Pricing and commitment by two‐sided platforms

I study pricing and commitment by platforms in two‐sided markets with the following characteristics: (i) platforms are essential bottleneck inputs for buyers and sellers transacting with each other; (ii) sellers arrive before buyers; and (iii) platforms can charge both fixed fees and variable fees (royalties). I show that a monopoly platform may prefer not to commit to the price it will charge buyers at the same time it announces its seller price if it faces unfavorable seller expectations. With competing platforms, commitment makes the existence of an exclusive equilibrium (in which sellers register with only one platform) less likely, but it has no impact on multi‐homing equilibria (in which sellers support both platforms) whenever these exist.     

The Risk‐Sharing Implications of Disaster Insurance Funds

We study the risk‐sharing implications that arise from introducing a disaster insurance fund to the cat insurance market. Such a form of intervention can increase efficiency in the private market, and our design of disaster insurance suggests a prominent role of catastrophe reinsurance. The model predicts buyers will increase their demand in the private market, and the seller will lower prices to such an extent that their revenues decrease upon introduction of disaster insurance. We test two predictions in the context of the Terrorism Risk Insurance Act (TRIA). It is already known that the introduction of TRIA led to negative abnormal returns in the insurance industry. In addition, we show this negative effect is stronger for larger and for low‐risk‐averse firms—two results that are consistent with our model. The seller’s risk aversion plays an important role in quantifying such feedback effects, and we point toward possible distortions in which a firm may even be overhedged upon introduction of disaster insurance.     

Intertemporal price discrimination with two products

We study the two‐product monopoly profit maximization problem for a seller who can commit to a dynamic pricing strategy. We show that if consumers' valuations are not strongly ordered, then optimality for the seller can require intertemporal price discrimination: the seller offers a choice between supplying a complete bundle now, or delaying the supply of a component of that bundle until a later date. For general valuations, we establish a sufficient condition for such dynamic pricing to be more profitable than mixed bundling. So we show that the established no‐discrimination‐across‐time result does not extend to two‐product sellers under standard taste distributions.     

Optimal certification policy,entry, and investment in the presence of public signals

We explore the optimal disclosure policy of a certification intermediary where (i) the seller decides on entry and investment in product quality, and (ii) the buyers observe an additional public signal on quality. The optimal policy maximizes rent extraction from the seller by trading off incentives for entry and investment. We identify conditions under which full, partial or no disclosure can be optimal. The intermediary's report becomes noisier as the public signal gets more precise, but if the public signal is sufficiently precise, the intermediary resorts to full disclosure. However, the social welfare may reduce when the public signal becomes more informative.     

Auctions with heterogeneous entry costs

If bidders have independent private values and homogeneous entry costs, a first‐ or second‐price auction with a reserve price equal to the seller’s value maximizes social surplus and seller revenue. We show that if entry costs are heterogeneous and private information, then the revenue‐maximizing reserve price is above the seller’s value, a positive admission fee (and a reserve price equal to the seller’s value) generates more revenue, and an entry cap combined with an admission fee generates even more revenue. Social surplus and seller revenue may either increase or decrease in the number of bidders, but they coincide asymptotically.     

Buying reputation as a signal of quality: Evidence from an online marketplace

Seller reputation, generated by buyer feedback, is critical to fostering trust in online marketplaces. Marketplaces or sellers may choose to compensate buyers for providing feedback. Signaling theory predicts that only sellers of high-quality products will reward buyers for truthful feedback, especially when a product lacks any feedback and when the seller is not established. We confirm these hypotheses using Taobao's reward-for-feedback mechanism. High-quality products, especially without established feedback, are chosen for feedback rewards, which cause sales to increase by 36%. Marketplaces and consumers can therefore benefit from allowing sellers to buy feedback and signal their high-quality products in the process.     

Why government bonds are sold by auction and corporate bonds by posted-price selling

When information is costly, a seller may wish to prevent prospective buyers from acquiring information, for the cost of information acquisition ultimately is borne by the seller. A seller can achieve the desired prevention through posted-price selling, by offering prospective buyers a discount. No such prevention is possible in the case of an auction. We establish the result that the seller prefers posted-price selling when the cost of information acquisition is high and auctions when it is low. We view corporate bonds as an instance of the former case, and government bonds as an instance of the latter.     

