The welfare effects of entry: the role of the input market

In a successive Cournot oligopoly, we show the welfare effects of entry in the final goods market with no scale economies but with cost difference between the firms. If the input market is very concentrated, entry in the final goods market increases welfare. If the input market is not very concentrated, entry in the final goods market may reduce welfare if the entrant is moderately cost inefficient. Hence, entry in the final goods market is more desirable if (1) the input market is very concentrated or (2) the cost difference between the incumbents and the entrant is either very small or very large. It follows from our analysis that entry increases the profits of the incumbent final goods producers if their marginal costs are sufficiently lower than the entrant’s marginal cost.     

Price-Matching Guarantees and Entry Deterrence under Incomplete Information

This paper studies price-matching guarantees in a market where entrant does not have perfect information about incumbent’s cost. The low-cost incumbent can adopt price-matching guarantees as a signal to distinguish itself from the high-cost type and thus effectively deter entry. On the other hand, the high-cost incumbent can successfully fool the potential entrant under certain conditions. Compared with the equilibriums in situations where the option of offering a price guarantee is not available, the use of this instrument either makes it easier for the low-cost incumbent to signal its cost, or expands the range of parameters over which the high-cost incumbent is able to deter entry successfully.     

Strategic Entry Deterrence by Limiting Qualities under Minimum Quality Standards

We consider a minimum quality standard (MQS) regulation under a vertically differentiated duopoly model where an incumbent may deter entry by limiting qualities, and explicity examine the strategic interaction between entry cost and a limit quality. We show that MQS will increase social welfare in most cases by reducing the incentive of the incumbent to limit quality, but it might render industry entry unprofitable for the entrant, which could induce predation to deter entry.     

Research Joint Ventures with Asymmetric Spillovers and Symmetric Contributions

The paper proposes a new type of R&D cooperation between firms endowed with asymmetric spillovers, which we call symmetric Research Joint Venture (RJV) cartelization, based on reciprocity in information exchange. In this setting, firms coordinate their R&D expenditures and also share information, but such that the asymmetric spillover rates are increased through cooperation by equal amounts. It is found that this type of cooperation reduces R&D investment by the low spillover firm when its spillover is sufficiently low and the spillover of its competitor is sufficiently high. But it always increases the R&D of the high spillover firm, as well as total R&D (and hence effective cost reduction and welfare). A firm prefers no cooperation to symmetric RJV cartelization if its spillover rate is very high and the spillover rate of its competitor is intermediate. The profitability of symmetric RJV cartelization relative to other modes of cooperation is analyzed. It is found that symmetric RJV cartelization constitutes an equilibrium for a very wide range of spillovers, namely, when asymmetries between spillovers are not too large. As these asymmetries increase, the equilibrium goes from symmetric RJV cartelization, to RJV cartelization, to R&D competition, to R&D cartelization.     

Entry and espionage with noisy signals

We analyze the effect of industrial espionage on entry deterrence. We consider a monopoly incumbent who may expand capacity to deter entry, and a potential entrant who owns an Intelligence System. The Intelligence System (IS) generates a noisy signal based on the incumbentʼs actions. The potential entrant uses this signal to decide whether or not to enter the market. The incumbent may signal-jam to manipulate the likelihood of the noisy signals and hence affect the entrantʼs decisions. If the precision of the IS is commonly known, the incumbent benefits from his rivalʼs espionage. Actually, he benefits more the higher is the precision of the IS while the spying entrant is worse off with an IS of relatively high quality. When the IS quality is private information of the entrant, the incumbent is better off with an IS of high expected precision while the entrant benefits from one of high quality. In this case espionage makes the market more competitive.     

How the source of the entrant's advantage limits entry‐deterring tying

I revisit a simple model of entry‐deterring tying—example 1 from Whinston's (1990) seminal paper—but allow the potential entrant to have either a cost advantage or a willingness‐to‐pay (WTP) advantage relative to the incumbent. I show that, compared to the usual case in which the potential entrant is cost‐advantaged, tying is less effective against an entrant with a WTP advantage because an entrant with a large WTP advantage may be able to induce the buyer to buy both the tied bundle and the entrant's product. I also show that tying but failing to deter entry can be less costly when facing an entrant with a WTP advantage than when facing an entrant with a cost advantage. For a firm facing uncertainty about, for example, the entrant's entry costs, this makes tying a more attractive entry deterrence strategy against a WTP‐advantaged entrant. These results shed light on the important policy question of which markets are most likely to be susceptible to entry‐deterring tying.     

