Bundling strategy and product differentiation

The existing literature shows that a decrease in the degree of substitutability increases a monopoly’s incentive to bundle. This paper in addition takes into account competition in the second product market and then re-examines how intra-brand and inter-brand product differentiations affect the incentive to bundle. In order to formally examine the above conjectures, this research builds up a two-firm, two-product model in which product 1 (monopoly product) is produced only by the bundling firm and product 2 (competing product) is produced by both firms. The analysis shows that under both Bertrand and Cournot competitions the incentive to bundle does not necessarily increase with the degree of intra-brand differentiation, while it strictly decreases with the degree of inter-brand differentiation. Moreover, under Bertrand competition bundling always decreases consumer surplus, but may increase the competitor’s profit and social surplus. Under Cournot competition bundling always reduces the opponent’s profit and social welfare, but may increase consumer surplus.     

Stackelberg竞争条件下的最佳福利关税与最大收入关税

文章考察Stackelberg竞争条件下的最佳福利关税与最大收入关税。分析表明,最佳福利关税与最大收入关税的相对大小主要取决于产品之间的相互关系和国内外企业的成本差异。当产品是互补品时,最佳福利关税总是小于最大收入关税;当产品是替代品时,最佳福利关税与最大收入关税的关系,既取决于产品间的替代程度又取决于国内外企业间的成本差异。产品的替代程度较弱时,最大收入关税总是大于最佳福利关税;产品的替代程度较强时,若国内外厂商间的成本差异越小,则最佳福利关税越有可能超过最大收入关税。     

REGULATION STRATEGIES FOR THE PROVISION OF PATERNALISTIC GOODS

In this study, we analyze the regulation of markets for the provision of services whose costs are subsidized for paternalistic reasons. We model the choice of a benevolent regulator who wants to maximize consumer welfare in a setting where quality cannot be verified and the good provided is fully subsidized. The choice is thus made between two types of providers (profit maximizers and altruistic providers) and two frameworks (monopoly franchise and quality competition). Our analysis shows that in this environment the performance of mixed markets is always dominated by pure forms. Moreover, although making efficient providers compete for the market minimizes cost, the choice of quality competition with altruistic providers may be preferable from a welfare point of view whenever service quality is relevant and the productivity differential is not substantial.     

Over- and under-investment according to different benchmarks

In a two-stage oligopoly, with investment in the first stage and quantity or price competition in the second stage, there is a “Common Wisdom” Theorem which states that we find over-investment if the goods are substitutes and competition is in strategic substitutes, or if goods are complements and competition is in strategic complements, and that we find under-investment if we have complements and strategic substitutes or substitutes and strategic complements. The existing literature, however, lacks a proof of this theorem and, in particular, it lacks a systematic comparison of the different benchmarks for over- and under-investment. A “naive” benchmark is the cost efficient investment with respect to the subgame perfect (closed loop) equilibrium quantities. Alternative benchmarks (which are more often proposed) are the open loop equilibrium investment or the welfare maximizing investment. The chosen benchmark is critical because the Common Wisdom Theorem applies (under certain conventional conditions) only for the naive benchmark. The other two benchmarks give rise to subcases.     

Pitfalls in Restructuring the Electricity Industry

Abstract. This paper models some reductions in output that may follow the opening of electricity markets to competition. Specifically, we show that vertical separation of electricity generation, transmission and distribution could reduce welfare compared to the previous system of vertically integrated monopoly, if grid owners can act as monopolistic retailers or, alternatively, set access prices that maximize merchandizing surplus. Moreover, we show that a rule of non‐discriminatory pricing would not remedy any of these problems. Hence, to secure the efficiency gains of deregulation, the re‐regulation of the remaining monopolistic core – the electric grid – cannot rely on simple rules like cost‐based non‐discriminatory pricing.     

Deregulating Network Industries: Dealing with Price-quality Tradeoffs

This paper examines the effects of introducing competition into monopolized network industries on prices and infrastructure quality. Analyzing a model with reduced-form demand, we first show that deregulating an integrated monopoly cannot simultaneously decrease the retail price and increase infrastructure quality. Second, we derive conditions under which reducing both retail price and infrastructure quality relative to the integrated monopoly outcome increases welfare. Third, we argue that restructuring and setting very low access charges may yield welfare losses, as infrastructure investment is undermined. We provide an extensive analysis of the linear demand model and discuss policy implications.     

