EconWorks Podcast

Two gas stations simultaneously raise their prices. And then they do it again. Their prices have not changed much. Their owners have been even talking. Is that enough evidence of price-fixing?In episode 2 of How Cartels Really Work, we take a look at one of the key issues in cartel enforcement: the line between suspicious parallel behavior and evidence of an agreement.Starting with a simple example of a gas station, we move through six observations of increasing importance. This includes simultaneous price increases and repeated matching, as well as competitor communications and evidence of an actual agreement.We explore how the same pricing pattern can arise from two very different stories: either the competitors colluded to raise prices or they observed and reacted to each other independently. The important question is not whether prices moved together. That’s why they moved together.Read the full article and graphic analysis: https://blog.econworks.com/p/cartels-episode-2-why-price-fixing?r=562wriExplore more visual economics content: https://econworks.comYouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@EconWorks-d3eSubstack: https://blog.econworks.com This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit blog.econworks.com/subscribe

The Zillow-Redfin case never went to court. Instead, the FTC, five states, Zillow, and Redfin agreed to a settlement that does something more interesting than just unwind the deal. Zillow can continue syndicating rental listings to Redfin, maintaining the cooperation the companies say yields efficiencies. But Redfin needs to rebuild its own rental-advertising business and re-emerge as an independent competitor. This episode asks what the settlement tells us about the economics of antitrust remedy. Did the earlier lawsuit assist both parties in reassessing the risks of trial? Why would Zillow want to do a competitor a favor? And can a remedy preserve the efficiencies of cooperation while removing the ban on competition? We also compare the settlement to the Google search remedies, where rivals are being given access to inputs that could help them compete more effectively. The court case may be wrapping up. The economic experiment has just begun.Read the full article and graphic analysis: https://blog.econworks.com/p/the-ftc-lost-the-motion-then-zillow?r=562wriExplore more visual economics content: https://econworks.comYouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@EconWorks-d3eSubstack: https://blog.econworks.com This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit blog.econworks.com/subscribe

Two gas stations competing with each other charge $4.50 each. That alone does not tell us whether they formed a cartel. They may incur the same costs. They may react to each other’s prices independently. Repeated interaction may teach them not to start price wars. Economists might refer to the result as tacit collusion. Or they may have conspired to set prices. In the first episode of How Cartels Really Work, EconWorks explores the boundary between competition and cartel behavior—and why the economic outcome alone can’t tell us where firms fall on that boundary. And then we replace the human pricing managers with AIS. Suppose both companies instruct their systems to maximize profits, obey antitrust laws, and never collude. What if the AI agents do talk to each other, coordinate, find a workaround, or hide what they are doing anyway? The technology is new, but the question behind it is an old one: When have competitors stopped acting on their own and started acting together?Read the full article and graphic analysis: https://blog.econworks.com/p/how-cartels-really-work-episode-1?r=562wriExplore more visual economics content: https://econworks.comYouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@EconWorks-d3eSubstack: https://blog.econworks.com This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit blog.econworks.com/subscribe

The antitrust case against Zillow and Redfin was scheduled to go to trial. The parties instead settled. The FTC did not kill the entire partnership. The companies will still syndicate rental listings to Redfin, maintaining the efficiencies they say benefit renters and property managers. But Redfin has to rebuild its independent rental advertising business and compete against Zillow again. Then who won? This episode goes deeper than the legal headlines and asks how it was economically feasible for both sides to settle. We will additionally address how pretrial litigation may have altered the bargaining positions of the parties, why Zillow had less incentive to continue litigating once the FTC retained the syndication efficiencies, and why Redfin may become a more formidable competitor than it was before. The larger question is whether today’s antitrust remedies can restore rivalry while preserving cooperation.Continue the cooperation. Bring back the rivalry. Now we get to see if it works.Read the full article and graphic analysis: https://blog.econworks.com/p/the-ftc-lost-the-motion-then-zillow?r=562wriExplore more visual economics content: https://econworks.comYouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@EconWorks-d3eSubstack: https://blog.econworks.com This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit blog.econworks.com/subscribe

Two gas stations are using AI to price their gas. They both come out at $4.50. “That’s a cartel? Not always. Common costs, standard competitive interdependence, tacit collusion, and an agreement between the AI agents—or an old-fashioned agreement between the humans running the firms—could all result in the same price. In Episode 1 of How Cartels Really Work, EconWorks poses an apparently simple question: What is a cartel? We consider the difference between* parallel pricing, interdependence,* conspiracy of silence,* communications,* deal,* and direct price-fixing.Then we complicate the problem. What if humans tell their artificial intelligence systems to maximize profits but respect the antitrust laws and don't collude? What if the AIs still coordinate? Suppose they communicate? What if they find a way around to colluding?And if they conceal the evidence? In each case, the price you see may be exactly the same. The legal story underneath may be entirely different. The cartel is not the price. The question is how the competitors got there. Next in the series: Why price fixing is easier to explain than it is to prove.Read the full article and graphic analysis: https://blog.econworks.com/p/how-cartels-really-work-episode-1?r=562wriExplore more visual economics content: https://econworks.comYouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@EconWorks-d3eSubstack: https://blog.econworks.com This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit blog.econworks.com/subscribe

