Search results

John McGee's 1958 paper, “Predatory Price Cutting: The Standard Oil (NJ) Case,” has had an astonishing influence on both antitrust policy in the United States and economic lore. McGee argued that predatory pricing is irrational and his analysis of the Standard Oil Company Matter, decided in 1911, led him to conclude that the Record in this case does not show that Standard Oil engaged in predatory pricing. This single publication appears to serve as a foundation of the U.S. Supreme Court's position on the issue of predatory pricing, as well as the assertion by many economists that predatory pricing is irrational and rarely occurs.

Numerous arguments have been advanced during the past 25 years that predatory pricing can be a rational strategy. As to McGee's empirical findings, there has been no re-examination of the Record of the Standard Oil case to determine the validity of his finding that the trial “Record” does not support the claim that Standard Oil engaged in predatory pricing.

We examined this Record and have found that the trial Record contains considerable evidence of predatory pricing by Standard Oil. Therefore, the Record does not support McGee's conclusion that Standard Oil did not engage in predatory pricing.

Thus, the decisions of the Supreme Court in recent years, as well as the opinions of many economists, concerning predatory pricing are not consistent with either current theory or the empirical record.

The situating of pimatisiwin as a framework for spatial justice and self-determination aids educators in strengthening their understandings of Indigenous knowledges to support an authentic inclusion of Indigenous students with disabilities. Through the sharing of Canada’s colonial history, and by critically examining the principles of care within special education, the author exposes its relationship with ableism, normalcy, eugenics, and white privilege to show how Indigenous peoples continue to be marginalized in the twenty-first century. This justice work asks educators to shift their perspectives of inclusion and wellness through the insertion of an Indigenous lens, one to help them see and hear the faces and voices of disabled Aboriginal children and their kinships. The chapter discusses the social model of disability, the psychology of Gentle Teaching, Indigenous ethics, and principles of natural laws through the voices of Nehiyawak and other knowledge keepers, in order to suggest an agenda for educators to come to an understanding of an emancipatory and gentle education. Spatial justice and Indigenous epistemologies merge as synergistic, inclusive, and holistic entities, to support Aboriginal children and youth as both they and those who teach learn to celebrate disabled ontologies. The chapter concludes by presenting how Gentle Teaching and Indigenous ways of knowing should be honored in this quest of creating an equitable, caring, and inclusive society for all disabled Indigenous children and youth.

The purpose of this paper is to demonstrate how to incorporate knowledge concepts into analytical models of strategy formulation and the strategic theory of the firm.

The paper examines four different perspectives of the elusive concept of “knowledge”, namely, “knowledge as assets”, “knowledge through innovation”, “knowledge embedded in routines” and “knowledge through learning”. The study attempts to specify and interrelate the concepts of a knowledge‐based strategic theory of the firm.

The “knowledge web” is seen as a partial framework, capturing from a strategic perspective how both specific and organisational knowledge build the competences necessary for the value‐creating activities of the firm.

The paper provides frameworks for understanding how knowledge can reinforce the strategic core competences of the firm.

The paper addresses knowledge as a key element in the development of an enhanced strategic theory of the firm, incorporating the knowledge‐based viewpoint.

The Coase theorem is associated with Stigler because Stigler coined the term. The object of this paper is to show that Stigler’s Coase theorem is Stiglerian for deeper – namely, methodological – reasons. We argue that, convinced as he was by the importance of Coase’s message, Stigler also believed that this message – such as presented in “The Federal Communications Commission” (1959) or “The Problem of Social Cost” (1962) – was not scientific. Hence, he had to transform it into a theorem to give it a scientific dimension. This is what we try to show by presenting Stigler’s methodology and by confronting it to the methodology used in Coase’s articles.

In these days of jargon and slang, to the purist it must seem that little is described by its real name, that is, during conversation. Most people refer to the city as “the smoke” and the city‐dweller's pseudonym for the country is “out in the sticks”, which, of course, could mean that “the sticks” are kindling to a fire that has not been lit, with the city “smoke” as the end‐product of the fire that is burning up those who rush hither and thither in its bedlamite streets and ugly office blocks. The cottage, the church and inn no longer completely fill the lives of the villagers; they now have piped water supplies, electricity and telephones; deep freezers, colour television and cars; they have moved closer to the city standards of comfort and convenience without losing any of the enduring qualities which make them different. And the countryman is very different to the town‐dweller—in outlook, habit and countenance. Even the villager who works in the town and city, and nowadays there are many of them, would not change his home in the country for a flat or terrace house in a mean street, despite the long journeying to and fro. At one time, it had to be a special type of girl who chose a home in these rural settings, with few or perhaps no neighbours and no corner‐shop, but now more and more are realizing that life in a village is easier on the whole family.

Since the late 1970s, research in accounting has been colonized by positive accounting theory (PAT) despite strong claims that it is fundamentally flawed in terms of epistemology and methodology. This paper aims to offer new insights to PAT by critically examining its basic tenets.

The paper subjects the language of the Rochester School to a deconstruction that is a transformational reading. This uncovers rhetorical operations and unveils hidden associations with other texts and ideas.

A new interpretation of the Rochester School discourse is provided. To afford scientific credibility to deregulation within the accounting field, Watts and Zimmerman used supplements and missing links to enhance the authority of PAT. They placed supplements inside their texts to provide a misleading image of PAT. These supplements rest on von Hayek's long‐term shaping blueprint to defeat apostles of the welfare state. Yet, to set PAT apart from normative theories that Watts and Zimmerman claimed were contaminated by value judgments, they made no reference in their text to the tight links between the Rochester School and the libertarian project initiated by von Hayek.

Any reading of PAT cannot present the infinite play of meaning that is possible within a text. Deconstruction involves a commitment to on‐going, eternal questioning.

The paper provides evidence of the relation between PAT and the neoliberal (libertarian) project of von Hayek. PAT is viewed as part of the institutional infrastructure and ideological apparatus that legitimates the hegemony of markets.