CPL 3 - Dominant Position

<p>Exclusionary conduct that forecloses competitors (C)</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>Evaluating the economic impact on consumers (B)</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>Dominance itself does not infringe the act (C)</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>Chapter 6 of the triple CCS guidelines (D)</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>To assess whether a hypothetical monopolist can maintain super competitive prices. (D)</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>A firm that can influence prices without fear of competitive responses. (A)</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>Defining the relevant product and geographic market. (C)</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>It suggests presumed dominance but is not definitive. (A)</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>Proof of the absence of market power. (D)</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>The focal product combined with its substitute products. (B)</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>Because market definition is technically complex. (D)</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>Controlling the amount of product available in the market. (B)</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>Through its ability to influence prices and production levels. (B)</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>To force retailers to accept all terms from suppliers. (D)</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>When a retailer agrees to stock a specific product line from a single manufacturer. (A)</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>By creating a financial disadvantage for less dominant firms. (D)</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>The firm maintains a low margin between input price and its selling price. (C)</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>Smaller firms may be forced to exit the market due to loss of competitiveness. (A)</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>The healthcare sector (B)</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>Unavailability of substitutes (C)</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>Technical expertise in supply contracts (A)</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>Self-catering by hospitals (B)</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>The availability of hospital kitchens before the merger (D)</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>It should be cleared (A)</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>Part III, Division 3 (D)</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>Assessment of abuse of dominant position (D)</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>Choice in service providers (B)</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>The presence of internal kitchens (C)</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>Purchasing efficiencies (B)</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>To protect consumer interests (C)</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>Bundling of products (B)</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>The potential impact of the conduct (B)</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>A customer being required to source products from one supplier (A)</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>Requiring retailers to stock a manufacturer's entire range (B)</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>Bundling products (C)</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>Lower per-unit costs as production scales up (C)</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>The firm must be established as dominant (B)</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>Observing types of exclusionary conduct (D)</p> Signup and view all the answers

This section of the Competition Act deals with the abuse of market power by dominant firms.

Conduct by a dominant firm that unfairly harms competitors.

The specific market segment being analyzed to check for dominance.

A firm with significant market power and influence.

Actions by dominant firms that harm competition, e.g., exclusionary practices.

The steps used to determine an abuse of dominant position: 1) Define the market, 2) Assess dominance, 3) Assess abusive conduct.

A form of abuse of market power, in which a company gains control of the market to the point of making it difficult or impossible for competitors to operate.

Identifying the products and geographic area related to an alleged abuse of market dominance, including substitute products, using the snip test.

A method to determine the relevant market by analyzing how buyers react to price increases of a focal product.

An undertaking's ability to sustain prices above or restrict output/quality below competitive levels in a relevant market.

An entity with market power, often with a significant market share (but not always above 60%), in a relevant market; potentially using or abusing its power.

Actions by a dominant undertaking that are anti-competitive, such as exploiting its dominance.

A rule that prevents anti-competitive abuse of a dominant market position.

A general guideline often used to assess if an entity holds market power; it is not the only factor and dominance can be achieved with lower percentages.

The product being assessed in relation to potential market abuse.

A specialized professional involved in technical analyses of markets to define competitive contexts.

A company has significant market power and can influence prices, output, or competition.

A framework used to determine if a company has abused its dominant position: 1) Define the relevant market 2) Determine dominance 3) Assess abusive conduct.

The extent to which consumers can switch to alternative products or services. High substitutability means less dominance.

Specialised knowledge or skills needed in a specific industry, e.g., food safety standards in healthcare.

Hospitals or nursing homes providing their food services internally, without using external contractors.

The extra profit a dominant company can extract by charging higher prices or reducing output.

The combined market share of two companies after a merger. This is important for assessing potential dominance.

The process of reviewing mergers to ensure they don't harm competition, by assessing potential dominance and abuse.

Evaluating factors like costs, economies of scale/scope, network effects, purchasing efficiencies, innovation, and product differentiation to determine if an undertaking has market dominance.

Competition Act lists specific actions that might constitute abuse of dominant position. These examples are important guidelines for competitive analysis.

Exclusive dealing or bundling arrangements where suppliers prefer certain customer types over others.

A customer is required to obtain most or all goods from one supplier only.

A dominant firm requires customers to purchase a product along with another (usually a required product).

A sales arrangement where a retailer is required to stock all products from a single manufacturer in order to get the dominant product.

A consideration of competition effects, rules and the specifics of individual cases to determine if abusive conduct has occurred.

Actions by a dominant firm to negatively affect competition through pricing strategies.

Actions by a dominant firm that harm competition but aren't related to pricing.

A dominant supplier forces a retailer to stock all products in their range as a condition to sell a popular product.

A manufacturer requires a retailer to only sell their specific products, limiting competition.

A dominant firm sets prices so low that smaller competitors can't survive, even if it means making minimal profit.

A dominant firm offers discounts or incentives to customers who buy only their products, discouraging them from competitors.

A vertically integrated firm sets a low price for its input and a high price selling its final product, squeezing profits for competitors in the downstream market.