Under the Sherman Act, economic damages are calculated based on the principles of antitrust economics and the specific facts of the case. The goal of calculating damages in an antitrust case is to determine the amount of harm caused to the plaintiff as a result of the anticompetitive conduct of the defendant.

There are several methods for calculating economic damages in antitrust cases, including the following:

the four methods for calculating economic damages in antitrust cases:

1. Overcharge Method: The overcharge method calculates damages by comparing the prices charged by the defendant with the prices that would have prevailed in a competitive market. The difference between the actual price and the competitive price is the overcharge, and this overcharge is used to calculate the damages suffered by the plaintiff. The overcharge method is often used in cases where the anticompetitive conduct results in higher prices for the plaintiff and other consumers. The method requires a determination of what the competitive price would have been absent the anticompetitive conduct, which can be challenging and requires expert economic analysis.
2. Market Share Method: The market share method calculates damages based on the plaintiff’s lost profits resulting from the defendant’s anticompetitive conduct. This method considers the plaintiff’s market share, the defendant’s market share, and the competitive price that would have prevailed in the absence of anticompetitive conduct. The damages are calculated by determining how much of the lost profits the plaintiff could have captured in a competitive market. This method is often used in cases where the plaintiff is a competitor of the defendant and has lost sales or profits as a result of the anticompetitive conduct.
3. Cost-Based Method: The cost-based method calculates damages based on the plaintiff’s increased costs resulting from the defendant’s anticompetitive conduct. This method considers the difference between the plaintiff’s actual costs and the costs that would have prevailed in a competitive market. The damages are calculated by determining how much the plaintiff’s costs increased as a result of the anticompetitive conduct. This method is often used in cases where the anticompetitive conduct results in increased costs for the plaintiff and other firms.
4. Yardstick Method: The yardstick method calculates damages by comparing the profits of the plaintiff’s business before and after the defendant’s anticompetitive conduct. This method considers the difference between the plaintiff’s actual profits and the profits that would have prevailed in a competitive market. The damages are calculated by determining how much the plaintiff’s profits decreased as a result of the anticompetitive conduct. This method is often used in cases where the anticompetitive conduct results in reduced profits for the plaintiff and other firms.

In summary, each of these methods is designed to help determine the economic damages suffered by the plaintiff as a result of the defendant’s anticompetitive conduct. The choice of method will depend on the specific facts of the case, including the type of anticompetitive conduct, the market structure, and the nature of the harm suffered by the plaintiff. The ultimate goal is to ensure that the plaintiff is fully compensated for the harm suffered and that the damages awarded are sufficient to deter similar anticompetitive conduct in the future.