Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by savanaly 2760 days ago
If Coke could take an action that would make them $1 million but cost Pepsi $1 billion, why wouldn't the two companies come to an agreement for Pepsi to pay Coke a one time sum of X where X is between $1m and $1b for Coke to not do it? A single entity owning both corporations should not be necessary for the efficient outcome to occur in this hypothetical.
2 comments

These are not negotiated activities operating in an environment of collusion. They are the result of separate corporations operating in an environment assumed to be competitive. Individual corporations will take strategic actions that may harm their competitors disproportionately to the benefit they receive. It is not zero-sum, and would be economically value-destructive for shareholders of both (while possibly beneficial for consumers).