期刊文献+

论掠夺性定价行为的认定方法 被引量:1

On Affirming Methods of Predatory Pricing
在线阅读 下载PDF
导出
摘要 掠夺性定价是反垄断法上最复杂、最难以认定的滥用市场势力的行为。本文先探讨掠夺性定价行为的概念、存在性及其与正常竞争行为在外在表现形式上的相似性,在此基础上探讨掠夺性定价行为的认定方法及其运用。 Predatory pricing is a kind of behavior abusing market power which is the most complicated and difficult to be affirmed in anti - monopoly law. This article discusses affinming methods of predatory pricing and its application after discussing its conception, existence and its extemal performance forms similar to normal competition.
出处 《江西师范大学学报(哲学社会科学版)》 2006年第5期94-98,共5页 Journal of Jiangxi Normal University(Philosophy and Social Sciences Edition)
关键词 掠夺性定价 正常竞争 认定方法 predatory pricing normal competition affirming methods
  • 相关文献

参考文献13

  • 1[1]John,S.McGee,"Predatory Pricing Revisited",Journal of Law and Economics,Vol.23,No.2,1980,p.289.
  • 2[1]完全信息条件下的掠夺定价模型主要参见 John S.McGee,Predatory Price Cutting:the Standard Oil(N.J.)Case,Journal of Law and Economics,1,1958,pp.137-69; Robert H.Bork,The Antitrust Paradox:a Policy at War with Itself,New York:Basic Books,1978; Frank H.Easterbrook,Predatory Strategies and Counterstrategies,University of Chicago Law Review,48(2),1981,pp.263-337.
  • 3[2]Roger Selten,"The Chain Store Paradox",Theory and Decision,Vol.9,1978,pp.127-159.
  • 4[5]Roland H.Koller,"The Myth of Predatory Pricing-An Empirical Study",Antitrust Law and Economics Review,Vol.4,No.4,1971,p105.
  • 5[6]William J.Baumol and Janusz A.Ordover,"Use of Antitrust to Subvert Competition",The Journal of Law and Economics,Vol.28,No.1,1985,pp.247-266.
  • 6[2]Gellhorn,E.and William E.Kovacic (1994),Antitrust Law and Economics in a Nutshell.4th edition,West Publishing Co.p.137.
  • 7[4]Phillip Areeda and Donald Turner,"Predatory Pricing and Related Practices under Section 2 of the Sherman Act",Harvard Law Review Vol.88,1975,pp.698-699.
  • 8[2]Williamson,O.E.,Markets and Hierarchies:Analysis and Antitrust Implications,New York:Free Press,1975,pp.208-233.
  • 9[3]Ibid,at 234-247.
  • 10[4]Phillip Areeda and Donald Turner,"Predatory Pricing and Related Practices under Section 2 of the Sherman Act",Harvard Law Review Vol.88,1975,p.699.

同被引文献2

引证文献1

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部