What if you have a monopolist who, technically, allows customers to buy a product separately, but prices the standalone product so high that the only economically sensible thing to do is to take the bundle? That is the premise of **constructive tying**, an antitrust theory that was accepted decades ago but not often used since the early 1970s. The theory has been reinvigorated by the Second Circuit in Cumulus Media v. Nielsen. Cumulus was buying some local ratings from a competitor while trying to get Nielsen’s national radio ratings. Eventually Nielsen offered the national product separately but at a much higher price. This episode explains why constructive tying has largely fallen out of favor, why the facts in *Cumulus* were different, and why the decision could provide future plaintiffs with a modern roadmap for challenging pricing structures that effectively force customers into bundles.The bigger lesson is that bundle discounts or high prices are not illegal in and of themselves. What antitrust law may sometimes do is look beyond whether a customer is technically free to choose and ask whether that choice is economically real.Read the full article and graphic analysis: https://blog.econworks.com/p/the-antitrust-theory-that-slept-for?r=562wriExplore more visual economics content: https://econworks.comYouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@EconWorks-d3eSubstack: https://blog.econworks.com This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit blog.econworks.com/subscribe

You tell your AI to make as much money as you can. The instruction is quite standard. But what if the AI learns that profits increase if it cooperates with competitors—or makes life difficult for a new competitor? It wasn't ordered to set prices. No one told it to exclude its competitors.The machine worked out the strategy: What do autonomous AI agents mean for antitrust law? Cartel law looks at whether competitors really made an agreement. Monopolization law asks whether a powerful firm harmed the competitive process, not simply whether it competed aggressively. AI doesn't solve those traditional questions. It might make them a lot harder to reply to.Consumers may face the same delegation problem. If you ask an AI to find the best deal, it might come up with solutions you’d never have thought of. This episode is the entry point to three future EconWorks series: How Cartels Really Work, How Monopolization Really Works, and When Your AI Meets Their AI. All three have the same question behind them: What if humans choose the objective, and AI chooses the method?We tell the AI what we want it to do. More and more, AI is figuring out how to do that. What if a firm's AI independently discovers coordination with competitors or exclusionary strategies? What’s the impact of consumers using their own autonomous agents? A portal to new EconWorks series on cartels, monopolization, and AI on both sides of the market.Read the full article and graphic analysis: https://blog.econworks.com/p/what-if-your-ai-breaks-the-antitrust?r=562wriExplore more visual economics content: https://econworks.comYouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@EconWorks-d3eSubstack: https://blog.econworks.com This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit blog.econworks.com/subscribe

An organization claims you can buy Product A, but not Product B. The only issue is that product A is so expensive that no one would ever choose it. A choice indeed? In Cumulus Media v. Nielsen, the Second Circuit revived an antitrust theory that had largely fallen out of use for more than half a century: constructive tying. Traditional tying is simple: buy A only if you buy B. Constructive tying is more subtle. The products may be technically available on their own, but the economics of the pricing structure can make purchasing them separately infeasible. This episode examines why the doctrine largely faded away following the 1971 American Manufacturers decision, what Cumulus did differently, and why the new ruling may lead to more constructive-tying suits involving data, software, subscriptions, and other bundled products. The ruling does not mean that high standalone prices or bundle discounts are automatically illegal. The more interesting question is when does pricing cease to be ordinary bargaining and become a tool to force customers to buy another product?Read the full article and graphic analysis: https://blog.econworks.com/p/the-antitrust-theory-that-slept-for?r=562wriExplore more visual economics content: https://econworks.comYouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@EconWorks-d3eSubstack: https://blog.econworks.com This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit blog.econworks.com/subscribe

A company tells its AI to maximize profits. It does not tell the AI to set prices, to collude with competitors, or to shut out competitors. But what if the AI comes up with those strategies on its own? A recent example is the case of an AI agent and a gym booking system. The larger issue is that humans are increasingly describing the goal, and AI is choosing the method. On this episode of EconWorks, we look at what these developments could mean for antitrust law. If an AI learns to cooperate with competitors, then that raises the question of cartel law: Was there really an agreement? If a dominant firm's AI discovers ways to make life harder for rivals, the question leads to monopolization: Was the conduct ordinary competition or unlawful exclusion? The same issue could arise on the other side of the market if consumers use AI agents. This episode introduces three upcoming EconWorks series:* How Cartels Really Work* How Monopolization Really Works* When Your AI Meets Their AIThe bigger question is deceptively simple: What happens when we tell an AI what we want—but no longer determine exactly how it gets there?Read the full article and graphic analysis: https://blog.econworks.com/p/what-if-your-ai-breaks-the-antitrust?r=562wriExplore more visual economics content: https://econworks.comYouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@EconWorks-d3eSubstack: https://blog.econworks.com This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit blog.econworks.com/subscribe

