COMPETITIVE PRICING AND EFFICIENCY IN SEARCH EQUILIBRIUM*

We consolidate and generalize some results on price determination and efficiency in search equilibrium. Extending models by Rubinstein and Wolinsky and by Gale, heterogeneous buyers and sellers meet according to a general matching technology and prices are determined by a general bargaining condition. When the discount rate r and search costs converge to 0, we show that prices in all exchanges are the same and equal the competitive, market clearing, price. Given positive search costs, efficiency obtains iff bargaining satisfies Hosios' condition and r=0. When prices are set by third‐party market makers, however, we show that search equilibrium is necessarily efficient.     

Indivisibilities, Lotteries, and Monetary Exchange

We introduce lotteries (randomized trading) into search-theoretic models of money. In a model with indivisible goods and fiat money, we show goods trade with probability 1 and money trades with probability τ, where τ<1 iff buyers have sufficient bargaining power. With divisible goods, a nonrandom quantity q trades with probability 1 and, again, money trades with probability τ where τ<1 iff buyers have sufficient bargaining power. Moreover, q never exceeds the efficient quantity (not true without lotteries). We consider several extensions designed to get commodities as well as money to trade with probability less than 1, and to illuminate the efficiency role of lotteries. Journal of Economic Literature Classification Numbers: E40, D83.     

Bargaining and network structure: An experiment

We consider bargaining in a bipartite network of buyers and sellers, who can only trade with the limited number of people with whom they are connected. We perform an experimental test of a graph-theoretic model that yields unique predictions about equilibrium prices for the networks in our sessions. The results diverge sharply depending on how a connection is made between two separate simple networks, typically conforming to the theoretical directional predictions. Payoffs can be systematically affected even for agents who are not connected by the new link, and we find evidence of a form of social learning.     

Bargaining in a network of buyers and sellers

We analyze bargaining between buyers and sellers who are connected by an exogenously given network. Players can make repeated alternating public offers that may be accepted by any of the responders linked to each specific proposer. Our purpose is to find the conditions of the network which drive the price distribution in equilibrium. This paper uses graph theory tools to provide necessary and sufficient conditions regarding the architecture of networks for the subgame perfect equilibrium of the bargaining game to coincide with the Walrasian outcome.     

The Evolutionary Stability of Auctions over Bargaining

This paper considers equilibrium in transaction mechanisms. In an environment with homogeneous buyers and sellers, which eliminates the advantage auctions possess of matching buyers and sellers, both auctions and bargaining are equilibria. However, only auctions are evolutionarily stable. This identifies a new advantage of auctions over bargaining, arising from the division of the gains from trade.Journal of Economic LiteratureClassification Numbers: C78, C73, D44.     

Evolutionary stability of bargaining and price posting: implications for formal and informal activities

In this paper we study the co-existence of two well known trading protocols, bargaining and price-posting. To do so we consider a frictional environment where buyers and sellers play price-posting and bargaining games infinitely many times. Sellers switch from one market to the other at a rate that is proportional to their payoff differentials. Given the different informational requirements associated with these two trading mechanisms, we examine their possible co-existence in the context of informal and formal markets. Other than having different trading protocols, we also consider other distinguishing features. We find a unique stable equilibrium where price-posting (formal markets) and bargaining (informal markets) co-exist. In a richer environment where both sellers and buyers can move across markets, we show that there exists a unique stable dynamic equilibrium where formal and informal activities also co-exist whenever sellers’ and buyers’ net costs of trading in the formal market have opposite signs.     

Convergence to perfect competition of a dynamic matching and bargaining market with two-sided incomplete information and exogenous exit rate

Consider a decentralized, dynamic market with an infinite horizon and incomplete information in which buyers and sellers' values for the traded good are private and independently drawn. Time is discrete, each period has length δ, and each unit of time a large number of new buyers and sellers enter the market. Within a period each buyer is matched with a seller and each seller is matched with zero, one, or more buyers. Every seller runs a first price auction with a reservation price and, if trade occurs, the seller and winning buyer exit with their realized utility. Traders who fail to trade either continue in the market to be rematched or exit at an exogenous rate. We show that in all steady state, perfect Bayesian equilibria, as δ approaches zero, equilibrium prices converge to the Walrasian price and realized allocations converge to the competitive allocation.     