Buyers' and sellers' agents in the housing market

We explain why buyers in the housing market use an agent employed by the seller. Such agents reduce buyers' search costs so that more buyers search a particular house. This increases the probability of the sale of the house and possibly also its selling price. However, since the selling price increases, if at all, by less than the fee paid by the seller to the agent, both buyers and sellers are better off. We identify two characteristics that give rise to sellers' agents and show that markets that do not have such agents are missing at least one of these characteristics.     

Inflation and Welfare in a Competitive Search Equilibrium with Asymmetric Information

We study an economy characterized by competitive search and asymmetric information. Money is essential. Buyers decide their cash holdings after observing the contracts posted by firms and experience match-specific preference shocks which remain unknown to sellers. Firms are allowed to post general contracts. In the baseline model with indivisible goods, we show that, when the number of potential buyers is fixed, inflation decreases markups. This, in turn, increases aggregate output and ex ante welfare. When goods are divisible the negative effect of inflation on markups holds for unconstrained agents but is ambiguous for constrained agents. Still, optimal monetary policy implies a positive nominal rate. When there is buyers' free entry, asymmetric information causes a congestion effect that can be corrected by monetary policy.     

Inefficient sales delays by a durable‐good monopoly facing a finite number of buyers

This article offers a new explanation for unscheduled price cuts and slow adoption of durable goods. We study a standard durable‐good monopoly model with a finite number of buyers and show that this game can have multiple subgame perfect equilibria in addition to the Pacman outcome—including the Coase conjecture. Of particular interest is a class of equilibria where the seller first charges a high price and only lowers that price once some—but not all—high‐valuation buyers purchase. This price structure creates a war of attrition between those buyers, which delays market clearing and rationalizes unscheduled purchase and price cut dates.     

Dynamic Prevention in Short-Term Insurance Contracts

This article looks at the dynamic properties of insurance contracts when insurers have a better technology at preventing catastrophic losses than the insured. When the prevention technology is irreversible and its benefits last for all future periods although its cost is borne in the period in which it is made, a hold‐up problem occurs because the insured can change insurer after his initial insurer has invested in prevention. Investment in prevention is then delayed compared to the first best outcome. When the audit cost must be incurred by the insured when he wants to change insurer, the incumbent insurer has an informational advantage so that he can keep his client over the entire investment horizon, even though long‐term contracts are not possible. This does not avoid the delay in investment, however.     

The anatomy of buyer–seller dynamics in decentralized markets

In this paper I investigate the nexus between buyer–seller dynamics, financial frictions and market efficiency in decentralized markets. To do so, I introduce financial frictions in a dynamic market with heterogeneous traders. Heterogeneously constrained buyers sequentially enter the market to acquire units of a generic good from heterogeneously endowed sellers. I characterize two closely related classes of equilibria, respectively called homogeneous equilibrium with no entry (HEWNE) and homogeneous equilibrium with entry (HEWE). Both equilibria prescribe a market where only the efficiently endowed type of seller exists in the limit. However, the two equilibria diverge in the specification of agents’ behavior subsequent to trade. In HEWNE, sellers and buyers exit the market upon successful trading. In HEWE, like in supply chains, in every period certain types of buyers replace exiting sellers, thus becoming potential sellers for subsequent waves of buyers. First, I identify the critical role of frictions in steering the complex evolution of market heterogeneity for both classes of equilibria. Secondly, I operationalize the combined study of HEWNE and HEWE to obtain sharp predictions on market efficiency for a range of empirically-relevant situations in which buyer–seller dynamics are decoupled, for example when entry of new sellers is delayed or stopped. Third, I test the theoretical findings against a simulated artificial market.     

“Upping the ante”: how to design efficient auctions with entry?

Of primary importance in auction design is the set of strategies available to the seller at the auction stage. We first formalize hold‐up regarding entry costs that preys on second‐price auctions when the seller may engage in a costly shill‐bidding activity. We derive the optimal reserve and show how shill bidding can make posted prices outperforming auctions. Second, we advocate for a new regulation where shills would be banned but with the possibility of canceling sales ex post, which offers some valuable flexibility: the English auction with jump bids implements, then, the first best in general environments.     

Strategic ex ante contracts: rent extraction and opportunity costs

This article cosiders the possibility that a seller can contract with one uninformed buyer prior to an auction involving two potential buyers. The seller's optimal strategic ex ante contract more accurately reflects joint opportunity costs of the seller and the contracted buyer, and therefore extracts more rent from the entrant. Moreover, this ex ante contract mitigates the seller's ex post rent seeking vis‐à‐vis the contracted buyer. Accordingly, it may create more social welfare than the absence of ex ante contracts, depending upon the contracted buyer's financial constraint and the distributions of trade surplus. Implementation of the optimal strategic ex ante contract and policy implications are discussed.     

