The Horizontal Merger Guidelines of 1992

The 1992 Horizontal Merger Guidelines of the Department of Justice and the Federal Trade Commission outline an enforcement policy which makes a long overdue break with its predecessors in awarding no decisive or predominant role to market concentration as a criterion of anticompetitive effect. However, the new policy does not provide an adequate substitute criterion: the tests that it prescribes for screening merger proposals are so specified that a potentially large proportion of anticompetitive mergers can escape challenge without showing any promise of improving efficiency. The time is ripe for a comprehensive inquiry aimed at formulating a more satisfactory policy.     

Sarbanes–Oxley Act and patterns in stock returns around executive stock option exercise disclosures

We document negative stock returns and elevated trading volumes around executives’ early option exercise disclosures post‐SOX, but not pre‐SOX. This stock price reaction is incomplete, and the negative stock price drift is smaller post‐SOX compared to pre‐SOX. We also show effects of media coverage in the stock price response to exercise disclosures in the post‐SOX period. These findings provide evidence that the requirement mandated by SOX to disclose executives’ stock option exercises within two business days, and the increased media coverage, improves investors’ ability to incorporate into stock prices in a timely fashion the information conveyed by these exercises.     

Central American Borders at the Core of the Regional Integration Process

At the beginning of the 2000 decade, boundaries are at the heart of the Central American reality. Three of four conflicts listed for the American continent by the International Boundaries Research Unit (IBRU) in 2004 were occurring in the isthmus. Since the end of the 1980s, the states of this area have initiated a process of democratic pacification and regional economic integration. The diplomatic relations maintained by these neighbouring states are an essential element of this process, yet their shared borders, so often an object of national tension, are still prone to conflict. Over the past few years, Central American borders have been the subject of new research, due to both renewed regional and increased world interest in this topic. This renewed interest is accompanied by Central American authorities' interest in encouraging binational co-operation. The aim of this paper is to examine the Central American boundary-design process and present the causes of the still-existing border disputes, with the intention of understanding better what is at stake today in the promotion of trans-border co-operation on the scale of the Central American region. Rather than focus on the classic territorial view of boundaries as dividers and as mechanisms for defusing conflicts between states, this article concentrates on the awakening of political wills that has resulted in the emergence of transnational relations and thus given value to Central American borders as privileged spaces of interaction. The Central American case is used to try to illustrate how the synthesis of the theories of boundary studies and border studies can be both positive and stimulating.     

Department of justice and federal trade commission: Horizontal Merger Guidelines

Department of justice and federal trade commission: Horizontal Merger Guidelines     

The vertical restraints guidelines of the department of justice

In January, 1985, the Department of Justice issued Vertical Restraints Guidelines intended to clarify the legal status of vertical restraints, which had remained indefinite since the Supreme Court had declared in 1977 that the “rule of reason” was applicable to a large class of these restraints, and to outline an enforcement policy fair to all concerned and economically justified. The guidelines are mainly concerned with the two most controversial types of arrangement: territorial or customer restraints and exclusive dealing arrangements. Separately treated are tying arrangements, where the enforcement policy strictly follows lines indicated by a recent Supreme Court decision. A large part of the text of the guidelines is devoted to a detailed explanation of ways in which a given vertical restraint may be freed from the suspicion of anticompetitive effect. The analysis employs defective tests for anticompetitive impact and does not deal adequately with practices with both good and bad effects. Therefore, the guidelines do not appear to have accomplished their stated purpose.     

Paths to Common Ground? A Rejoinder to Dewey's Response

While subsequent discussion in this Review has failed to reconcile the merger policies proposed by Dewey and Keyes, it has suggested that they are not as far apart as they seemed at first reading. It now appears that both writers advocate a serious critical consideration of the efficiencies claims advanced by proponents of otherwise unacceptable mergers. Moreover, there may be a possibility that Dewey's special large-firm merger control could be defended on grounds which would not conflict with Keyes' proposal but would simply complement it.     

The new merger guidelines of the department of justice

The statement of antitrust enforcement criteria regarding mergers issued by the Justice Department in June 1982 embodies not only a significant change in policy but also an important improvement in the quality of the underlying economic analysis. The statement clearly sets forth the overall objective of the policy, its underlying rationale, and the criteria to be followed in deciding whether to proceed against horizontal and non-horizontal mergers respectively. As compared with the 1968 Guidelines, the new statement devotes less attention to long-term economic effects, contemplates a more extensive “behind-the-scenes” consideration of economic benefits, and confines probable challenge to a smaller range of transactions. Neither set of criteria provides a satisfactory basis for predicting the actual incidence of enforcement; neither is based on a demonstration that the implied policy will probably produce net economic benefit. The valuable contribution of the new statement to both law and economics is its realistic treatment of the problem of market definition.