WHO SEARCHES?*

We consider a directed search model with buyers and sellers and determine whether buyers look for sellers or vice versa. The buyers and sellers can choose to search or wait; what they do in equilibrium depends on the relative size of the two populations and the price formation mechanism. We study bargaining and auctions and find that when one population is much larger than the other the former searches and the latter waits. Under auction with roughly equal populations some buyers and sellers search and some wait. Our results challenge the practice of postulating who searches and who waits.     

Bertrand price competition with differentiated commodities

This develops a general equilibrium, differentiated commodity version of Bertrand price competition. We study two, related market games in which buyers as well as sellers announce both quantities and prices. In the first game, buyers' strategies are artificially restricted. The Nash allocations of this game will be nearly competitive, provided that the commodities supplied by sellers are sufficiently similar. In the second game, the restriction on buyers' strategies is relaxed and a stronger solution criterion, called local perfection, is invoked. The locally perfect equilibria of the unrestricted game coincide the Nash equilibria of the restricted game.     

Disapproval aversion or inflated inequity acceptance? The impact of expressing emotions in ultimatum bargaining

Past experimental research has shown that when rating systems are available, buyers are more generous in accepting unfair offers in ultimatum bargaining. However, it also suggests that, under these conditions, sellers behave more fairly to avoid receiving negative feedback. This paper experimentally investigates which effect is stronger with the use of a rating system: buyers’ inflated inequity acceptance or sellers’ disapproval aversion. We explore this question by varying the information condition on the buyers’ side. Our experiment shows that in a setup where the size of the pie is common knowledge for both buyers and sellers, when a rating system is present, the sellers exhibit disapproval aversion but the buyers do not display greater acceptance of inequity. By contrast, when only sellers are aware of the size of the pie, sellers behave aggressively to exploit buyers and their behavior does not change in the presence of a rating system; however, buyers display greater acceptance of inequity when a rating system is present. We discuss how these results can be explained by a theoretical model that includes sellers’ social disapproval aversion and buyers’ disappointment aversion in addition to the players’ inequality aversion.     

Trading networks with price-setting agents

In a wide range of markets, individual buyers and sellers trade through intermediaries, who determine prices via strategic considerations. Typically, not all buyers and sellers have access to the same intermediaries, and they trade at correspondingly different prices that reflect their relative amounts of power in the market. We model this phenomenon using a game in which buyers, sellers, and traders engage in trade on a graph that represents the access each buyer and seller has to the traders. We show that the resulting game always has a subgame perfect Nash equilibrium, and that all equilibria lead to an efficient allocation of goods. Finally, we analyze trader profits in terms of the graph structure — roughly, a trader can command a positive profit if and only if it has an “essential” connection in the network, thus providing a graph-theoretic basis for quantifying the amount of competition among traders.     

Buyer groups as strategic commitments

Buyer cooperatives, buyer alliances, and horizontal mergers are often perceived as attempts to increase buyer power. In contrast to prior research emphasizing group size, I show that even small buyer groups composed of buyers with heterogeneous preferences can increase price competition among rival sellers by committing to purchase exclusively from one seller. Without transfer payments, at least one buyer group exists for each pair of sellers and buyer groups membership is chosen to achieve indifference between the two sellers. With transfer payments, and just two sellers, the grand coalition is a coalition-proof subgame perfect equilibrium (CP-SPNE), though equilibria with arbitrarily many buyer groups also exist. With three sellers (and with more sellers when the distribution of buyers is symmetric), a CP-SPNE always exists, all coalition-proof equilibria are payoff equivalent and have at least one buyer group for each pair of firms, so the grand coalition is not an equilibrium.     

Prices, Delay, and the Dynamics of Trade

We characterize the dynamics of trading patterns and market composition when trade is bilateral, finding a trading partner is costly, prices are determined by bargaining, and preferences are private information. We show that equilibrium is inefficient and exhibits delay as sellers price discriminate between buyers with different values. As frictions vanish, transaction prices are asymptotically competitive and the welfare loss of inefficient trading approaches zero, even though the trading patterns continue to be inefficient and delay persists. Journal of Economic Literature Classification Numbers: D40, D50.     

