The manner in which the price information was shared among the rival oligopolists when collusion among oligopolists has facilitated sharing of information and the reason that the court found these actions to be an antitrust violation. The U. S. Supreme Court interpreted the anti-trust law by reading the case summary of U.S v. U. S. Gypsum Co. et al. (438 U. S. 422), that is available in website www.stolaf.edu/people/becker/anitrust/summaries/438us422.htm .

Question

Want to see the full answer?

Answer 1

Question

Chapter 12, Problem 7E

To determine

To Explain: The manner in which the price information was shared among the rival oligopolists when collusion among oligopolists has facilitated sharing of information and the reason that the court found these actions to be an antitrust violation. The U. S. Supreme Court interpreted the anti-trust law by reading the case summary of U.S v. U. S. Gypsum Co. et al. (438 U. S. 422), that is available in website www.stolaf.edu/people/becker/anitrust/summaries/438us422.htm.

Expert Solution & Answer

Want to see the full answer?

Check out a sample textbook solution

See solution

Students have asked these similar questions

According to the Federal Trade Commission, “Many mergers benefit competition and consumers by allowing firms to operate more efficiently. But some mergers change market dynamics in ways that can lead to higher prices, fewer or lower-quality goods or services, or less innovation.” Antitrust laws often allow the former pro-competitive types of mergers, but prohibit the latter anti-competitive types. Suppose that one looks over the historical record of antitrust enforcement and finds that while the authorities have permitted some mergers and blocked others, the industry’s average price has tended to fall whenever a merger has been permitted and occurred. a) Based solely on the information provided above, is it correct then to infer that the antitrust authorities should have been more lenient and permitted more mergers? Why or why not? b) Based solely on the information in the question, is it likely that these merged firms sell products that are substitutes or complements? Why

Why do the United States and many other countries have antitrust laws? What’s so harmful about oligopoly that it warrants an entire body of law?

The following table shows the maximum amount five potential car buyers are willing to pay for each level of sales. Suppose that the cars are being sold by a car dealer operating as a monopoly (perhaps because there are no other car dealers in the market). Maximum Amount He or She Would Pay for the Car Buyer 1 $40,000 Buyer 2 $35,000 Buyer 3 $30,000 Buyer 4 $25,000 Buyer 5 $20,000 a) If the price of the car is $30,000, the revenue will be $............thousand.b) If the marginal cost of each car is $20,000. The monopolistic car dealer will want to sell 3 cars and the price will be $................. thousand.c) In a perfectly competitive market, the number of cars sold would be 5 cars. Note:- Do not provide handwritten solution. Maintain accuracy and quality in your answer. Take care of plagiarism. Answer completely. You will get up vote for sure.