Comments on: Specter On The March

By: Antitrust Review » A Random Walk Down The Blogosphere

Antitrust Review » A Random Walk Down The Blogosphere — Fri, 16 Jun 2006 20:30:32 +0000

[…] As I am on record opposing amendment of the antitrust laws to create special standards for different industries, you can probably guess my opinion on The Oil Industry Merger Antitrust Enforcement Act which would, among other things, amend the Clayton Act so that “the burden of proof shall be on the defendant or defendants to establish by a preponderance of the evidence that the merger, acquisition, or transaction at issue will not substantially lessen competition or tend to create a monopoly” (in the case involving the “business of exploring for, producing, refining, or otherwise processing, storing, marketing, selling, or otherwise making available petroleum, oil, or natural gas, or products derived from petroleum, oil, or natural gas”). […]

By: oldhats

oldhats — Thu, 30 Mar 2006 12:50:19 +0000

And wouldn’t retroactively taxing an industry based on success strike fear into the hearts of other industries and discourage them from acheiving similar success?

By: Antitrust Review » The FTC Chairman Agrees With Me!

Antitrust Review » The FTC Chairman Agrees With Me! — Fri, 24 Mar 2006 17:22:27 +0000

[…] Last week, I reported on Sen. Specter’s proposal and wrote that “I have grave doubts about the wisdom of treating different products/markets differently under the antitrust laws because of a belief (rightly or wrongly) that the product is ‘vital’ to American consumers and the economy.” Glad to see that great minds think alike. […]

By: penn1076

penn1076 — Tue, 21 Mar 2006 23:51:05 +0000

Sorry, here is the link to the story in Forbes I referenced:

http://www.forbes.com/business/energy/2006/03/15/exxon-shell-senate-cxjh0315energy.html

By: penn1076

penn1076 — Tue, 21 Mar 2006 23:47:38 +0000

A recent article in Forbes said it was ‘hard to see how Specter’s legislation will help lower gas prices.’ This legislation, as noted at the top, is clearly in reaction to high oil company profits, yet it will do nothing to address that problem. What, then, is the point?

By: Antitrust Review » News Round Up

Antitrust Review » News Round Up — Tue, 21 Mar 2006 23:16:44 +0000

[…] Between my beloved NCAA basketball tournament and very nasty cold/fever combo, I’ve been m.i.a. the last few days. In the interim, there have been a number of comments in response to our post about Arlen Spector and his proposal to create a separate set of antitrust laws for oil companies. […]

By: oldhats

oldhats — Tue, 21 Mar 2006 14:07:01 +0000

I’m amazed that an American company can compete on a global level at all when the competition is primarily (foreign) government-owned national oil companies. Couple that with enormous costs–burdensome taxes, the cost of crude oil, R&D–and IMHO, there is no want for competition in the “oil patch.” That’s not a hospitable economic landscape on a good day.

By: penn1076

penn1076 — Mon, 20 Mar 2006 01:31:08 +0000

Another benefit of the oil mergers of the 1990s was that it enabled them to become bigger investors on the international market. As it was pointed out above, only one U.S. company ranks among the top ten companies worldwide. Additionally, seven of them are state-owned, which makes the challenge of competing with them all the more formidable. Sen. Specter and his fellow Senators should be looking for ways to help strengthen American oil companies, not hurt them.

By: andreww

andreww — Sun, 19 Mar 2006 21:31:14 +0000

There really is nothing wrong with a large corporation, especially when the competition is just as large if not even larger than them. When it comes to oil, the companies need to be large in order to maximize efficiency. Just imagine if there were 10,000 mom and pop oil companies out there. Each with one of their own oil rigs, one oil tanker, and one refinery. Just imagine how inefficient that company would be.

There is plenty of competition on the oil market right now. I do not think that tightening the restrictions on oil companies would be beneficial to the American oil market in the long term.

By: David Fischer

David Fischer — Thu, 16 Mar 2006 22:15:23 +0000

Would the right “patch” be? OPEC? See, for example, Tim Noah’s (of Slate.com) series of articles about antitrust lawsuits against OPEC here (http://www.slate.com/id/1008106/), here (http://www.slate.com/id/2061770/) and here (http://www.slate.com/id/2081361/).

Or is there even a right place for Sen. Spector to hunt?

By: Elain Loveridge

Elain Loveridge — Thu, 16 Mar 2006 19:17:13 +0000

As the world marketplace becomes more efficient, many industries require that companies scale up to effect economies of size and to assure their competitive edge. The fact that only one US oil company is in the top ten in the world suggests there is plenty of competition in the oil patch. Sen. Spector is hunting in the wrong patch.

By: Glendon Irving

Glendon Irving — Wed, 15 Mar 2006 22:44:32 +0000

Given the merger that have gone through recently, it seems we need a tightening of the standards for all industries. But it is better to end the lax standards for one industry than for none.