vertical merger


Also found in: Legal, Financial, Wikipedia.

ver′tical merg′er


n.
the purchase by a company of a supplier or a distributor. Compare horizontal merger.
Mentioned in ?
References in periodicals archive ?
(8) An important recent vertical merger case in which the 2007 Guidelines were tested was that between TomTom and TeleAtlas, which was cleared without requiring any remedies on May 14, 2008, after an extensive phase II investigation.
and Soo Bock Lee, "Vertical Merger, Market Foreclosure, and Economic Welfare." Southern Economic Journal, April 1986, 948-61.
New York, NY, August 16, 2019 --(PR.com)-- The Knowledge Group/The Knowledge Congress Live Webcast Series, the leading producer of regulatory focused webcasts, announced today that it has scheduled a live webcast entitled: Vertical Merger Enforcement: How to Effectively Navigate Through the Uncharted Waters of Complexities.
According to Altawashi, the making of the eatery was a formidable task as it emerges out of vertical merger of two buses, with the upper bus laid upside down on the bus below.
The appeals court affirmed the $81 billion vertical merger won't harm consumers or competition in the booming pay-TV market
Opposing the merger forced the Justice Department to argue against standing legal doctrine that favors mergers among companies that don't compete directly with each other, what's known as a vertical merger.
Neither the Supreme Court nor any circuit has addressed a vertical merger case since 1979.
We would call that a vertical merger. They have the Minute Clinics, the PBM, etc.--we see them invading the healthcare space to compete for what we call 'stickiness with the consumer.' You have 9 to 11 percent of the spend in pharmaceuticals.
The court decision, in allowing a so-called vertical merger, also could be interpreted as good news for companies in other industries pursuing conglomerate-building.
"If DOJ chooses not to appeal or loses on appeal, then I think it's fair to say that vertical merger enforcement is effectively dead."
Chicago School economics and laissez-faire ideology have intentionally targeted vertical merger enforcement.
Each of those parties will charge a noncompetitive price for its outputs, thus leading to a double markup and creating a "vertical externality." (80) However, "a vertical merger has the potential to reduce costs and increase efficiency by eliminating a double monopoly markup on input costs." (81) Antitrust scholars and regulators have cited the elimination of double marginalization as an important justification for vertical integration.