[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Re[2]: your mail

  On Thu, 3 Jul 1997, Keith D Shugarman wrote:
  > Indeed, I do not recall the term "unilateral effects" ever being used in 
  > J. Hogan's carefully worded and traditional opinion.
     My appologies if I mistated something here.  I thought the opinion was
  a ringing endorsement for the FTCs case, including its empirical evidence
  of price effects relating to competition among superstores stores (and
  not-so-super office supply retailers), which a number of experts told me
  (I thought) was based a unilateral effects economic analysis.  But perhaps
  Bob Lande or Keith can educate me a bit on the difference between a
  "traditional"  opinion and the other kind.  jl
  James Love | Center for Study of Responsive Law | P.O. Box 19367,
  Washington, DC 20036 | love@cptech.org | Voice 202/387-8030 | Fax
  202/234-5176 | Current Projects: Consumer Project on Technology:
  http://www.cptech.org | Antitrust: http://www.essential.org/antitrust