With grocery prices still high, another supermarket merger may seem difficult to defend. Kroger’s proposed acquisition of Giant Eagle is especially striking because Kroger’s previous attempt to acquire Albertsons was blocked.But the two mergers do not appear to eliminate competition in the same way.Kroger and Albertsons competed across numerous local grocery markets. The proposed remedy required the transfer of 579 stores, brands, distribution assets, and other parts of the business to create a replacement competitor.Kroger and Giant Eagle mostly operate in different regions. The main competitive concern appears to be Columbus, where the merger comfortably exceeds the government’s HHI concentration thresholds.This episode explains why grocery markets are local, what HHI actually measures, why a serious problem in one city may not justify blocking an entire transaction, and why antitrust is not simply a rule that large companies must never become larger.Read the full article and graphic analysis: https://blog.econworks.com/p/why-krogergiant-eagle-may-survive?r=562wriExplore more visual economics content: https://econworks.comYouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@EconWorks-d3eSubstack: https://blog.econworks.com This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit blog.econworks.com/subscribe

Artificial intelligence is changing far more than the speed of economic analysis.In this concluding episode of the Age of AI series, we explore how AI is reshaping the workflow of antitrust economists—from evaluating economic models and analyzing evidence to refining ideas through iterative learning.The discussion focuses on practical observations rather than predictions, explaining why human judgment remains central even as AI expands analytical capability.Whether you’re interested in competition law, economics, or artificial intelligence, this episode offers a practical perspective on how the profession is already evolving.Read the full article and graphic analysis: https://blog.econworks.com/p/age-of-aiepisode-5-how-ai-changes?r=562wriExplore more visual economics content: https://econworks.comYouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@EconWorks-d3eSubstack: https://blog.econworks.com This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit blog.econworks.com/subscribe

The FTC is challenging a $100 million rentals partnership between Zillow and Redfin. The government argues that the agreement removed Redfin as an independent competitor in online rental listings. The companies say the partnership expands distribution and improves the service available to renters and property managers.A federal judge recently refused to decide key parts of the case before trial. That may sound like a defeat for the government, but the ruling did not decide whether the agreement was lawful.This episode asks why the FTC sought an early structural presumption, what it hoped to gain, why disputed market definitions prevented the court from granting the motion, and how the case could affect the online gateways connecting landlords with renters.The government tried to secure a head start and failed. It must now prove its case at the August 24, 2026, bench trial.Read the full article and graphic analysis: https://blog.econworks.com/p/the-ftc-tried-to-win-part-of-the?r=562wriExplore more visual economics content: https://econworks.comYouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@EconWorks-d3eSubstack: https://blog.econworks.com This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit blog.econworks.com/subscribe

Adding more economists to a merger investigation sounds like an obvious way to increase analytical capacity.In practice, however, larger teams create new communication, coordination, and consistency challenges.In this episode, we explore Brooks’ Law and explain why AI changes the economics of teamwork.Rather than replacing economists, AI enables smaller analytical teams to accomplish work that previously required much larger organizations.Topics include:* Brooks’ Law explained* Coordination costs* AI-assisted economic analysis* Merger investigations* Human judgment* The future of analytical teamsRead the full article and graphic analysis: https://blog.econworks.com/p/age-of-aiepisode-4-when-bigger-teams?r=562wriExplore more visual economics content: https://econworks.comYouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@EconWorks-d3eSubstack: https://blog.econworks.com This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit blog.econworks.com/subscribe

The Paramount–Warner merger produced three sharply different regulatory responses. The Department of Justice cleared it. The European Commission cleared it with one narrow remedy. A coalition of states sued to stop it. The apparent disagreement concerns market definition: should competition be measured among anticipated blockbusters, all wide-release films, or a broader group that includes independents and newer theatrical suppliers? But even if the states establish a narrow blockbuster market, another question remains. What should each studio’s market share measure? Historical box-office receipts capture commercial success, audience demand, and the strength of a studio’s past slate. They do not tell us directly which distributor is the next best alternative for an exhibitor, how often Paramount and Warner constrain each other in negotiations, or how much bargaining leverage theaters would lose post-merger. This episode examines the difference between defining a market and measuring competition within it—and why the arithmetic of HHI can be much simpler than its economic interpretation.Read the full article and graphic analysis: https://blog.econworks.com/p/one-merger-three-answers?r=562wriExplore more visual economics content: https://econworks.comYouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@EconWorks-d3eSubstack: https://blog.econworks.com This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit blog.econworks.com/subscribe

Economic analysis starts with data. Unfortunately, real-world data is rarely clean. In this episode we discuss how artificial intelligence is changing empirical economic analysis by aiding economists to prepare, organize and explore confidential company datasets before the formal modeling begins. Topics include:• Why business data is a mess• Data preparation assistance by AI• Identifying patterns and spotting anomalies• Monte Carlo simulation• Human judgment vs. automation• The future of empirical work in competition policy Artificial intelligence is accelerating technical work exponentially, giving economists more time for evidence interpretation and strategy development.Read the full article and graphic analysis: https://blog.econworks.com/p/age-of-aiepisode-3-ai-and-the-messy?r=562wriExplore more visual economics content: https://econworks.comYouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@EconWorks-d3eSubstack: https://blog.econworks.com This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit blog.econworks.com/subscribe