TO REGULATE OR TO DEREGULATE? THE ROLE OF DOWNSTREAM COMPETITION IN UPSTREAM MONOPOLY VERTICALLY LINKED MARKETS

This paper attempts to cast light to the effect of monopoly regulation in Cournot markets compared to its effect in Bertrand markets. To this purpose, we use a simple model of a vertically linked market, where an upstream regulated natural monopoly is trading via two‐part tariff contracts with a downstream duopoly. Combining our results to those of the existing literature on deregulated markets, we argue that when the downstream competition is in prices, efficiency dictates regulating the monopoly with a marginal cost based pricing scheme. However, this type of regulation leads to significant welfare loss, when the downstream market is characterized by Cournot competition.     

Reciprocal Dumping with Product Differentiation*

This paper examines if international trade can reduce total welfare in an international oligopoly with differentiated goods. We show that intra‐industry trade, i.e. “reciprocal dumping,” can result in lower total surplus than autarky in a Cournot model for any degree of product differentiation. Moreover, trade can reduce welfare compared to autarky in a Bertrand model when the local markets are sufficiently competitive and products are sufficiently close substitutes. Otherwise it unambiguously increases welfare.     

Information quality choice and information disclosure in oligopoly

In this paper, we provide a framework to analyze the information disclosure and information quality choice in the oligopoly in which one firm has the opportunity to choose her information quality flexibly and then decide her information disclosure rule after she has observed her information.We find that in the Cournot (Bertrand)competition, when the goods are substitutes (complements) and the degree of substitution (complement) is small enough, the firm will choose the maximal information quality. However, if the degree of substitution (complement) is large enough, the information quality is some intermediate value. On the other hand, in the Cournot (Bertrand) competition, when the goods are complements (substitutes), the maximal information quality will be chosen. We also find that the Fully Revealing case in which the probability of information disclosure is one will occur in (i) the Cournot competition with sufficiently small degree of substitution; (ii) the Cournot competition when goods are complements; (iii) the Bertrand competition when goods are substitutes; (iv) the Bertrand competition with sufficiently small degree of complements. Moreover, we show that the No Revealing case in which the probability of information disclosure is zero will never show up.     

产品差异化下的纵向限制及其竞争效应

垄断制造商在品牌差异度足够低时有激励实施纵向限制,但这是以消费者剩余和社会福利为代价的,而且损失都随着商品差异度特别是品牌内差异度的提高而提高.因此,纵向限制反垄断应该关注限制方非价格竞争程度较低、特别是同时被限制方非价格竞争程度较高的情况.     

Price and quantity competition under free entry

This paper complements that of Cellini et al. (Cellini, R., Lambertini, L., Ottaviano, G. I. P., 2004. Welfare in a differentiated oligopoly with free entry: A cautionary note. Research in Economics, 58:125–33.), which shows that Cournot competition may generate higher welfare compared to Bertrand competition in an economy with free entry. Unlike them, we provide a more general proof for this result and show that Cournot competition generates higher welfare compared to Bertrand competition when the products are sufficiently differentiated. If the products are close substitutes, welfare is higher under Bertrand competition. We show that these qualitative results hold whether or not number of varieties increases market size. We also show when the active firms earn higher profits under Bertrand competition compared to Cournot competition.     

Platform intermediation in a market for differentiated products

We study a two-sided market where a platform attracts firms selling differentiated products and buyers interested in those products. In the subgame perfect equilibrium of the game, the platform fully internalises the network externalities present in the market and firms and consumers all participate in the platform with probability one. The monopolist intermediary extracts all the economic rents generated in the market, except when firms and consumers can trade outside the platform, in which case consumers obtain a rent that corresponds to the utility they would get if they did trade outside the platform. The market allocation is constraint-efficient in the sense that the monopoly platform does not introduce distortions over and above those arising from the market power of the differentiated product sellers. An increase in the number of retailers increases the amount of variety in the platform but at the same time increases competition. As a result, the platform lowers the firm fees and raises the consumer charges. In contrast, an increase in the extent of product differentiation raises the value of the platform for the consumers but weakens competition. In this case, the platform raises both the charge to the consumers and the fee for the firms.     

