MGM-Mirage – Mandalay Resorts Casino Merger
The casino merger is legal according to the antitrust laws. Competition is always ruthless in the free market. Therefore, the antitrust law offers regulation to the competition for fair competition in the market. According to Bentil (1998) the term antitrust mentions the nineteenth century giants, corporations who merged into units called trusts. The antitrust law enforced and prohibited discrimination of the competitors by selling the services or products to the customers at different prices which in turn forces the buyers to enter into contracts exclusively. Furthermore, it forbids domination through sharing of board members between competing companies and market and corporate mergers. However, the law promotes open marketing job creation, reliability in the marketplace and stable pricing. The smaller companies such as Caesar’s Entertainment also had their shares rose which presents healthy competition among the casinos.
The theory of utility mentions that the right decision should promote happiness among the stakeholders involved. The utility refers to the extent to which the merger promotes happiness among the competitors. The casino merger is indeed a morally perused according to the Utilitarian ethics since it brings pleasure to both casino business holders in town. Furthermore, the merger brought honesty, courage, friendship and knowledge among the competitors. The fact that the other small companies had their shareholders increasing shows pleasurable results in the business environment (Hammond, 1996).
Mirage-Mandalay Casino can attain Social responsibility by promoting environmental sensitivity and cultural impact of the business. The company should endorse campaigns to react to the international political pressures exerted by national, local and international anti-corporate movements and promote sustainable development among the competitors. Porter (2008) mentions that the social responsibility procedures should create profit-driven agendas which promote the development over sustainability in business. The company should go beyond the law obligations and requirements to voluntarily address the societal needs and all the stakeholders affected by corporate practices and policies. Corporate social responsibility benefits the business by improving their efficiency, increased revenues, improved management risks and strong branding.
Bentil, K. (January 01, 1988). Common Market anti-trust law and restrictive business agreements or practices prompted by national regulatory measures. European Competition Law Review.Eclr, 9, 3, 354-383.
Hammond, P. J. (January 01, 1996). Consequentialist decision theory and utilitarian ethics.Ethics, Rationality, and Economic Behaviour / Edited by Francesco Farina, Frank Hahn, and Stefano Vannucci.
Porter, T. B. (May 01, 2008). Managerial applications of corporate social responsibility and systems thinking for achieving sustainability outcomes.Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 25, 3, 397-411.