The Justice Department has approved the merger of Paramount and Warner. The European Commission cleared the deal with a slim remedy. A number of states sued to stop it. So how did three agencies investigating the same transaction come to such different conclusions? On market definition, there is clearly a disagreement. The states are looking at potential blockbusters and see Paramount and Warner as two of only a handful of big suppliers. The DOJ and the EU think there is a wider and more lively pool of rival studios. But that’s only the first question of market definition. Even if the blockbusters are a separate market, regulators still have to figure out how to measure the competitive significance of each studio. States rely on historical box office receipts. But box office receipts are a function of audience demand, marketing, timing of release, screen allocation, and negotiated licensing terms, not simply bargaining power. In this episode we discuss the following:* why blockbusters might constitute a separate product market;* the rationale for the licensing of theatre on negotiated financial and non-financial terms;* where exhibitors obtain bargaining power;* why box-office shares can be useful but incomplete evidence;* and why winning the market-definition debate does not necessarily determine the meaning of the resulting HHI.The main issue is not whether Paramount and Warner are big studios. The question is whether this physical separation materially improves the exhibitor’s alternatives in negotiations.Read the full article and graphic analysis: https://blog.econworks.com/p/one-merger-three-answers?r=562wriExplore more visual economics content: https://econworks.comYouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@EconWorks-d3eSubstack: https://blog.econworks.com This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit blog.econworks.com/subscribe

Most people think if authorities catch a cartel, there will be criminal convictions. Competition law in fact offers several tools for enforcement. This episode considers why governments sometimes settle civilly rather than prosecute, the differences between benchmark manipulation and traditional price fixing, and why private litigation plays a much greater role in the United States than in many other jurisdictions. This is the EconWorks. In this episode, we explain how a relatively small benchmark market can influence prices across an entire industry—and why better benchmark design may be the most effective long-term solution.Read the full article and graphic analysis: https://blog.econworks.com/p/why-did-an-alleged-egg-cartel-end?r=562wriExplore more visual economics content: https://econworks.comYouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@EconWorks-d3eSubstack: https://blog.econworks.com This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit blog.econworks.com/subscribe

AI may initially overwhelm academia with more papers, faster analyses, and polished but predictable prose. Yet that may be only a transitional phase.As authors use AI to pre-review their work and reviewers use AI to evaluate it, routine academic execution becomes easier to produce and less useful as a signal of quality. Writing still matters—but polish alone no longer proves expertise.This episode examines the symmetric loop between authors and reviewers, the short-run problem of AI slop, and the longer-run movement of intellectual value toward original observations, institutional knowledge, human judgment, and accountable research.Read the full article and graphic analysis: https://blog.econworks.com/p/age-of-aiepisode-25-the-symmetric?r=562wriExplore more visual economics content: https://econworks.comYouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@EconWorks-d3eSubstack: https://blog.econworks.com This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit blog.econworks.com/subscribe

The simple argument is this: rail competes with trucking, and therefore the relevant market is all freight transportation. If so, then mergers of railroads operating in different regions might seem innocuous. But that argument assumes all railroad customers are in the same market. In this episode of EconWorks, we explain why railroad freight is better thought of as a market with price discrimination, where different customers face fundamentally different competitive conditions. Contractual bargaining is used by industrial shippers who ship large volumes. Smaller shippers often compare trucking and rail on a price basis. This distinction changes how economists should think about market definition, the hypothetical monopolist test, and the competitive effects of railroad mergers. Topics:* Why railroad freight is not a single market Big shippers vs. little shippers* Substitution or negotiation* Definition of market and monopoly* Why trucking will be in the relevant market only where the merger makes little difference* Implications for railroad merger analysis* If you like clear explanations of antitrust, competition policy, AI, and platform economics, subscribe to EconWorks.Read the full article and graphic analysis: https://blog.econworks.com/p/the-wrong-market-the-wrong-test-railroad?r=562wriExplore more visual economics content: https://econworks.comYouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@EconWorks-d3eSubstack: https://blog.econworks.com This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit blog.econworks.com/subscribe

Economic models are powerful—but only if their underlying assumptions are valid. In this episode we explore how artificial intelligence is changing the way economists test these assumptions. Instead of settling for one model, AI lets economists produce hundreds of alternative versions, test sensitivity, and better understand which conclusions are robust. Topics include:* The three-step process that economists use to test models* Assumptions are important* Sensitivity analysis assisted by AI* Algorithmic pricing as an example* Human judgment versus computer power* Why economists are more valuable, not less, in the age of AIThis episode is a sequel to Episode 1, and it explains how AI is changing the practice of economics long before empirical analysis begins.Read the full article and graphic analysis: https://blog.econworks.com/p/age-of-ai-episode-2-when-models-meet?r=562wriExplore more visual economics content: https://econworks.comYouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@EconWorks-d3eSubstack: https://blog.econworks.com This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit blog.econworks.com/subscribe