Regulating bidder participation in auctions

Regulating bidder participation in auctions can potentially increase efficiency compared to standard auction formats with free entry. We show that the relative performance of two such mechanisms, a standard first‐price auction with free entry and an entry rights auction, depends nonmonotonically on the precision of information that bidders have about their costs prior to deciding whether to participate in a mechanism. As an empirical application, we estimate parameters from first‐price auctions with free entry for bridge‐building contracts in Oklahoma and Texas and predict that an entry rights auction increases efficiency and reduces procurement costs significantly.     

Catastrophe Bonds,Reinsurance, and the Optimal Collateralization of Risk Transfer

Catastrophe bonds feature full collateralization of the underlying risk transfer and thus abandon the reinsurance principle of economizing on collateral through diversification of risk transfer. Our analysis demonstrates that this feature places limits on catastrophe bond penetration, even if the structure possesses frictional cost advantages over reinsurance. However, we also show that catastrophe bonds have important uses when buyers and reinsurers cannot contract over the division of assets in the event of insolvency and, more generally, cannot write contracts with a full menu of state‐contingent payments. In this environment, segregation of collateral—in the form of multiple reinsurance companies, as well as catastrophe bond vehicles—can ameliorate inefficiencies due to reinsurance contracting constraints by improving welfare for those exposed to default risk. Numerical simulation illustrates how catastrophe bonds improve efficiency in market niches with correlated risks, or with uneven exposure of buyers to reinsurer default.     

Vertical collusion

We characterize collusion involving secret vertical contracts between retailers and their supplier—who are all equally patient (“vertical collusion”). We show such collusion is easier to sustain than collusion among retailers. Furthermore, vertical collusion can solve the supplier's inability to commit to charging the monopoly wholesale price when retailers are differentiated. The supplier pays retailers slotting allowances as a prize for adhering to the collusive scheme and rejects contract deviations. In the presence of competing suppliers, vertical collusion can be sustained using short-term exclusive dealing.     

Price,quality, and reputation: evidence from an online field experiment

We examine the link between price, quality, seller claims, and seller reputation in Internet auctions. After purchasing actual baseball cards and having them professionally graded, we find that some buyers in the online graded market are misled by incredible claims of quality. They pay higher prices but do not receive better quality and, in fact, are defrauded more often. Online seller reputation is effective for identifying good‐faith sellers. But conditional on completed auctions, reputable sellers do not provide better quality. Evidence also suggests that high‐claim sellers target less‐experienced buyers. We attribute these patterns to two loopholes in the eBay rating system. We benefited from the comments of Austan Goolsbee, Raphael Thomadsen, John Shea, Dan Vincent, David Reiley, Larry Ausubel, Peter Cramton, V. Joseph Hotz, Jeff Smith, Jimmy Chan, Vincent Crawford, Mark Duggan, and attendees at numerous seminars and conferences. We are particularly grateful to Seth Sanders and John List for their constructive advice at the early stage of the research, to Timothy Bresnahan, Rachel Kranton, and Thomas Hubbard for their detailed suggestions in reshaping earlier versions, and to Editor Ariel Pakes and two anonymous referees for their careful readings. Special thanks to eight friends who acted as our agents in purchasing baseball cards in retail markets, and to numerous sports card store owners who shared their insights on the sportscard industry. Excellent research assistance from Randy Alexander Moore and Krzysztof Fizyta is gratefully acknowledged. Any remaining errors are ours.     

How limiting deceptive practices harms consumers

There are two competing sellers of an experience good, one offers high quality, one low. The low‐quality seller can engage in deceptive advertising, potentially fooling a buyer into thinking the product is better than it is. Although deceptive advertising might seem to harm the buyer, we show that he could be better off when the low‐quality seller can engage in deceptive advertising than not. We characterize the optimal deterrence rule that a regulatory agency seeking to punish deceptive practices should adopt. We show that greater protection against deceptive practices does not necessarily improve the buyer welfare.     

Optimal disclosure decisions when there are penalties for nondisclosure

We study a seller of an asset who is liable for damages if the seller fails to disclose to buyers an estimate of the asset's value he knew prior to the sale. Our results include as either the “damages multiplier” that determines the size of the damages the seller must pay buyers increases, or as the probability the seller is caught withholding his estimate from buyers increases, the seller discloses his estimate less often, and as the precision of the seller's estimate increases, he sells a larger fraction of the asset.