,,,The Fatal Economic Flaws of the Contemporary Campaign Against Vertical Integration

Among law and economics scholars it has long been a settled matter that vertical integration-whether partial integration by contract or full integration by merger-is typically procompetitive (or, at the very least, competitively ambiguous, and problematic in only very limited, stylized, and theoretical circumstances). 1 One after another, old case law and outdated economic theories of vertical harm have crumbled, effectively moving what was once a judicial stance of per se illegality to one of near per se legality for such conduct.2 Even vertical mergers-the ultimate vertical restraint-have been consistently viewed by scholars and courts as generally procompetitive, supported by substantial empirical literature.