All economic models contain assumptions. But what if those assumptions change? In Episode 2 of the Age of AI series, we explore how economists are using artificial intelligence to test economic models, not to replace human expertise, but to systematically test alternative assumptions and discover which conclusions are really robust. What you'll learn:* Why all economic models are simplifications of reality* How economists study and test theoretical models* Why sensitivity analysis is important* How AI can develop and test thousands of alternative model specifications* Why we still need human judgment* What algorithmic pricing can teach us about AI and competitionAI is not meant to replace economists, but rather to give them a powerful new tool for asking better questions, exploring competing explanations, and producing more reliable economic analysis. If you’re interested in antitrust, economics, artificial intelligence, or competition policy, then this is the episode for you. Subscribe for our next episode on how AI is helping economists grapple with messy real-world data.Read the full article and graphic analysis: https://blog.econworks.com/p/age-of-ai-episode-2-when-models-meet?r=562wriExplore more visual economics content: https://econworks.comYouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@EconWorks-d3eSubstack: https://blog.econworks.com This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit blog.econworks.com/subscribe

What happens when a criminal conspiracy treats trust as an engineering problem? According to a recently unsealed DOJ indictment, four major shipping container manufacturers allegedly banded together to artificially limit global output. To keep members from cheating, they shared real-time factory camera feeds with each other.But their biggest legal vulnerability wasn’t the cameras—it was the basic math of expanding their membership. This video explores the fascinating logic of corporate defection.Read the full article and graphic analysis: https://blog.econworks.com/p/the-box-cartel-trust-power-and-the?r=562wriExplore more visual economics content: https://econworks.comYouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@EconWorks-d3eSubstack: https://blog.econworks.com This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit blog.econworks.com/subscribe

Most people think merger enforcement is decided in court.The data show a different pattern.Across the United States and the European Union, an increasing share of challenged mergers resolve before a judge ever rules. Transactions are withdrawn, abandoned, or restructured through negotiated remedies long before litigation concludes.This shift is changing the role of economists—and artificial intelligence is accelerating it.In Episode 1 of the Age of AI series, we examine the following:• Why merger decisions are moving earlier in the review process• How economists are becoming strategic advisors rather than litigation specialists• How AI helps firms anticipate regulatory concerns• Why better economic analysis can lead to faster and more informed decisions• What this means for the future of competition policyWhether you’re an economist, lawyer, regulator, student, or simply interested in AI and competition policy, this episode provides an accessible introduction to one of the biggest changes occurring in modern merger enforcement.Read the full article and graphic analysis: https://blog.econworks.com/p/age-of-ai-episode-1-merger-enforcement?r=562wriExplore more visual economics content: https://econworks.comYouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@EconWorks-d3eSubstack: https://blog.econworks.com This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit blog.econworks.com/subscribe

Artificial intelligence is creating unprecedented demand for computing infrastructure.In this episode, we examine how data centers work, why AI-ready capacity has become a distinct market, and why infrastructure constraints—not market power—are driving today’s shortages.We also discuss what these developments mean for competition policy, investment, and the future of AI.Read the full article and graphic analysis: https://blog.econworks.com/p/the-market-for-ai-ready-data-center?r=562wriExplore more visual economics content: https://econworks.comYouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@EconWorks-d3eSubstack: https://blog.econworks.com This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit blog.econworks.com/subscribe

In 2010, Google attempted to acquire Groupon for roughly $6 billion. Groupon rejected the offer amid fears that antitrust scrutiny could trap the company in a prolonged review process during a critical growth phase.The company later IPO’d, faced accounting controversies, and lost most of its market value.But the larger significance of the failed deal may lie elsewhere.This episode explores how merger uncertainty, nascent competitor concerns, and evolving antitrust theories helped foreshadow many of today’s debates involving:* Big Tech,* AI ecosystems,* digital gatekeepers,* and platform acquisitions.Read the full article and the graphic analysis.https://blog.econworks.com/publish/posts/detail/198543769?referrer=%2Fpublish%2Fposts%2FpublishedExplore more visual economics content:https://econworks.comYouTube:https://www.youtube.com/@EconWorks-d3eSubstack: This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit blog.econworks.com/subscribe

On May 25, 2026, the Dutch government blocked Kyndryl’s acquisition of Solvinity, citing national security concerns. But the real story is not the block—it’s how the Dutch government (and many others) inadvertently created a one-vendor monopoly in critical infrastructure through mundane procurement decisions. This episode considers the following:* The risk of lock-in through repeated government contracts* Why traditional antitrust tools are useless in these situations* The true trade-off between digital sovereignty and scale* Smarter market design solutions for security and competitionThis issue is something policymakers, tech leaders, antitrust professionals, and everyone else concerned about critical digital infrastructure need to watch.Read the full article and graphic analysis: https://blog.econworks.com/p/the-lock-in-problem-how-procurement?r=562wriExplore more visual economics content: https://econworks.comYouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@EconWorks-d3eSubstack: https://blog.econworks.com This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit blog.econworks.com/subscribe

In Episode 5 of the Control in AI Series, we explain how standard antitrust tools (market definition, SSNIP tests, and price indices) break down in AI markets. You’ll learn about the tariff system, economies of scale and scope, stacked demand, emergent switching costs, and why competition in AI is driven far more by quality and capability than price.This episode demonstrates how the architecture of AI markets presents distinctive obstacles for regulators and why traditional playbooks are ineffective.Read the full article and graphic analysis: https://blog.econworks.com/p/control-in-ai-episode-5-the-price?r=562wriExplore more visual economics content: https://econworks.comYouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@EconWorks-d3eSubstack: https://blog.econworks.com This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit blog.econworks.com/subscribe

