Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/17pdf/16-1454_5h26.pdf
Page Number: 21

Cite as:  585 U. S. ____ (2018) 

17 

Opinion of the Court 

at  merchant  locations  where  Amex  is  not  accepted  and,
thus, Amex’s antisteering provisions do not apply.  See 88 
F.  Supp.  3d,  at  222.    This  suggests  that  the  cause  of  in-
creased  merchant  fees  is  not  Amex’s  antisteering  provi-
sions,  but  rather  increased  competition  for  cardholders 
and  a  corresponding  marketwide  adjustment  in  the  rela-
tive price charged to merchants.  See Klein 575, 609. 

2 
The  plaintiffs  did  offer  evidence  that  Amex  increased 
the  percentage  of  the  purchase  price  that  it  charges  mer-
chants by an average of 0.09% between 2005 and 2010 and 
that  this  increase  was  not  entirely  spent  on  cardholder 
rewards.  See 88 F. Supp. 3d, at 195–197, 215.  The plain-
tiffs  believe  that  this  evidence  shows  that  the  price  of 
Amex’s transactions increased. 

Even  assuming  the  plaintiffs  are  correct,  this  evidence 
does not prove that Amex’s antisteering provisions gave it 
the  power  to  charge  anticompetitive  prices.    “Market 
power  is  the  ability  to raise  price profitably  by  restricting 
output.”  Areeda  &  Hovenkamp  §5.01  (emphasis  added); 
accord, Kodak, 504 U. S., at 464; Business Electronics, 485 
U. S., at 723.  This Court will “not infer competitive injury 
from  price  and  output  data  absent  some  evidence  that 
tends  to  prove  that  output  was  restricted  or  prices  were
above a competitive level.”  Brooke Group Ltd., 509 U. S., 
at 237.  There is no such evidence in this case.  The output
of credit-card transactions grew dramatically from 2008 to 
2013, increasing 30%.  See 838 F. 3d, at 206.  “Where . . . 
output  is  expanding  at  the  same  time  prices  are  increas-
ing,  rising  prices  are  equally  consistent  with  growing 
product demand.”  Brooke Group Ltd., supra, at 237.  And, 
as  previously  explained,  the  plaintiffs  did  not  show  that
Amex charged more than its competitors.