DEFINING RELEVANT MARKETS FOR PHARMACEUTICALS

To identify the relevant product markets for Swedish pharmaceuticals, a spatial econometrics approach is employed. First, we calculate Moran's Is for different market definitions and then we use a spatial Durbin model to determine the effect of price changes on quantity sold of own and competing products. As expected, the results show that competition is strongest between close substitutes; however, the relevant product markets for Swedish pharmaceuticals extend beyond close substitutes down to products included in the same class on the four‐digit level of the Anatomic Therapeutic Chemical system as defined by the World Health Organization. The spatial regression model further indicates that increases in the price of a product significantly lower quantity sold of that product and in the same time increase the quantity sold of competing products. For close substitutes (products belonging to the same class on the seven‐digit level of the Anatomic Therapeutic Chemical system), as well as for products that, without being close substitutes, belong to the same therapeutic/pharmacological/chemical subgroup (the same class on the five‐digit level of the Anatomic Therapeutic Chemical system), increased competition is also visible after 1 July 2009 when the latest policy changes with regards to pharmaceuticals have been implemented in Sweden.     

Bundled discounts: Strategic substitutes or complements?

Bundled discounts by pairs of otherwise independent firms play an increasingly important role as a strategic tool in several industries. Given that prices of firms competing for the same consumers are strategic complements, one would expect their discounts levels also to be strategic complements. However, in this paper we show that under some circumstances bundled discounts may be strategic substitutes. This occurs under vertically differentiated products where a low quality pair of producers may indeed prefer to lower its discount after an increase in the discount offered by a high quality pair of producers.     

Relaxing competition through quality differentiation and price discrimination

In this paper, I compare two-part tariff competition to linear pricing in a vertically differentiated duopoly. Consumers have identical tastes for quality but differ in their preferences for quantity. The main finding is that quality differentiation occurs in equilibrium if and only if two-part tariffs are feasible. Furthermore, two-part tariff competition encourages entry, which in turn increases welfare. Nevertheless, two-part tariff competition decreases consumer surplus compared to linear pricing.     

Credible delegation

We show that the vertical delegation of decision-making authority to agent firms can act as a credible strategic commitment even when contracts are unobservable (or renegotiable) if and only if multilateral delegation is combined with decentralized ownership of the agent firms. In this case, the possibility of renegotiation of other agents’ contracts constrains the set of contracts acceptable to each agent. Delegation may induce more or less aggressive behavior, depending on the nature of within-structure competition among the agent firms. Thus, delegation may be a valuable, credible strategic commitment mechanism when strategies are either substitutes or complements.     

The Most-Favoured-Customer Pricing Policy and Competitive Advantage

The paper investigates the effects on competition of the unilateral most-favoured-customer pricing policy. A model is considered in which a multimarket incumbent firm faces a threat of entry in one of its two markets. It is shown that contemporaneous most-favoured-customer clauses may change competition to the advantage of the incumbent both under strategic substitutes and strategic complements. If the duopolistic market is strong, the most-favoured-customer policy makes the incumbent 'tough' and may be used for entry deterrence purposes.     

Emission Permit Trading Between Imperfectly Competitive Product Markets

The present paper analyzes the efficiency of emission permit trading between two imperfectly competitive product markets. Even if firms are price takers in permit markets, the integration of permit markets can decrease welfare because of imperfect competition in product markets. If there is asymmetric information between the regulator and firms, the integration of the permit markets could have a positive effect related to the flexibility of an integrated market; this flexibility can justify integrating the permit markets.     

Competition,Welfare and Macroeconomics: A Classical/Sraffian Perspective

The paper reflects on two phenomena seen by orthodoxy as key defining characteristics of imperfect competition: product differentiation and restricted mobility of resources. Product differentiation is first considered in terms of its significance within a Sraffian price model. This in turn allows one to consider the ‘welfare’ effects—considered here in terms of the impact on output per worker—of a degree of monopoly power, to the extent this is conferred on producers by product differentiation. Restricted mobility of resources on the other hand is considered in terms of its impact on the level and pattern of sectoral profit rates and via this on income-expenditure multipliers and hence aggregate output per unit of autonomous demand. Both parts of the analysis suggest that, at least from a Sraffian standpoint, no hard and fast conclusions can be drawn about the welfare effects of product differentiation or restricted mobility of resources; in turn casting doubts on more orthodox claims about the welfare impacts of imperfect competition.