Ex-Post Merger Evaluation in the UK Retail Market for Books

Abstract

This paper empirically evaluates the price effects of the merger of two major book retail chains in the UK: Waterstone's and Ottakar's. We employ differences-in-differences techniques and use a rich dataset containing monthly scanner data information on a sample of 200 books sold in 60 stores in 50 different local markets for a period of four years around the merger. Since retail mergers may have either local or national effects (or both) according to the level at which retail chains set prices, we undertake an ex-post assessment of the impact of the merger at both levels. At the local level, we compare the changes in the average price charged before and after the merger in the shops located in overlap areas -i.e. areas where both chains were present before the merger-and in non-overlap areas -i.e. areas where only one chain was present before the merger. At the national level, we employ two distinct control groups to evaluate the merger, namely the competitors and the top-selling titles. We find that the merger did not result in an increase in prices either at the local or at the national level. We also perform heterogeneous treatment effects estimations in order to assess whether the effect of the merger differs along various dimensions of heterogeneity that are present in our data.Keywords: Mergers, Ex-post Evaluation, Book market, Retail sector JEL Classification: K21, L24, L44, D22, O32 * Corresponding author: Elena Argentesi, Department of Economics, University of Bologna, Piazza Scaravilli 2, 40126 Bologna, Italy, Tel: + 39 051 2098661, Fax: +39 051 2098040, E-Mail: elena.argentesi@unibo.it. This paper is partially based on a research project we undertook for the UK Competition Commission (CC). Paolo Buccirossi and Cristiana Vitale were coauthors of that report and offered continuous guidance for this paper; therefore we extend our sincere gratitude for their council and contributions. We are also grateful to Luca Barbarito, Peter Haan, Cristian Huse, Adam Lederer, Chiara Monfardini, Massimo Motta, Amrita Ray Chaudhuri, and Daniel Rubinfeld for very useful suggestions. We gratefully acknowledge comments from

A Retrospective Evaluation of the GDF/Suez Merger: Effects on Gas Hub Prices

“…Before we explain in detail our identification strategy, it is worth noting that when mergers are subject to authorisation, it is common in the retrospective evaluation literature to consider the date of the decision as the main relevant date to assess the effect of the merger (see for instance Choné and Linnemer, 2012;Björnerstedt and Verboven, 2016;Aguzzoni et al, 2016). In the case under consideration, there was a time lapse of more than one-and-a-half-years between the Commission's decision and the actual consummation of the merger and its remedies.…”

Merger Efficiency Gains: Evidence from a Large Transport Merger in France

“…In particular, many studies exploit the growing availability of data and features of the retailing sector to assess large mergers in Europe (e.g. Aguzzoni et al (2014); Aguzzoni et al (2016); Allain et al (2017)) and in the U.S. (e.g. Ashenfelter and Hosken (2010); Ashenfelter et al (2013); Ashenfelter et al (2015)).…”

Abuse of Dominance and Antitrust Enforcement in the German Electricity Market

“…Developments in both the academic literature (e.g., Aguzzoni et al (2016); Ashenfelter and Hosken (2010); Ashenfelter et al (2014a,b); Kwoka (2013)) and the policy discussion (e.g., Ilkzkovitz and Dierx (2015); OECD (2016); Ormosi et al (2015)) have helped to identify and define the best practices for ex post evaluation. However, the empirical evidence is not evenly spread across all areas of competition policy: while there is a large body of literature on the ex postevaluation of merger control and at least a number of studies on cartel enforcement, very little evidence exists on the effects of antitrust decisions pertaining to an abuse of market dominance (e.g.…”