Many people believe that an immediate antitrust challenge would follow for a merger between SpaceX and Tesla. This episode raises a more important question: Would the merger really reduce competition? We apply standard merger analysis to distinguish between horizontal, vertical, and conglomerate effects to understand where competitive concerns may (or may not) arise.Read the full article and graphic analysis: https://blog.econworks.com/p/spacex-and-tesla-the-economics-of?r=562wriExplore more visual economics content: https://econworks.comYouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@EconWorks-d3eSubstack: https://blog.econworks.com This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit blog.econworks.com/subscribe

Most people consider AI to be chatbots or image generation. But in reality modern AI is a complicated, layered system. The real power is at the bottom. The model layer itself. In this episode, EconWorks breaks down the AI stack (Model → System → Interface) and explains why whoever controls the model layer (the base of the stack) is the one that controls the entire market. You’ll learn how scale, learning effects, and scope economies concentrate advantage at the model layer; why the market has transitioned from open research to centralized platforms; and the two competing visions of AI: shared infrastructure vs. controlled platforms. It also considers what the model means for competition, why governance is now the critical issue, and how the same system that fuels innovation can also lead to lock-in and dependence.Read the full article and graphic analysis: https://blog.econworks.com/p/control-in-ai-episode-4-when-the?r=562wriExplore more visual economics content: https://econworks.comYouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@EconWorks-d3eSubstack: https://blog.econworks.com This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit blog.econworks.com/subscribe

Discourse around AI compute is often framed in terms of vertical integration and the risk of foreclosure. But market realities may not align with these concerns. The main problem is not access, but the slow pace of capacity expansion due to power and permitting constraints. This conversation reframes the AI race as a race of infrastructure scarcity and execution speed.Read the full article and graphic analysis:https://blog.econworks.com/p/competition-in-ai-compute-is-about?r=562wriExplore more visual economics content: https://econworks.comYouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@EconWorks-d3eSubstack: https://blog.econworks.com This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit blog.econworks.com/subscribe

This installment of Control in AI takes a look at the Meta–Manus transaction—a deal that was signed, entered into a phase of early technical exploration and alignment, but never reached the stage of full operational control. We discuss why the deal creates a new and important category in AI markets: partially realized deals. Such arrangements can impact technical direction, system design, and the nature of competition well before any formal change of control. We also link the case to broader questions around OpenAI and discuss why traditional antitrust frameworks struggle with the layered nature of AI (attention vs. execution layers) and why the central question is moving from “Is this deal a merger?” “When does the control actually begin?” This analysis is clear and practical for anyone interested in AI, antitrust, and platform power.Read the full article and graphic analysis: https://blog.econworks.com/p/control-in-ai-episode-3-meta-manus?r=562wriExplore more visual economics content: https://econworks.comYouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@EconWorks-d3eSubstack: https://blog.econworks.com This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit blog.econworks.com/subscribe

We break down the economic structure of the AI developer market in this episode. We discuss how dependence on upstream foundation models compels downstream innovators to flow both capital and highly refined telemetry back to their vertically integrated competitors.We objectively evaluate the proposed solution, the acquisition of Cursor by SpaceX/xAI. Is the deal a classic case of vertical foreclosure that will harm competition or a necessary defensive merger that ends a data monopoly? We walk through the specific efficiencies of the deal, including cost reduction, performance optimization, and the removal of the innovation barriers.Read the full article and graphic analysis:https://blog.econworks.com/p/the-subsidy-paradox-why-cursor-sold?r=562wriExplore more visual economics content: https://econworks.comYouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@EconWorks-d3eSubstack:https://blog.econworks.com This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit blog.econworks.com/subscribe

AI Antitrust Series. Episode 2: In our second episode, we deconstruct the AI stack (Model → System → Interface) and show how control at the model layer determines access, capabilities, integration, and ultimately who wins the AI economy. We explore why economies of scale, learning effects, and scope make the model layer the main bottleneck. We compare it to the Apple ecosystem and discuss the two competing visions: AI as open infrastructure vs. AI as a tightly controlled platform. By the end of this episode, you will understand why governance is the new question at the heart of AI—not just who gets to build the best model but who gets to decide the rules of the whole system. It’s perfect for anyone who wants to understand the deeper economics and power dynamics behind the AI revolution.Read the full article and graphic analysis:Explore more visual economics content:https://econworks.comYouTube:https://www.youtube.com/@EconWorks-d3eSubstack: This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit blog.econworks.com/subscribe

What happens when the “market” isn’t a product—but a platform?In this episode, we unpack why traditional antitrust tools struggle with platforms and introduce a new way to think about them. From credit cards to Google to sports leagues, not all platforms work the same way—and that distinction matters more than you think.Read the full article and graphic analysis:https://blog.econworks.com/p/when-the-platform-is-the-market?r=562wriExplore more visual economics content:https://econworks.comYouTube:https://www.youtube.com/@EconWorks-d3eSubstack: This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit blog.econworks.com/subscribe

