ADVERTISEMENT



Google       

Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Corporate & Securities Law Blogs -> Truth on the Market

OR PHONE (866) 635-1838 for Bankruptcy Help, (866) 635-6190 for Divorce,
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense

Find a Local Lawyer

Bankruptcy (866) 635-1838
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402

Bookmark

Corporate & Securities Law

: Truth on the Market

Fair Search’s Google-ITA Video

ADVERTISEMENTS

A link to the video is available here.

The video has all of the standard ingredients of a competitor complaint:  (1) a slogan (“Stand with Bob”), (2) anti-corporate rhetoric (“Freedom not Google Profit!”), and (3) appeals to provocative statements from a CEO.   Meanwhile, Google rivals have also turned their attention to Congress.  I suppose the video format is new.

As I’ve written before, there is nothing out of the ordinary for rivals to compete with appeals to the government to bring an enforcement action against a rival.

Complaints from rivals are fairly predictable.  We expect less efficient rivals to turn to the government agencies when competition on the merits puts them at a disadvantage.  Of course, we can also expect complaints from rivals when the defendant is engaging in exclusionary conduct that may put the rival out of business.  The point is that ? without more ? pointing to Google?s market share and adding competitor complaints to the mix does not suggest or create any inference of competitive harm.  As Expedia?s lawyer knows quite well, the distinction between harm to rivals coupled with speculative theories about harm to competition on the one hand and hard evidence of the latter on the other is one that lies at the center of antitrust jurisprudence.

Here’s a Google’s spokesperson’s explanation of the motives for the merger:

When someone does a Google search for ?flights from Boston to Miami,? we?d like to provide not just 10 blue links but exact flight times and prices as well. ITA will help us do that, while sending more traffic to airline and online travel websites where consumers can buy tickets.  So far, the only critics of this deal are competitors, not consumers, and the laws aren?t intended to protect companies from competition.?

The last point is key.  Google has also addressed Fair Search’s contentions in a blog post of their own.

Videos and slogans warning of potential effects of the merger will have no sway with the DOJ, whose analytical focus will be on a rigorous consumer welfare analysis.  In this case, I suspect the analysis is relatively straightforward and the merger will be approved — perhaps with a press release highlighting the fact that Google has (already) promised to respect ITA’s existing contracts.


Filed under: antitrust, economics, google, merger guidelines, mergers & acquisitions, technology

Full post as published by Truth on the Market on November 17, 2010 (boomark / email).

Bloggers, promote your law blog by nominating your blog for inclusion in USLaw.com's Law Blog Directory and RSS Reader. Benefits described.
Related Law Articles

Lawsuits and Settlements

Related Searches

























































































































US Law
#1 Online Legal Resource













Your Blog Subscriptions
Subscribe to blogs

10,000+ Law Job Listings
Lawyer . Police . Paralegal . Etc
Earn a law-related degree
Are you the author of this blog? Adding USLaw.com to your Blogroll increases relevance. You qualify to display a USLaw Network badge.
Suggest changes to this blog's description or nominate another for inclusion. Register for updates.


Practice Area
Zip Code:

Contact a Lawyer Now!






0.0022 secs (from cache 11/03/26 13:00:19)