Institutional Design of the Order 220 in Relation to Digital and Classical Markets

The proposed article reflects a methodological description and specific proposals for the content of certain provisions of the Procedure for analyzing the state of competition in the commodity market, approved in accordance with Order No. 220 of the Federal Antimonopoly Service of Russia dated April 28, 2010 in connection with a set of changes related primarily to digital markets. The article presents a brief historical content of changes and transformations of methods for analyzing commodity markets for the purposes of antitrust enforcement, which shows the need for important additions and modernization of the Order 220, both in relation to digital markets and updating concepts and categories of the general outline of commodity market analysis. Special attention is paid to the fact that the instrumental disclosure of the concepts of “decisive influence” and “network effect” are the most important narrative of the regulatory axis in the digital agenda. The article proposes a matrix of variability of research tools for analyzing the relevant market (classical and digital), since significant transformations of the classical market paradigm in the context of expanding digitalization of public and economic life imply a change in research tools for assessing the state of the competitive environment. Given that different types of online platforms compete on the basis of different quality parameters, a description of the SSNDQ test is presented, which may become the main argument for the possibility of switching platform users and its inclusion in the Order of 220 is possible. For the first time in scientific research content, the author’s vision of instrumental assessments of network effects and signs of dominance of digital platforms is systematically reflected, indicators for analyzing the consequences and strength of the network effect are systematized. Four complex groups of indicators are proposed to assess the consequences and strength of the network effect, and their meaningful content is reflected.

1. RF Federal Law “On Protection of Competition” of July 26, 2006, no.135-FZ. SPS «Konsul’tantPlyus». Available at: https://www.consultant.ru/document/cons_doc_LAW_61763/ (accessed 25.12.2023) (in Russian).

2. RF Order of the Federal Antimonopoly Service “Procedure for analyzing the state of competition in the commodity market” of April 28, 2010, no.220. SPS «Konsul’tantPlyus». Available at: https://www.consultant.ru/document/cons_doc_LAW_103446/ (accessed 15.12.2023) (in Russian).

3. Tsyganov A. G. Introduction. Formation of a system for analyzing commodity markets in the activities of the Russian antimonopoly authority. In: Assessment of the state of competition in commodity markets legal and general issues: monograph. Moscow, Izdatel’skaya gruppa «Yurist» Publ., 2020, pp.17-40.

4. The Model Law on Competition. UNCTAD. Available at: https://unctad.org/publication/model-law-competition (accessed 15.12.2023).

5. Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation “On some issues arising in connection with the application of antimonopoly legislation by courts” of March 4, 2021, no.2. SPS «Konsul’tantPlyus». Available at: https://www.consultant.ru/document/cons_doc_LAW_378656/ (accessed 15.12.2023) (in Russian).

6. Knyazeva I. V., Zaikin N. N. The phenomenon of bargaining power in competitive commodity markets. Sovremennaya konkurentsiya=Journal of Modern Competition, 2022, vol.16, no.4, pp.5-18. DOI: 10.37791/2687-0657-2022-16-4-5-18.

7. Popondopulo V. F. The market power of manufacturers and consumers of goods, its manifestation forms and legislative regulation. Konkurentnoe pravo=Competition Law, 2021, no.4, pp.2-9 (in Russian). DOI: 10.18572/2225-8302-2021-4-2-9.

8. Anand B. The Content Trap: A Strategist’s Guide to Digital Change. New York, Random House, 2016, 464 р.

9. Stobierski T. What are network effects? // Harvard Business School, November 12, 2020. Available at: https://online. hbs.edu/blog/post/what-are-network-effects (accessed 25.12.2023).

10. Jin L., Coolican D. 16 Ways to Measure Network Effects // Andreessen Horowitz, December 13, 2018. Available at: https://a16z.com/16-ways-to-measure-network-effects/ (accessed 25.12.2023).

11. Network Effects and Efficiencies in Multisided Markets. Note by H. Shelanski, S. Knox and A. Dhilla. Hearing on Re-thinking the use of traditional antitrust enforcement tools in multi-sided markets. 21–23 June 2017. Available at: https://one.oecd.org/document/DAF/COMP/WD(2017)40/FINAL/en/pdf (accessed 15.12.2023).

12. Shastitko A. Ye., Markova O. A. An old friend is better than two new ones? Approaches to market research in the context of digital transformation for the antitrust laws enforcement. Voprosy ekonomiki, 2020, no.6, pp.37-55 (in Russian). DOI: 10.32609/0042-8736-2020-6-37-55.

13. The Future of Market Definition by the European Commission. Latham & Watkins LLP. Available at: https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=a5b6644b-8e52-4cba-89a5-b6df6a0ea630 (accessed 15.12.2023).