Market Definition—Achieving an Integrated Analysis

Abstract

Economic analyses employed by economists to address market definition are often performed in conjunction with additional economic analyses focused on addressing other aspects of a merger. Analyses used to evaluate a merger should work together as an integrated unit, and any inconsistencies between them point to a flawed set of analyses. We review lessons from two litigated merger cases (one in Canada and one in the United States) in which the enforcement agencies adopted inconsistent positions with regard to market definition and other aspects of the case. In The Commissioner of Competition v. CCS Corp., results stemming from the competitive effects analyses were found by the Competition Tribunal in Canada to be inconsistent with the claimed geographic market. In In re Polypore International, Inc., the FTC staff sought divestiture of assets located outside the claimed geographic market, raising serious questions about the proposed geographic market, the proposed remedy, or both.