or maintain its monopoly in jarred baby food. In order to successfully recoup losses through higher-than-competitive prices, a firm must have the power to control prices and have sufficient staying power to be able to charge those prices for long enough to make up its losses. Brooke Group, 509 U.S. at 225, 113 S.Ct. 2578; Matsushita Elec. Indus. Co. v. Zenith Radio Corp., 475 U.S. 574, 590-91, 106 S.Ct. 1348, 89 L.Ed.2d 538 (1986). Beech-Nut alleges that Gerber has market power in infant cereal and jarred baby food. The allegation of market power includes not only Gerber’s allegedly 70-86% share of the relevant markets, but also barriers to entry. See Rebel Oil Co. v. Atl. Richfield Co., 51 F.3d 1421, 1434 (9th Cir.1995) (discussing market power); cf. Hunt-Wesson Foods, 627 F.2d at 925 (<HOLDING>). Beech-Nut also claims that it has been driven
holding that market participant socal edison is in privity with the california power exchange corporation not with other market participants holding that an allegation of a 65 market share could be the basis for inferring market power and thus defeated a 12b6 motion to dismiss recognizing implied duty to market holding that a contract for an exclusive agency to market a product contains an implied promise to use all reasonable efforts to market the product holding that changes in the baseball card market between 1965 and 1980 foreclosed any argument that a definition of the relevant market by the federal trade commission could preclude relitigation of the market definition issue