they have come in recent years to embrace taking advantage of desperate consumers as a central part of their business models.

The practice, called dynamic pricing, is intended to ration scarce goods and services, yet, as I show in a recent paper, it primarily harms consumers by making it easier for companies to fleece them.

Amazon's Whole Foods Deal Could Still Be Reversed Thanks To Forgotten Antitrust Case, Ramsi Woodcock

Law Faculty Popular Media

Amazon formally took ownership of Whole Foods this week after the Federal Trade Commission signaled on August 23 that it wouldn’t stop the deal.

The online retailer isn’t wasting any time remaking the high-end grocery chain in its low-price image. Its first act involved cutting prices on dozens of items, from avocados to tilapia. But that is not what is sending shivers down the aisles of rival food retailers like Walmart, which now controls 20 percent of the grocery market by pursuing just such a low-price strategy.

The reason, which the FTC ignored in providing its imprimatur, is that Amazon …

Big Data, Price Discrimination, And Antitrust, Ramsi Woodcock

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

Antitrust law today guarantees a particular distribution of wealth between consumers and firms by promoting competition in some markets, but allowing firms to retain pricing power in other markets, such as those in which a firm has achieved power through oligopoly or by fielding a superior product. By giving firms the power to identify individual consumers at the point of sale and determine the maximum price that each consumer can be made to pay for a product, big data will soon allow firms with pricing power to charge each consumer the highest price that the consumer is able to pay, …

Eu's Antitrust 'War' On Google And Facebook Uses Abandoned American Playbook, Ramsi Woodcock

Law Faculty Popular Media

On June 27, the European Union imposed a €2.4 billion (US$2.75 billion) fine on Google for giving favorable treatment in its search engine results to its own comparison shopping service. And Germany’s antitrust enforcer is investigating Facebook for asking users to sign away control over personal information.

In contrast, American antitrust enforcers have shown little interest in these companies. The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) did open an investigation into whether Google has a search bias, but closed it in 2013, despite recognizing that it “may have had the effect of harming individual competitors.”

Anti-Americanism, however, does not explain these starkly …

The Bargaining Robot, Ramsi Woodcock

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

The primary threat of the rise of the machines is not to competition itself, but to the bargaining power of consumers, given any level of competition in the market. By enabling firms to interact with each consumer on an individual basis, technology will permit firms to tailor price to the highest level each individual consumer is willing to pay and to use tailored marketing to break each consumer’s will to hold out for a better deal, reducing consumer welfare for any given level of competition. By giving consumers more outside options, the promotion of competition can limit the effects of …

Innovation And Reverse Payments, Ramsi Woodcock

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

Settlements of patent litigation between branded and generic drug makers that include a promise by the generic maker to stay out of the market, sometimes in exchange for a ‘reverse’ payment, increase the profits of drug makers at the expense of consumers. Some commentators argue that drug makers will invest these profits in innovation, ultimately making consumers better off. Drug market data suggest, however, that the resulting gains to consumers may still be insufficient to offset consumer losses from delayed access to generics. Even when innovation is taken into account, antitrust can most efficiently eliminate the risk of consumer harm …

Uncertainty And Reverse Payments, Ramsi Woodcock

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

The current approach to “reverse payment” settlements of drug patent litigation seeks to preclude only those settlements guaranteed to harm consumers, rather than all that could harm them. Antitrust tolerates the possibility of harm in order to give firms the freedom to make settlements that might benefit consumers, relative to what courts would achieve under patent law. Antitrust’s mission is not, however, to improve upon outcomes under patent law, but rather to prevent harm to consumers. Accordingly, antitrust must minimize the possibility of harm, even if that precludes the chance of gain. I show that a ban on all settlements …