User talk:AchalOza: Difference between revisions

From AntitrustWorldWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
← Older edit
AchalOza (talk | contribs)
861 edits
No edit summary
AchalOza (talk | contribs)
861 edits
Egypt 2005 - Defenses
 
(11 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
== Vietnam 2005 Tying ==
== Algeria 2003 Obstacles to Entry ==


''Does a prohibition against agreements imposing trading conditions on other parties count as a prohibition against tying?''
''Below is Algeria's definition of dominance (using Google Translator).  Does this sound like obstacles to entry language?  Perhaps we should have a translator look at it.''


--[[User:AchalOza|AchalOza]] 14:51, 19 July 2007 (EDT)
Article 3(c) - Dominant Position: the position allowing a company to hold, on the market in question, a position of economic power which '''gives him the capacity to make obstacle with the maintenance of an effective competition''', by providing him the possibility of independent behaviors in an appreciable measurement with respect to its competitors, of its customers or its suppliers;


Hylton: no, this is a prohibition against resale price maintenance.  --[[User:AchalOza|AchalOza]] 20:28, 23 July 2007 (EDT)
--[[User:AchalOza|AchalOza]] 08:01, 11 September 2007 (EDT)


== Vietnam 2005 Dom. Efficiency Defense ==
== Algeria 2000 Tying ==


''Would this imply any sort of efficiency defense?''
''One of the criteria for establishing a dominant position includes being able to create advantageous contractual bonds.  Would this just be another abusive act prohibition, or tying under RTP?  Or should this be nothing since it's just establishing what is a dominant position and doesn't say it's an abusive act? The text below was translated with Google.''


"Several of these practices [by dominant firms] are not prohibited per se but
Article 2 - The criteria of determination of the dominant position of an economic agent on a market or a market segment of goods or services are in particular: financial, contractual bonds or in fact which bind the economic agent to one or more economic agents and which get advantages of any nature to him;
are prohibited if they actually cause loss to consumers or
have the intention of harming competition. However, no
criteria or guidelines for assessing such effect or
intentions are set out."


--[[User:AchalOza|AchalOza]] 15:21, 19 July 2007 (EDT)
--[[User:AchalOza|AchalOza]] 08:08, 11 September 2007 (EDT)


Hylton: no, this is not a defense.  For the purposes of this study, we are not differentiating between per se and rule of reasons tests.  --[[User:AchalOza|AchalOza]] 13:48, 23 July 2007 (EDT)
== Egypt 2005 - Collusive Tendering ==


== Yugoslavia 1996 Divestitures ==
Article 6(c) - "Coordinating with regard to proceeding or refraining from participating in tenders, auctions, negotiations and other calls for procurement."


''Divestitures?''
--[[User:AchalOza|AchalOza]] 00:49, 8 October 2007 (EDT)


Article 6(1) - "When the Anti-Monopoly Commission finds that an economic agent has misused its monopolistic or
== Egypt 2005 - Defenses ==
dominant position on the market or concluded a monopolistic accord, it shall render a decision
ordering the economic agent concerned '''to take appropriate steps towards eliminating the established
irregularities or deficiencies'''."


--[[User:AchalOza|AchalOza]] 16:49, 19 July 2007 (EDT)
'''Article 9'''


Based on Hylton's comments re: Venezuela, this is not sufficient for divestiture. --[[User:AchalOza|AchalOza]] 20:30, 23 July 2007 (EDT)
The provisions of this Law shall not apply to public utilities managed by the State.


== Mali 1992 Predatory Pricing ==
The Authority may, upon the request of the concerned parties, exempt some or all the acts provided for in articles 6 [on Restrictive Trade Practices], 7 [on Restrictive Trade Practices] and 8 [on Dominance] regarding public utilities that are managed by companies subject to the Private Law where this is in the public interest or for attaining benefits to the consumers that exceed the effects of restricting the freedom of competition. This shall be done in accordance with the regulations and procedures set out by the Executive Regulation of this Law.


''Looks like predatory pricing:''
--[[User:AchalOza|AchalOza]] 00:58, 8 October 2007 (EDT)
 
Article 17 - "[The following is a prohibited act:] the sale at a loss. [It is] regarded as sale at a loss, any resale in the state of goods or products at a price lower than its effective purchase price."
 
--[[User:AchalOza|AchalOza]] 06:50, 23 July 2007 (EDT)
 
== Mali 1992 Predatory Pricing Defense ==
 
''The statute seems to allow a type of efficiency defense for predatory pricing, however they do not have a broader dominance efficiency defense.  How should I code this, I'm leaning towards as a comment to price setting.''
 
Article 17 - "[The following] are not aimed by this measurement [prohibiting predatory pricing]: (1) resale of non durable products since they are threatened of fast detoriation; (2) voluntary or forced resale, moved by the suspension or the change of a commercial activity."
 
--[[User:AchalOza|AchalOza]] 06:53, 23 July 2007 (EDT)
 
Hylton: do not include this as an efficiency defense, instead just mention it as a comment in price setting.  --[[User:AchalOza|AchalOza]] 13:41, 23 July 2007 (EDT)

Latest revision as of 04:58, 8 October 2007

Algeria 2003 Obstacles to Entry

Below is Algeria's definition of dominance (using Google Translator). Does this sound like obstacles to entry language? Perhaps we should have a translator look at it.

Article 3(c) - Dominant Position: the position allowing a company to hold, on the market in question, a position of economic power which gives him the capacity to make obstacle with the maintenance of an effective competition, by providing him the possibility of independent behaviors in an appreciable measurement with respect to its competitors, of its customers or its suppliers;

--AchalOza 08:01, 11 September 2007 (EDT)

Algeria 2000 Tying

One of the criteria for establishing a dominant position includes being able to create advantageous contractual bonds. Would this just be another abusive act prohibition, or tying under RTP? Or should this be nothing since it's just establishing what is a dominant position and doesn't say it's an abusive act? The text below was translated with Google.

Article 2 - The criteria of determination of the dominant position of an economic agent on a market or a market segment of goods or services are in particular: financial, contractual bonds or in fact which bind the economic agent to one or more economic agents and which get advantages of any nature to him;

--AchalOza 08:08, 11 September 2007 (EDT)

Egypt 2005 - Collusive Tendering

Article 6(c) - "Coordinating with regard to proceeding or refraining from participating in tenders, auctions, negotiations and other calls for procurement."

--AchalOza 00:49, 8 October 2007 (EDT)

Egypt 2005 - Defenses

Article 9

The provisions of this Law shall not apply to public utilities managed by the State.

The Authority may, upon the request of the concerned parties, exempt some or all the acts provided for in articles 6 [on Restrictive Trade Practices], 7 [on Restrictive Trade Practices] and 8 [on Dominance] regarding public utilities that are managed by companies subject to the Private Law where this is in the public interest or for attaining benefits to the consumers that exceed the effects of restricting the freedom of competition. This shall be done in accordance with the regulations and procedures set out by the Executive Regulation of this Law.

--AchalOza 00:58, 8 October 2007 (EDT)

Retrieved from "https://antitrustworldwiki.com/antitrustwiki/index.php?title=User_talk:AchalOza&oldid=1780"