Who benefited from common ownership of US airlines?

Also known as Airline common ownership, Horizontal shareholding in US airlines

Shows who gained or lost, and who disputes a study that says so, in the words of whoever says it.

Not that anyone caused it.

7 links · 6 accounts · 2001–2014

Play Explore

A connection is not evidence of wrongdoing.

Each account

A to Z, none ranked above another.

According to A Refutation of ‘Common Ownership Does Not Have Anti-Competitive Effects in the Airline Industry’

A Refutation of ‘Common Ownership Does Not Have Anti-Competitive Effects in the Airline Industry’ disputes a finding of Common Ownership Does Not Have Anticompetitive Effects in the Airline Industry Aug 2022 Scholarship & press 1 Contrary to DGS’ claims, ownership changes do predict price changes once one constructs a valid placebo that actually separates the variation from market shares from the variation in ownership.

According to Anticompetitive Effects of Common Ownership

Airline consumers harmed by Scholarship & press 2 These results suggest both a large deadweight loss (i.e., decreased efficiency of the economy) and a large wealth transfer from consumers to producers due to common ownership.
The study says “consumers”, in a paper about airline tickets. This sentence follows its 10% to 12% result from the BlackRock and Barclays Global Investors merger, not its 3% to 7% panel result.
US airlines benefited from Scholarship & press 2 These results suggest both a large deadweight loss (i.e., decreased efficiency of the economy) and a large wealth transfer from consumers to producers due to common ownership.
The study says “producers”, in a paper about airline tickets. This sentence follows its 10% to 12% result from the BlackRock and Barclays Global Investors merger, not its 3% to 7% panel result.

According to BlackRock

BlackRock disputes a finding of Anticompetitive Effects of Common Ownership 15 Jan 2019 Primary record 3 When the aforementioned erroneous assumptions are corrected, Analysis Group finds no statistically significant relationship between ‘common ownership’ and airline ticket prices.
The letter calls the study the “AST Paper”. Analysis Group is a consultant BlackRock hired.

According to Common Ownership Does Not Have Anticompetitive Effects in the Airline Industry

Common Ownership Does Not Have Anticompetitive Effects in the Airline Industry disputes a finding of Anticompetitive Effects of Common Ownership Sep 2022 Scholarship & press 4 5 We further show that the results are sensitive to measures of investor control and to assumptions about equity holders' ownership and control during bankruptcy.
The abstract says “prior research”. Isabel Tecu, a co-author of the 2018 study, names this paper among those answering it.

According to Einer Elhauge

Einer Elhauge disputes a finding of Common Ownership Does Not Have Anticompetitive Effects in the Airline Industry 2020 Scholarship & press 6 But their claims are based on three modifications to the regression, none of which support their conclusion.
He answers a 2019 draft of the paper.

According to Isabel Tecu

Isabel Tecu disputes a finding of Common Ownership Does Not Have Anticompetitive Effects in the Airline Industry Sep 2021 Scholarship & press 5 However, these studies do not support an affirmative conclusion that no such effects exist.
“These studies” are by Kennedy, O’Brien, Song and Waehrer, and by Dennis, Gerardi and Schenone, whose paper was then a working paper. Tecu is a co-author of the study they answer.

Proof 6 sources

A Refutation of ‘Common Ownership Does Not Have Anti-Competitive Effects in the Airline Industry’ (ECGI Finance Working Paper 837/2022), European Corporate Governance Institute, Aug 2022. Scholarship & press
Contrary to DGS’ claims, ownership changes do predict price changes once one constructs a valid placebo that actually separates the variation from market shares from the variation in ownership.
Anticompetitive Effects of Common Ownership (The Journal of Finance, vol. 73, no. 4, 2018), Wiley, for the American Finance Association, 25 May 2018. Scholarship & press Archived copy
These results suggest both a large deadweight loss (i.e., decreased efficiency of the economy) and a large wealth transfer from consumers to producers due to common ownership.
Comment letter to the Federal Trade Commission on Hearing #8 (Common Ownership), Competition and Consumer Protection in the 21st Century, BlackRock, 15 Jan 2019. Primary record
When the aforementioned erroneous assumptions are corrected, Analysis Group finds no statistically significant relationship between ‘common ownership’ and airline ticket prices.
This testing was performed by a third party consultant, Analysis Group, hired by BlackRock.
Common Ownership Does Not Have Anticompetitive Effects in the Airline Industry (The Journal of Finance, vol. 77, no. 5, 2022), Wiley, for the American Finance Association, 1 Sep 2022. Scholarship & press
We further show that the results are sensitive to measures of investor control and to assumptions about equity holders' ownership and control during bankruptcy.
“Anticompetitive Effects of Common Ownership” at Seven Years (Antitrust, vol. 36, no. 1, Fall 2021), American Bar Association, 2021. Scholarship & press
Dennis, Gerardi, and Schenone subsequently offered a similar conclusion in a paper provocatively titled “Common Ownership Does Not Have Anti-Competitive Effects in the Airline Industry” (DGS).
However, these studies do not support an affirmative conclusion that no such effects exist.
How Horizontal Shareholding Harms Our Economy—And Why Antitrust Law Can Fix It (Harvard Business Law Review, vol. 10, issue 2, 2020), Harvard Business Law Review, 2020. Scholarship & press
But their claims are based on three modifications to the regression, none of which support their conclusion.

How this answer is built

Lines on the record come first: sourced links that no one presents as their own account, each with its strongest source. Then every account recorded here gets its own column, A to Z, none ranked above another. A column quotes only that account's own words and shows the strength of its own sources. Disputed lines are listed apart, with the reason, and lines still being verified come last. Neither is counted. Withdrawn lines are never shown.

A dispute of a study about common ownership of US airlines answers too, and each such line names the study.

When a list is longer than the page shows, the links the public methodology ranks strongest stay (methodology 0.3), and the rest open in the explorer.

Know a source we are missing? Propose it with a pull request to content/entities/event/co/common-ownership-of-us-airlines.md.