The season finale tackles the FTC’s challenge to Tempur Sealy’s vertical merger with Mattress Firm. Was the merger a smart efficiency play in retail and manufacturing, or did it risk anticompetitive foreclosure?In this episode, AI critiques the expert economic analysis, focusing on vertical merger guidelines, concentration risks, and real-world retail dynamics. We compare the AI take to the court’s perspective and close season 1 with big-picture lessons on how antitrust should handle innovation, efficiency, and evidence in fast-changing markets.Read the full article and the graphic analysis:https://blog.econworks.com/p/ai-v-judge-episode-5-ftc-vs-tempur?r=562wriExplore more visual economics content:https://econworks.comYouTube:https://www.youtube.com/@EconWorks-d3eSubstack: This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit blog.econworks.com/subscribe

In this episode, we examine the economic foundations of reverse-payment antitrust law through the lens of the Takeda verdict.The Supreme Court’s *Actavis* decision shifted the focus from patent validity to payment size—but left unresolved how courts should measure what counts as “large.”We explore the circularity embedded in the framework, the role of damages models, and why jury decisions may ultimately substitute for missing economic methods.Read the full article and the graphic analysis:https://blog.econworks.com/p/the-885-million-question-actavis?r=562wriExplore more visual economics content:EconWorksYouTubeSubstack This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit blog.econworks.com/subscribe

In this episode, we talk about the complexities of digital advertising in the US. DOJ v. Google ad tech case. Google’s integrated platform dominates ad servers, exchanges, and networks, and critics have accused it of excluding rivals.The AI looks at the main expert arguments about auctions, vertical integration, and market power and compares the criticism to the trial evidence. In this episode we unpack important but technical concepts like header bidding and multi-homing and put them in plain English. We also take a new look at one of the biggest ongoing antitrust battles in tech.Read the full article and the graphic analysis:https://blog.econworks.com/p/ai-v-judge-episode-4-united-states?r=562wriExplore more visual economics content:EconWorksYouTubeSubstack This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit blog.econworks.com/subscribe

This episode explores the DOJ’s settlement with Agri Stats and the growing antitrust debate surrounding information sharing, algorithmic pricing, and AI coordination.The discussion covers:* why collusion is unstable,* how monitoring systems sustain coordination,* the role of AI pricing algorithms,*and why future antitrust cases may become increasingly difficult to detect and prove.Read the full article and the graphic analysis:https://blog.econworks.com/p/when-does-sharing-data-become-the?r=562wriExplore more visual economics content:EconWorksYouTubeSubstack This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit blog.econworks.com/subscribe

This episode turns to the FTC’s attempt to block the Tapestry (Coach) and Capri (Michael Kors, Kate Spade) merger. The central fight was over how to define the relevant market—a narrow “accessible luxury” segment or something much broader?Using AI, we critique the expert report’s data choices, market framing, and economic analysis, then see how it stacked up against the court’s real-world assessment. This episode explores brand differentiation, consumer behavior, and the challenges of merger review in consumer goods. It’s a fascinating case that reveals a lot about current FTC strategy.Read the full article and the graphic analysis:Explore more visual economics content:EconWorksYouTubeSubstack This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit blog.econworks.com/subscribe

This episode of EconWorks looks at one of the most important recent tests of serial acquisition enforcement: the FTC's lawsuit against U.S. Anesthesia Partners. The conversation looks at: * Rollups in healthcare* Definition of the market, * Leverage in negotiations, * Consolidation economics,* and the challenge of reestablishing competitiveness once markets have already changed due to past acquisitions. Significant legal and economic issues remain unsolved because the parties settled the case before the trial.Read the full article and graphic analysis:Explore more visual economics content:EconWorksYouTubeSubstack This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit blog.econworks.com/subscribe

Was the App Store an iOS-only monopoly or was it in a highly competitive multiplatform market? In episode two of the AI v. Judge series, AI takes a deep dive into the epic expert report in Epic v. Apple, including the fight over central market definition. We compare the AI assessment directly to the actual ruling of the court. The podcast features a comparison of broad and narrow marketplaces.Read the full article and the graphic analysis:Explore more visual economics content:EconWorksYouTubeSubstack This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit blog.econworks.com/subscribe

In the first episode of the AI Critique in Antitrust series, we introduce a powerful new approach: letting AI rigorously analyze expert economic reports from major cases, then benchmarking those critiques against actual judicial decisions. Discover why market definition matters so much and how this series will stress-test modern antitrust thinking.Click here to read the whole article and see the full graphic analysis of this case: This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit blog.econworks.com/subscribe

Have you ever wondered if anything will actually change the way we buy concert tickets? In this episode, we break down the monumental shift in the fight against Live Nation-Ticketmaster.For over a decade, the debate around Ticketmaster relied on the constraints of a 2010 negotiated settlement with the DOJ, where core economic questions were never fully adjudicated. Now, the story has changed. We discuss the recent landmark case where a jury officially found that Live Nation-Ticketmaster possessed monopoly power, engaged in exclusionary conduct, and caused consumer harm.Tune in as we unpack the details of the “Antitrust Decision Funnel” and explain why determining liability is just the beginning. We explore the jury’s estimation of a $1.72 (or 1-3%) ticket overcharge and discuss how this magnitude of harm will influence the judge’s ultimate decision on remedies, which could range from damages to structural breakups. Finally, we compare the U.S. antitrust path—which seeks to restore competitive conditions—to alternative approaches, like Ontario’s direct price regulation that caps resale tickets at face value.If you want to understand the economics, the law, and what this verdict actually means for your next concert, this episode is for you!For a full article and graphic examination of this case, click this link: This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit blog.econworks.com/subscribe

