Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Advanced Micro Devices - Moderated (AMD) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: combjelly who wrote (252042)	5/19/2008 4:55:45 PM
From: Sarmad Y. Hermiz	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

>> Now, if you take FPG's suggestion and actually google the term, you will find that it definitely is a US legal concept also. And has been for a while. << I have read several summaries of cases on pricing in the US. They are clear in stating the standard in the US is "average variable cost". If you can find something different, please post it. AMD's position is usually cited as the position that is rejected. Specifically ninth circuit, which had a wide ranging opinion, that the supreme court has allowed to stand. Taking your suggestion, and reading what some economist says courts should do, is not as useful as reading what courts have in fact done.

To: combjelly who wrote (252042)	5/20/2008 6:32:26 AM
From: Sarmad Y. Hermiz	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

>> Sigh. It just gives a good explanation of the concept. A good explanation of a rejected concept. You may want to see the bolded part in the reference paper. papers.ssrn.com Most of the recent antitrust claims involving loyalty programs have involved use of such programs at the wholesale level. In the remainder of this Section, we examine these recent cases and the economic theories of harm underlying the claims. These cases were chosen because they involve volume discounts with customer specific thresholds. In Part a, we examine the single product case with near exclusionary volume discounts in Barry Wright v. ITT Grinnell and Brooke Group v. Brown & Williamson. The first case involved an above cost volume discount that was based on buyers agreeing to take nearly all of their requirements from one seller. In the second, the Supreme Court set out high hurdles for a plaintiff to prevail in a predation case involving individualized below cost volume discounts. Part b examines the use of market share discounts in Concord Boat. All three cases resulted in judgment for the defendant, and all stress a focus on the actual facts or realities of the marketplace rather than on hypotheticals.