In the previous chapters, we explored the ecosystem of financial markets and institutions. Now, we turn to a concept so fundamental that it underpins almost every financial decision ever made: the Time Value of Money ( TVM ) . This chapter introduces the core principles, definitions, and calculations that form the bedrock of valuation . 3.1 Introduction to Time Value of Money Would you rather have €100 today or €100 one year from today? Intuitively, you would choose to have the money today. This simple preference illustrates the most important concept in finance: a dollar (or euro) today is worth more than a dollar tomorrow. This is not because of inflation , though that can be a factor. It is because of money's earning potential : If you have €100 today, you can invest it. In a year, that investment could grow to €102, €105, or even more. The €100 you receive in the future cannot be invested until you receive it, and you therefore miss out on that entire period of potential growt...
Objectives
By the end of this lecture, students should be able to:
- Understand the meaning of anti-competitive agreements
- Distinguish between horizontal and vertical agreements
- Identify common forms of cartel conduct
- Analyze agreements with anti-competitive effects
- Understand exemptions and justifications under competition law
1. Introduction to Anti-Competitive Agreements
1.1 Meaning of Anti-Competitive Agreements
Anti-competitive agreements are arrangements between two or more undertakings that have the object or effect of preventing, restricting, or distorting competition in a market. These agreements undermine market rivalry and are prohibited under most national and international competition regimes.
1.2 Legal Basis for Prohibition
Most competition laws prohibit agreements that restrict competition, whether formal or informal, written or oral. The prohibition applies regardless of whether the agreement is legally enforceable under contract law.
1.3 Importance of Regulating Agreements
Regulating anti-competitive agreements ensures that markets remain open and competitive. Without such regulation, firms could collude to fix prices, limit output, or exclude competitors, leading to consumer harm.
2. Types of Anti-Competitive Agreements
2.1 Horizontal Agreements
2.1.1 Meaning of Horizontal Agreements
Horizontal agreements are arrangements between undertakings operating at the same level of the production or distribution chain. These agreements are particularly harmful because they involve direct competitors.
2.1.2 Cartels
Cartels are the most serious form of horizontal agreements. They involve collusion between competitors to eliminate competition and maximise collective profits.
Common cartel practices include:
Cartels are generally considered illegal per se due to their harmful effects on competition and consumers.
2.1.3 Price-Fixing Agreements
Price-fixing occurs when competitors agree to set prices at a certain level rather than allowing market forces to determine prices. This practice removes price competition and leads to higher prices for consumers.
2.1.4 Market Allocation
Market allocation involves competitors dividing markets among themselves by territory, customers, or product lines. This eliminates competition within allocated markets.
2.2.1 Meaning of Vertical Agreements
Vertical agreements are arrangements between undertakings operating at different levels of the supply chain, such as manufacturers and distributors. While not always harmful, some vertical agreements may restrict competition.
2.2.2 Resale Price Maintenance
Resale price maintenance occurs when a supplier sets the minimum or fixed price at which a distributor must resell a product. This restricts price competition at the retail level.
2.2.3 Exclusive Dealing
Exclusive dealing arrangements require a distributor to purchase goods exclusively from one supplier. While sometimes efficiency-enhancing, such arrangements may foreclose market access for competitors.
2.2.4 Tying and Bundling
Tying occurs when the sale of one product is conditional on the purchase of another. Bundling involves selling products together as a package. These practices may restrict competition if they exclude rivals.
3. Analysis of Anti-Competitive Agreements
3.1 Object-Based Restrictions
Some agreements are considered anti-competitive by their very nature. These include cartels and price-fixing arrangements. Authorities do not need to prove actual harm if the object of the agreement is clearly anti-competitive.
3.2 Effect-Based Restrictions
Other agreements are assessed based on their effects on competition. Authorities examine whether the agreement has or is likely to have a significant adverse effect on market competition.
3.3 Market Power and Context
The assessment of effects depends on market structure, the parties’ market power, and barriers to entry. Agreements involving firms with little market power may not significantly harm competition.
4. Exemptions and Justifications
4.1 Efficiency Justifications
Certain agreements may be exempted if they generate efficiency gains that outweigh their restrictive effects. These efficiencies may include cost reductions, innovation, or improved distribution.
4.2 Consumer Benefit Requirement
To qualify for exemption, efficiency gains must benefit consumers through lower prices, improved quality, or increased choice.
4.3 Indispensability and Proportionality
Restrictions must be necessary and proportionate to achieve the claimed efficiencies. Agreements that impose unnecessary restrictions will not qualify for exemption.
4.4 Block Exemptions
Some jurisdictions provide block exemptions for categories of agreements, particularly certain vertical agreements, provided specific conditions are met.
5. Enforcement and Penalties
5.1 Investigation of Agreements
Competition authorities investigate anti-competitive agreements through dawn raids, document reviews, and witness interviews. Leniency programmes encourage cartel members to report illegal conduct.
5.2 Sanctions and Remedies
Penalties for anti-competitive agreements may include heavy fines, nullification of agreements, and in some jurisdictions, criminal sanctions for individuals.
5.3 Private Enforcement
Victims of anti-competitive conduct may bring private actions for damages. Private enforcement complements public enforcement and enhances deterrence.
6. International Case Laws on Anti-Competitive Agreements
6.1 Hartford Fire Insurance Co v California (1993) – USA
- The court held that U.S. antitrust law could apply to foreign conduct that producessubstantial effects within the United States.
6.2 F Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd v Empagran SA (2004) – USA
- This case clarified the limits of extraterritorial application of antitrust law, holding thatforeign plaintiffs must show a direct domestic effect.
6.3 Microsoft (2007) – European Union
- The European Commission found that Microsoft abused its market position through restrictive agreements, reinforcing the prohibitionof anti-competitive practices in digital markets.
7. Conclusion of Lecture 2
7.1 Summary
This lecture examined anti-competitive agreements, focusing on horizontal and vertical arrangements, methods of analysis, exemptions, and enforcement. Such agreements pose a serious threat to market competition and consumer welfare.
7.2 Link to Next Lecture
The next lecture will focus on *abuse of dominance*, examining dominant market positions and conduct that unlawfully restricts competition.
➡ Next Lecture: Lecture 3 – Abuse of Dominance
Anti-Competitive Agreements /E-cyclopedia Resources by Kateule Sydney is licensed under CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments
Post a Comment