2019
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijindorg.2019.102537
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Effects of antitrust prosecution on retail fuel prices

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
5
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

2
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 8 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 47 publications
0
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…There are increasing voices claiming, that cartel fines may not be sufficient to deter future cartels (Bigoni et al, 2012;Allain et al, 2015;or Smuda, 2013). Moreover, González and Moral (2019) find evidence in the Spanish retail petrol market that cartel fines are followed by increased prices, with potential explanation that penalised firms pass on the fine to consumers. there is debate on whether cartel fines are sufficient to deter cartels.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…There are increasing voices claiming, that cartel fines may not be sufficient to deter future cartels (Bigoni et al, 2012;Allain et al, 2015;or Smuda, 2013). Moreover, González and Moral (2019) find evidence in the Spanish retail petrol market that cartel fines are followed by increased prices, with potential explanation that penalised firms pass on the fine to consumers. there is debate on whether cartel fines are sufficient to deter cartels.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…We exclude from our data set those gas stations that operate on the Canary and Balearic Islands, as well as gas cooperatives and other stations that do not sell to the public. The data was collected before midnight, if any station changes the price more than once in a given day, the price collected would be the last price of the day (see González and Moral [2] for more details).…”
Section: Experimental Design Materials and Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It follows that the Spanish Competition Authority should pay attention to Cepsa, even when it does not exceed the 30% market threshold, because it is responsible for welfare-reducing through decreased competition. This firm's behavior could include hidden collusive practices, a plausible account given that Repsol, Cepsa and three other minor operators were sanctioned in February 2015 for maintaining collusive agreements that softened competition between their respective gas stations (González and Moral, 2019).…”
Section: Friendly Competitorsmentioning
confidence: 99%