scholarly journals Market Power and Joint Ownership: Evidence from Nuclear Plants in Sweden*

2021 ◽  
Vol 69 (3) ◽  
pp. 485-536
Author(s):  
Erik Lundin
2016 ◽  
Vol 106 (8) ◽  
pp. 2185-2218 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jessica Calfee Stahl

This paper exploits deregulation in the 1990s to estimate viewership and revenue effects of consolidation in broadcast television, then finds cost effects that explain the ownership structure given viewership and revenue effects. Results suggest that consolidation greatly increased profitability in an industry with otherwise declining profitability. Groups with broader national coverage attract more advertising per station. Joint ownership of two stations within a market and network ownership both allow for significant cost savings. There is some evidence that within-market consolidation allows stations to achieve local market power. However, both within-market and across-market consolidation appear to have boosted viewership, on net. (JEL G32, L13, L25, L51, L82, L88)


2008 ◽  
Vol 64 (4) ◽  
pp. 34-37 ◽  
Author(s):  
Edwin S. Lyman
Keyword(s):  

Jurnal Akta ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 197
Author(s):  
Reza Fairuzabadi ◽  
Akhmad Khisni

ABSTRAKPenelitian ini bertujuan mengetahui peran PPAT setelah terjadinya penetapan pembagian waris di Pengadilan Agama Garut, apabila terjadi hal terkait masalah proses peralihan hak atas tanah dan atau pembagian warisan sebaiknya para ahli waris terlebih dahulu datang ke kantor PPAT untuk berkonsultasi, agar dijelaskan tentang mekanisme penyelesaian serta di buatkan akta terkait pembagian waris sesuai peristiwa hukumnya yang sebelumnya sudah melalui proses pembagian waris di Pengadilan Agama. Penelitian ini mengggunakan pendekatan yuridis empiris.Berdasarkan metode tersebut penelitian menghasilkan pada pokoknya (1) Peran PPAT dalam proses peralihan hak dan Pembagian Waris di Pengadilan Agama Garut Menurut Putusan Pengadilan Agama yang isinya mengembalikan dan membagikan harta warisan kepada masing-masing ahli waris, selanjutnya PPAT membuatkan APHB, pada umumnya sama dengan alasan-alasan yuridis terkait pembuatan APHB yang menyatakan bahwa tanah yang merupakan warisan belum didaftar wajib dilampirkan dokumen-dokumen yang berkaitan dengan kewarisan dalam proses pendaftaran haknya sebagaimana tersebut dalam pasal 42 ayat 2 PP.24/1997, Pasal 111 PMA nomor 3 tahun 1997, KHI pasal 171-176, Pasal 37 ayat (1) PP 24/97, Pasal 136 PMA, UUPA nomor 5 Tahun 1960, PP 37 Tahun 1998, PP 3 Tahun 1997, PP 1 Tahun 2006, Perkaban Nomor 8 Tahun 2012. (2) Kendala dan solusi yang dihadapi oleh PPAT : a. Ketentuan yang mengharuskan pencantuman tanda tangan asli para ahli waris dalam pembuatan Surat Keterangan Waris dan Akta Pembagian Hak Bersama. b. Sistem pemecahan secara sempurna yang melahirkan produk akhir berupa sertifikat hak atas tanah dengan kepemilikan bersama atas nama para ahli waris. c. Perhitungan Pajak APHB. d. Persyaratan administratif yang harus dilengkapi oleh para ahli waris. e. Kantor Pertanahan terlalu kaku dalam menerapkan kelengkapan persyaratan. f. Kebiasaan Pejabat Pembuat Akta Tanah menyuruh pegawainya untuk menjadi saksi dalam pembuatan Surat Keterangan Waris. g. Para ahli waris kurang mempunyai kesadaran hukum dalam melengkapi persyaratan proses pembagian hak bersama.Kata kunci : Peralihan Hak Atas Tanah, Pembagian Hak Bersama, Penetapan Pembagian WarisABSTRACTThis study aims to determine the role of PPAT after the establishment of inheritance division in Garut Religious Court, in case of problems related to the process of transition of land rights and / or inheritance division, the heirs must first come to the PPAT office to consult, to explain the settlement mechanism and made a deed related to the division of inheritance according to legal events that have been through the process of distributing inheritance in the Religious Courts. This research employs empirical juridical approachBased on the method, the research produces basically (1) The role of PPAT in the process of transition of rights and division of inheritance in Garut Religious Court Based on the Decision of Religious Court whose contents restore and distribute inheritance to each heirs, then PPAT make APHB, juridical reasons related to the creation of the APHB stating that the land which is inherited has not been registered must be attached with documents related to inheritance in the process of registration of its rights as mentioned in Article 42 paragraph 2 of PP.24 / 1997, Article 111 PMA number 3 of 1997, KHI article 171-176, Article 37 paragraph (1) PP 24/97, Article 136 PMA, UUPA number 5 Year 1960, PP 37 Year 1998, PP 3 Year 1997, PP 1 Year 2006, Perkaban Number 8 Year 2012. (2 ) Constraints and solutions faced by PPAT: a. The provisions that require the inclusion of the original signatures of the heirs in the making of the Certificate of Inheritance and the Deed of Rights Sharing. b. A perfect splitting system that produces the final product of a land title certificate with joint ownership on behalf of the heirs. c. APHB Tax Calculation. d. Administrative requirements to be completed by the heirs. e. Land Office is too rigid in applying the requirements. f. Habit of Officers of the Deed Land Author instructs his employees to become witnesses in the making of the Inheritance Certificate. g. The heirs lack legal awareness in completing the terms of the process of sharing common rights.Keywords: Land Rights Transfer, Shared Rights Sharing, Stipulation of Inheritance


2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
James Gibson

Despite what we learn in law school about the “meeting of the minds,” most contracts are merely boilerplate—take-it-or-leave-it propositions. Negotiation is nonexistent; we rely on our collective market power as consumers to regulate contracts’ content. But boilerplate imposes certain information costs because it often arrives late in the transaction and is hard to understand. If those costs get too high, then the market mechanism fails. So how high are boilerplate’s information costs? A few studies have attempted to measure them, but they all use a “horizontal” approach—i.e., they sample a single stratum of boilerplate and assume that it represents the whole transaction. Yet real-world transactions often involve multiple layers of contracts, each with its own information costs. What is needed, then, is a “vertical” analysis, a study that examines fewer contracts of any one kind but tracks all the contracts the consumer encounters, soup to nuts. This Article presents the first vertical study of boilerplate. It casts serious doubt on the market mechanism and shows that existing scholarship fails to appreciate the full scale of the information cost problem. It then offers two regulatory solutions. The first works within contract law’s unconscionability doctrine, tweaking what the parties need to prove and who bears the burden of proving it. The second, more radical solution involves forcing both sellers and consumers to confront and minimize boilerplate’s information costs—an approach I call “forced salience.” In the end, the boilerplate experience is as deep as it is wide. Our empirical work should reflect that fact, and our policy proposals should too.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document