Managing deeply integrated, complex systems requires a careful balance. When regulators pull out their toolkit, the results are rarely simple. Join us as we look at both sides of the modern competition debate and the practical realities of trying to “fix” global markets.Key Discussion Points:* The Case for Intervention: Breaking price chokeholds and preventing consumer “lock-in”.* The Risks of Regulation: Visualizing the compliance trap and system-wide performance degradation.* The “Rescued” Competitor: Why the DOJ’s win against the JetBlue/Spirit merger resulted in a Chapter 11 bankruptcy.* Global Competition: How blocking domestic mergers like Tapestry/Capri may handicap American brands against European conglomerates.Call to Action: This series is reader-supported. Consider becoming a free or paid subscriber at EconWorks to support our work. What do you think—are regulators getting it right, or is the cure worse than the disease?For a full article and visual examination of this situation, click this link: This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit blog.econworks.com/subscribe

A jury has officially found Live Nation-Ticketmaster guilty of having too much power and acting in a way that keeps people out of the market. But will this really lower the price of your concert tickets?In this episode, we talk about the recent state-led antitrust case against Ticketmaster and what the limits of state antitrust power are. We talk about the history of the 2010 DOJ settlement, what the jury's finding of a $1.72 overcharge means for the company's future, and why figuring out who is responsible is just the first step. Finally, we compare the US approach of restoring competition to international approaches, like Ontario's, restoring competition with international approaches, such as direct price caps on ticket resales.If you've ever been angry about buying concert tickets, you won't want to miss this explanation of the law, the money, and what comes next!For a comprehensive article and graphic study of this case, click this link: This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit blog.econworks.com/subscribe

Competition enforcement is currently at the forefront of economic policy. From digital tech platforms to aviation and healthcare, regulators are aggressively stepping in to reshape industries. But how do we ensure markets remain fair without triggering a disastrous chain reaction?In this episode, we dive into the “Remedies Toolkit” used by the DOJ and FTC. We analyze the three main pillars of intervention and their potential unintended consequences:* Behavioral Remedies: Can conduct rules turn agile tech firms into sluggish bureaucracies?* Structural Remedies: Does forcing a breakup lead to operational collapse and broken tools?* Interoperability Mandates: Are we creating security and stability nightmares in the name of open standards?We also examine real-world case studies beyond Big Tech, including the JetBlue/Spirit merger blockade and the Tapestry/Capri fashion deal.For a comprehensive article and visual examination of this situation, click this link: This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit blog.econworks.com/subscribe

Brazil isn't waiting for the courts. Their administrative approach to antitrust is providing a real-time test for interoperability remedies that the rest of the world is watching. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit blog.econworks.com/subscribe

Today on EconWorks, we conclude our deep dive into the FAANG antitrust landscape by looking at the “invisible hands” of platform operators.Key Topics Discussed:* The Shift in Enforcement: Why U.S. antitrust complaints are focusing on user choice architecture and market access rather than just price.* The Five Pillars of Conduct: Default placement (Google), App Store rules (Apple), Marketplace ranking (Amazon), Feed curation (Meta), and OS integration (Microsoft).* Feedback Loop Dynamics: How data accumulation creates self-reinforcing cycles of usage and performance.* The Future of Policy: Assessing innovation, access, and interoperability in platform-mediated markets.Technical Deep Dive: For our paid subscribers, we have released a technical appendix featuring a simplified economic model that assesses how these governance choices affect new business entry and innovation incentives. To access the full report, visit This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit blog.econworks.com/subscribe

Brazil has officially forced open the iOS ecosystem—but the battle is far from over. Following a landmark antitrust settlement, a massive legal and economic standoff is brewing over the iPhone’s NFC chip and Brazil’s instant payment system, Pix.In this video, we break down the core arguments: Is Apple protecting billions in proprietary hardware R&D, or is it acting as an illegal gatekeeper by taxing a public utility? We explore the new tiered commission structure, the “free rider” economic defense, and why Brazil’s administrative laws are moving much faster than U.S. judicial courts.For a full article and visual examination of this situation, click this link: This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit blog.econworks.com/subscribe

In this episode, we move beyond traditional price-based analysis to explore how dominant digital platforms—Google, Apple, Amazon, Meta, and Microsoft—shape competition through ecosystem governance.We break down the key mechanisms of platform power:* Default Placement & Behavior: How search and browser defaults steer user usage.* App Store & OS Governance: The impact of rules on developer entry and pricing.* Ranking & Feeds: How marketplace algorithms and feed curation allocate demand and attention.* Integration & Data: The feedback loops where usage generates data, improving performance and reinforcing dominance.Does platform conduct limit innovation and choice, or does it enhance security and product quality? We examine the competing claims and the evolving framework for digital competition policy.For a full article and graphic examination of this case, click this link: This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit blog.econworks.com/subscribe