Alleged violations of either Sherman ?2's antimonopoly strictures or Clayton ?7's proscriptions against anticompetitive mergers, necessarily involve a particular product, and must occur in a particular place. That is, the plaintiff in either a ?2 or ?7 suit must define a relevant market within which the violation alleged has occurred.' Even in the most mundane antitrust analysis, however, market definition is rarely readily accomplished and unaccompanied by a series of caveats, and the possibility of the opposing parties in an antitrust suit failing to contest each other's proffered definition is virtually nil.2 Because economists, from
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ira Horowitz (1981) studied this question.