The Year in Review: Economics at the Antitrust
DAVID S. SIBLEY
and KEN HEYER**
U.S. Department of Justice, Antitrust Division, U.S.A
Abstract. This paper covers the activities of the Economic Analysis Group (EAG), during
2003–2004. It describes the economic analysis undertaken by EAG in several important
investigations, litigations, and administrative and appellate matters.
Key words: antitrust, bundled discounts, mergers, merger remedies, two-sided markets
Since the last articles (Katz Sibley and Heyer, 2003) of this kind in this
Review, the members of the Economic Analysis Group (EAG) in the
Antitrust Division have worked on a number of unusually interesting is-
sues, both in litigation and internally. At the trial level, EAG worked on
the proposed merger between the owners of two large debit card networks,
First Data (owner of the NYCE network) and Concord EDS (owner of
STAR). This case ended in a settlement reached just prior to trial, on the
terms sought by the federal government. More recently, EAG worked
intensively on litigation to block Oracle’s proposed hostile takeover of
At the appellate level, EAG worked on several signiﬁcant civil
nonmerger matters, including the Microsoft settlement, the credit cards
litigation, and the Department’s appeal brief in Dentsply.
also ﬁled an amicus brief in Trinko,
a major Supreme Court case that
* The authors are, respectively, Deputy Assistant Attorney General for Economics, U.S. Department of
Justice, Antitrust Division, and Economics Director of Enforcement, U.S. Department of Justice,
Antitrust Division. The views contained herein are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily
represent those of the U.S. Department of Justice.
** Author for correspondence. Ken Heyer, U.S. Department of Justice, Antitrust Division, Room 3112,
950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 205300–001, U.S.A. Tel.: 202 5146–994; Fax: 202 5140–
306; E-mail: Ken.Heyer@usdoj.gov
As of the time this article was written, a decision in the Oracle trial had not yet been
To see the Division’s appeal brief in Dentsply, visit http://www.usdoj.gov/atr/cases/
Verizon Communications Inc. v. Law Oﬃces of Curtis V. Trinko, LLP, 124 S. Ct. 872 (2004).
Review of Industrial Organization 25: 375–394, 2004.
Ó 2004 Kluwer Academic Publishers. Printed in the Netherlands.