Rich Bergin
Managing Director, Boston
ECONOMICS CONSULTING OVERVIEW
For businesses facing antitrust, litigation, regulatory, or commercial challenges, sound economic analysis is critical. Our team of antitrust and regulatory economists, econometricians, financial economists, and academic affiliates combines sharp economic insights with diverse academic, industry, and subject matter expertise.
We provide litigation support and expert testimony to support clients on antitrust matters, as well as commercial and class action litigation, and we quantify damages in both antitrust and commercial disputes.
ANTITRUST AND COMPETITION
We work on a broad spectrum of antitrust issues, from market definition, market power, and conduct to mergers and acquisitions, and market inquiries, as well as quantification of damages. Key areas include:
- Antitrust damages
- Mergers & acquisitions
- Cartel & anticompetitive agreements
- Monopolization/abuse of dominance.
Learn more about our antitrust and competition capabilities here.
Notable Case Outcomes
FTC v. Qualcomm and Apple v. Qualcomm
Managing Director Dr. Tasneem Chipty was one of Qualcomm’s antitrust experts in lawsuits challenging Qualcomm’s licensing practices and use of customer incentive agreements that reference rivals. She and the team studied issues of market definition, market power, and raising rivals costs—accounting for technological innovation in the dynamic modem chipset marketplace. Dr. Chipty also studied Qualcomm’s contracts with Apple, which the FTC characterized as exclusionary contracts.
Consistent with Dr. Chipty’s testimony, the 9th Circuit ruled in favor of Qualcomm (in FTC v. Qualcomm), drawing a distinction between “anticompetitive” and “hypercompetitive” behaviors and concluding that the Qualcomm-Apple contracts did not have an “actual or practical effect of substantially foreclosing competition in the CDMA modem chip market.”
Notable Case Outcomes
CenturyLink-Level 3 Merger
Managing Director Dr. Tasneem Chipty led multiple teams to evaluate the competitive landscape for business data services, on behalf of the parties before the U.S. Department of Justice and Federal Communications Commission. The analysis involved assessing the overlap in the parties’ assets in several metropolitan areas and the likely response of rivals to the putative merger.
The deal cleared federal merger review in October 2017.
Notable Case Outcomes
MOL, K-Line, and NYK Line Joint Venture
Managing Director Dr. Tasneem Chipty and her team analyzed the competitive effects of the formation of a joint venture between three Japanese shipping companies, on behalf of the parties. The assignment involved analyzing competition along the supply chain for transporting refrigerated produce between the U.S. and Japan. Dr. Chipty presented these findings before the U.S. Department of Justice in the summer of 2017.
The transaction was permitted to close in the U.S. without any conditions attached.
Notable Case Outcomes
U.S., et al. v. Hillsdale Community Health Center, et al.
Managing Director Dr. Tasneem Chipty was the government’s antitrust expert in a lawsuit alleging that two hospitals conspired to allocate customers. Her work focused on the economics of collusion and the role of marketing in patients’ choices of hospital. In addition, she analyzed the overlap of services offered by the hospitals and conducted a diversion analysis to assess whether the Defendants were competitors.
The dispute settled in February 2018 with the Defendants agreeing not to engage in the challenged conduct.
Notable Case Outcomes
Liberty’s acquisition of AT&T’s Wireline and Wireless Assets in Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands
Managing Director Dr. Tasneem Chipty and her team analyzed overlap of fiber networks, pricing, and investments to study the competitive effects of the acquisition, on behalf of the parties. Their work was submitted to both the DOJ and the FCC, who permitted the transaction to close, with divestitures, in October 2020.
Notable Case Outcomes
U.S. et al. v. Carolinas Healthcare System
Managing Director Dr. Tasneem Chipty was the government’s antitrust expert in its lawsuit against Carolinas Healthcare System that challenged the steering restrictions CHS imposed on health insurers. Her assignment included defining hospital markets, assessing market power, and evaluating the competitive effect of the challenged conduct.
The dispute settled in April 2019 with CHS agreeing to cease the challenged conduct.
Notable Case Outcomes
Disney divests regional sports networks in acquiring FOX assets
Disney sought regulatory approval to acquire FOX assets, including cable networks, film and television studios, and its 30 percent stake in Hulu. The U.S. Department of Justice conditionally approved the acquisition subject to Disney divesting 22 FOX regional sports networks. Our team supported an academic economist to evaluate the competitive implications of Disney’s proposed acquisition.
Notable Case Outcomes
Atrium Health agrees to cease challenged conduct
In June 2016, the U.S. Department of Justice and State of North Carolina challenged steering restrictions imposed by Atrium Health (formerly, Carolinas HealthCare System) on health insurers.
Managing Director Dr. Tasneem Chipty was the DOJ’s antitrust liability expert. She submitted testimony that addressed relevant markets, Atrium Health’s market power, and the competitive effects of the challenged conduct.
PRIVATE ANTITRUST LITIGATION OUTSIDE THE U.S.
The amount of private antitrust litigation outside the U.S. continues to increase dramatically. This is no longer confined to the traditional jurisdictions of the UK, Germany and the Netherlands, but is now worldwide. Follow-on claims, which rely on a regulatory decision to prove an infringement, and stand-alone claims, where the infringement must be shown, are common. In the EU, virtually every cartel decision by a regulator is now followed by a damages claim from customers; and cartel damages claims are far from the only types of claim being brought.
AlixPartners Managing Director Mat Hughes discusses the key issues raised when valuing and arguing loss in private antitrust litigation outside the U.S., from both the claimants’ and defendants’ points of view.
Global Team