THE HIDDEN COST OF BARGAINING: EVIDENCE FROM A CHEATING-PRONE MARKETPLACE

It is widely believed that successful bargaining helps consumers increase their surplus. We present evidence from a field experiment showing that bargaining over price reduces buyer surplus in a marketplace where sellers cheat on the weight whose value may more than offset the price discount. Our results show that bargaining entails hidden costs since sellers cheat significantly more when buyers bargain than not and they cheat significantly more when bargaining succeeds than fails. Overall bargaining reduces buyer surplus than not bargaining. Our result is relevant for credence goods markets where bargaining over prices may induce sellers to “undertreat” more.     

Bargaining and separation costs in two-sided markets

A two-sided market is characterized by contract negotiations, bilateral exchanges between buyers and sellers. Separation costs endow trading partners with monopoly power, rendering this a market of bilateral monopolistic competition. Market equilibrium is defined by these negotiations, a matching of the two sides, and a set of prices; the costs of disagreement are endogenous. A bargaining strategy some players use is commitment to a position. Disagreements are possible and, contrary to the case of bilateral monopoly, these disagreements are not always inefficient.     

Remain silent and ye shall suffer: seller exploitation of reticent buyers in an experimental reputation system

By providing incentives for sellers to act in a trustworthy manner, reputation mechanisms can mitigate moral-hazard problems when particular buyers and sellers interact infrequently. However, these mechanisms rely on buyers sharing their private information about sellers, and thus may suffer from too little feedback when provision is costly. We experimentally compare a standard feedback mechanism to one in which sellers can inspect a buyer’s feedback-provision history, thus providing incentives to share private information even when costly. We find fairly high trust and trustworthiness in all markets, with buyers providing costly feedback, especially negative, sufficient to induce trustworthiness. However, feedback-provision histories did not improve outcomes, and at least weakly decreased trustworthiness with experienced participants, as this information enabled sellers to discriminate and ship less frequently to buyers lacking a reputation for information sharing.     

The Nash bargaining solution in general n-person cooperative games

We present a noncooperative foundation for the Nash bargaining solution for an n-person cooperative game in strategic form. The Nash bargaining solution should be immune to any coalitional deviations. Our noncooperative approach yields a new core concept, called the Nash core, for a cooperative game based on a consistency principle. We prove that the Nash bargaining solution can be supported (in every subgame) by a stationary subgame perfect equilibrium of the bargaining game if and only if the Nash bargaining solution belongs to the Nash core.     

A Walrasian Rubinstein and Wolinsky model

We provide a full dynamic analysis of a continuous-time variant of Rubinstein and Wolinsky (1985) matching and bargaining model with unbalanced flows of buyers and sellers. The focus is on the price limit as the frictions of search are removed. It is found that a necessary and sufficient condition for the limit price to be Walrasian at all times is the alignment of the initial buyer and seller stocks with the flows.     

Bargaining one-dimensional social choices

We analyze bargaining over the one-dimension characteristic of a public good among n impatient players when decisions require q favorable votes, q?2. Stationary subgame perfect equilibrium strategies are characterized for all games with deterministic protocol. We provide a monotonicity condition (satisfied by all single-peak, strictly quasi-concave and concave utilities) that assures uniqueness for every q whenever player's utilities are symmetric around the peak. Without symmetry, the monotonicity condition assures uniqueness for qualified majorities, q>n/2, provided that agents are sufficiently patient and utilities satisfy an additional regularity condition. Asymptotic uniqueness is assured for qualified majorities by imposing only the monotonicity condition.     

Seller competition by mechanism design

This paper analyzes a market game in which sellers offer trading mechanisms to buyers and buyers decide which seller to go to depending on the trading mechanisms offered. In a (subgame perfect) equilibrium of this market, sellers hold auctions with an efficient reserve price but charge an entry fee. The entry fee depends on the number of buyers and sellers, the distribution of buyer valuations, and the buyer cost of entering the market. As the size of the market increases, the entry fee decreases and converges to zero in the limit. We study how the surplus of buyers and sellers depends on the number of agents on each side of the market in this decentralized trading environment.