Public Utilities Reports

PUR Guide 2012 Fully Updated Version

Available NOW!
PUR Guide

This comprehensive self-study certification course is designed to teach the novice or pro everything they need to understand and succeed in every phase of the public utilities business.

Order Now

Why Special Contract Discounts are Good For Electric Competition

Fortnightly Magazine - May 15 1997

544 (9th Cir. 1983) ("A monopolist, no less than any other competitor, is permitted and indeed encouraged to compete aggressively on the merits..."), cert. denied, 465 U.S. 1038 (1984); Austin v. Blue Cross & Blue Shield of Alabama, 903 F.2d 1385, 1390 (11th Cir. 1990) (using market power to obtain lower prices for Blue Cross subscribers was not anti-competitive).

13Matsushita Elec. Indus. Co. v. Zenith Radio Corp., 475 U.S. 574 (1986); Areeda & Turner, Predatory Pricing and Related Practices under Section 2 of the Sherman Act, 88 HARV. L. REV. 697, 711, 716-18 (1975).

14See Brooke Group, Ltd. v. Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp., 509 U.S. 209 (1993).

15See generally Easterbrook, Predatory Strategies and Counterstrategies, 48 U. CHI. L. REV. 263 (1981).

16Compare City of Kirkwood v. Union Electric Co., 671 F.2d 1173, 1181-82 (8th Cir. 1992), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1170 (1983), with City of Newark v. Delmarva Power & Light Co., 467 F. Supp. 763, 772-74 (D. Del. 1979).

17See also Bristol Steel & Ironworks, Inc. v. Bethlehem Steel Corp., 41 F.3d 182, 188

(4th Cir.1994).

1815 U.S.C. §13a.

30

Articles found on this page are available to Internet subscribers only. For more information about obtaining a username and password, please call our Customer Service Department at 1-800-368-5001.

Pages