I read it more that an actor can lower prices in one market or at one time and raise them in others or at another time, and that regulators should police predat

I read it more that an actor can lower prices in one market or at one time and raise them in others or at another time, and that regulators should police predatory pricing because of the harm to competition and consumers, even if in some markets or at some times prices are lower. That's consistent with what the FTC is doing here. Further, the essay was written six years ago, and to an audience of legal scholars. This case is about Amazon today and the audience are courts. The facts and arguments derived from them are naturally different. I would suggest reading the entire thing, especially the excellent summary on the history of legal and economic theory applied to anti-trust to understand the deeper meaning behind the abstract itself. It's hard to boil down a nuanced and complex argument into a single paragraph. There's a lot of meat there.