I have a different take on how we arrived at the horribly rotten outcome in the Paramount case. The Trump administration’s deal with the Hollywood giant is only one example of his interference in DOJ's investigations. In several instances, career staff, tasked with enforcing the antitrust laws and often with decades of experience of doing just that, have been sidelined by their politically appointed bosses. Given Trump's transactional nature, and given evidence of a quid-pro-quo for other regulatory relief, it is time to start asking how to prevent the monetization of the White House. My latest via @TheSlingOrg. (Link to follow)

Tuesday is coming fast (and if anyone has tips for not losing your voice while talking all day and night I need them) but one of the absolute best part of this journey is talking to people who have already read your book! Don’t miss this fantastic convo with @halsinger and @DylanGyauchL

Cali AG Rob Bonta's awful decision to let the comically anticompetitive Paramount/WB merger happen doesn't just spell disaster for entertainment and media. It clouds a once-hopeful picture of state antitrust enforcement. New from me in @TheSlingOrg thesling.org/can-state-antit…

The concentration numbers were sufficiently high. Tho the best theory of harm was on the worker side, as spelled out in this @TheSlingOrg piece. Yet the states neglected to include that (monopsony) theory in their complaint. It's a bad day for the anti-monopoly movement. thesling.org/hollywoods-labo…

Had the pleasure of interviewing Lindsay Owens (@owenslindsay1), about her new book, "Gouged: The End of a Fair Price--And What That Means for Your Wallet" on The Slingshot. Here's a snippet where Lindsay explains the simple yet powerful role of the price tag in protecting consumers. And how surveillance pricing threatens that protection. Go give it a listen!

I look forward to working with its editors and contributors to help publish ideas on the issues shaping the field. If you’re interested in contributing to The Sling, submit your work here: thesling.org/submissions/. Law students are welcome to submit, too! 2/2

Excited to share that I’ve joined the @TheSlingOrg’s newly formed editorial board. Since its launch in 2022, The Sling has built a distinctive forum for antitrust commentary that challenges conventional thinking about economics, democracy, law, and liberty. 1/2

Fun piece by sports economist @wagesofwins (David Berri) in @TheSlingOrg, asking why sports owners don't put their money with their mouth is and go on strike. Maybe because they don't generate any real value? 🤷‍♂️ thesling.org/why-dont-the-sp…

Cool new piece in @TheSlingOrg by @DeveshKRay that explores the impact of driverless taxis by comparing trips per hour (using a driver) in cities exposed and not exposed (e.g., New York City) to autonomous fleets. Go check it out! thesling.org/a-union-born-to…

In case you missed this yesterday. Antitrust and guns.

And for those interested in diving deeper into this issue, here’s a link to Hudson’s report. cdn.prod.website-files.com/6…

Had a good time interviewing Hudson Munoz, Executive Director of Guns Down America, about his new report on how large gun retailers are keeping gun prices inflated through a scheme that amounts to price fixing. Are high gun prices a bad thing? Well go watch our nerdy chat, with great commentary by my co-host Darren Bush. thesling.org/video/slingshot…

In today's Sling, @eyreflare discusses antitrust efficiencies claims as they apply in creative industries. In other words, such as in Paramount-Warner Brothers merger. Check it out! thesling.org/the-efficiencie…

The economic debate over what caused inflation to surge in 2021-22 pits two dueling hypotheses: (1) a shifting out of the demand curve or (2) a change in firm conduct. The most common explanation of (2) is a form of *tacit* price coordination--that is, firms raised prices in excess of costs under the cover of a crisis, aka "profiteering," "gouging," or "sellers' inflation." Largely overlooked in the debate is the contribution of *explicit* price-fixing in major consumer-facing sectors of the economy such as rents (think RealPage) and food (think Agri Stats). It's important to resolve this debate, as the policy implications for combating inflation are very different depending on what ultimately caused prices to spike in this period.

The kernel of his idea is that evidence of rising margins or profits' contribution to value added could also be explained by rising demand. Yet he never offers any proof in support of his alternative hypothesis. Instead, he critiques the evidence in support of profit-inflation (or what @IsabellaMWeber calls "sellers' inflation"). He also proposes an evidentiary requirement for a change in firm conduct to have caused inflation--namely, that a rash of cartels must have formed precisely in 2021 or 2022. We explain why such a requirement is not needed, and even if it were, there was in fact a rash of price-fixing complaints and settlements in the real estate and food industries in the same period.

In the aftermath of Covid crisis, a heterodox theory of inflation took hold, which blamed corporations for using the fog of a crisis to raise prices in excess of any cost increase and generally coordinate on pricing. Some industrial organization economists believe it is their job to defend corporations and deflect blame for price hikes on rising demand. One such economist was able to publish his critique in a peer-reviewed journal. With Rafay Abit, I review his paper here (link in thread below).

In case you missed it yesterday: The HPE-Juniper decision to enter the consent decree is deeply flawed and misunderstands the Tunney Act, writes Darren Bush.

What's wrong with the Judge Pitts' HPE-Juniper decision to enter the consent decree? Everything, Darren Bush writes in his latest Sling post. thesling.org/the-fatally-fla…

This blatant omission by the DOJ of potential alternative settlements in HPE-Juniper is damning. The court excuses it outright. For instance, @econliberties, quoted throughout the Opinion, would have argued that at minimum the Court should reinstate price caps agreed to by HPE.