Local loop unbundling and antitrust policy

This paper examines economic effects of local loop unbundling. We confirm the common belief that the incumbent can deter entry effectively by denying local loop unbundling. However, contrary to the widely held perception, the incumbent may also benefit from local loop unbundling if it is obliged to accommodate entry, because denying the entrant’s request for local loop unbundling may compel the entrant to build its own facilities and this is just to abandon the incumbent’s chance to reap rental revenues. Furthermore, the model demonstrates that local loop unbundling itself does not weaken the entrant’s incentive of building facilities.     

Efficiency and competition in the long run: The survival of the unfit

In a dynamic contest the current incumbent competes against a randomly assigned entrant in a private value all pay auction each period. We focus on equilibria where the beliefs about the incumbent's type and the employed strategies are stationary. We show that inefficient types survive, even if the entrants arrive very frequently, because the entrant plays more aggressively than the incumbent, allowing a low type entrant to win against a high type incumbent. In an example we show that if the incumbent is challenged more often, then the equilibrium type of the incumbent is higher on average. When the value of the prize is the same for all players (the case studied in the public choice literature), the equilibrium rent of the bidders is fully dissipated as the incumbent is challenged infinitely often. The technical contribution lies in showing the existence of stationary equilibrium in an incomplete information game.     

Rebates as incentives to exclusivity

Abstract.  We show how rebates (or fidelity discounts) that take the form of lump‐sum payments made to retailers can be used by an incumbent manufacturer to achieve exclusivity and to deter the entry of a more efficient rival. The results, which hold whatever the degree of differentiation between retailers and whatever the cost advantage of the entrant, are found, despite minimizing asymmetries that may favour the incumbent. As such, there is no need to introduce buyers' disorganization, discriminatory offers, economies of scale, non‐coincident markets, or liquidated damages to find that exclusivity can lead to anti‐competitive effects. JEL classification: L12, L42     

Entry and Competition in the Postal Market: Foundations for the Construction of Entry Scenarios*

This paper presents a model of entry and imperfect competition, which is inspired by the product differentiation literature and incorporates facts pertaining to the postal sector. There are two operators: incumbent and potential entrant. The entrant offers only one of the products (commercial mail) with a specific technology and delivers only to part of the addressees (located in low cost areas). Its degree of coverage is viewed as a quality attribute; it affects demand and hence market share. The incumbent faces a USO while the entrant is an unregulated profit maximizing firm. To illustrate the potential applications of our approach, we provide some numerical simulations of entry scenarios.     

Preemptive Spacing With Vertical Differentiation When Input Quality is of Inelastic Supply

This paper examines a model of vertical differentiation in which an incumbent engages in preemptive spacing to prevent entry. Input quality is of fixed supply, and the incumbent prevents high-end entry by producing a product with all the quality available. It also commits to the production of a minimum-quality product to deter low-end entry. There is no entry in equilibrium, and the incumbent monopolist chooses to sell only its high-quality product. Commitment to the production of the minimum-quality product is used merely as a credible threat to vigorously compete should an entrant also produce a minimum-quality product.     

Organization Design and Information-Sharing in a Research Joint Venture with Spillovers

The paper presents a non-tournament model of process innovation with spillovers in the R&D process when firms engage in Cournot competition in the product market. It is shown that careful modelling of information-sharing and coordination of research activities leads to the conclusion that a Research Joint Venture (RJV) will economize on scarce R&D resources. There is an analysis of the effects of R&D cooperation, in the form of an RJV, on the organization of R&D, i.e. the efficient number of research labs. R&D expenditure, which precedes production, results in lower unit costs. R&D is modelled as a two-stage process: in the first stage, firms incur expenditure that will generate new knowledge, while in the second stage this knowledge is employed to reduce unit costs. A distinction is made between single and complementary research paths. It is shown that the RJV will operate one lab in the case of a single research path exploiting its coordination advantage. In the case of complementary research paths the number of labs the RJV will operate crucially depends on the stage of the R&D process at which diminishing returns occur: it will operate both labs when diminishing returns occur at the first stage (creation of knowledge), while it will be indifferent as to the number of labs, one or two, when diminishing returns occur in the second stage (cost reduction).     

Vertical product differentiation and entry deterrence

I study how a potential entrant influences quality in a model of vertical product differentiation with quality-dependent production costs. With identical costs, the incumbent will always deter entry if possible, i.e., if fixed costs are high. Quality will be set at a level lower than or equal to the optimal quality under either duopoly or monopoly. Results are completely different when the entrant has substantially lower costs. They are explained by the relative location of the entrant's quality best response to the incumbent's optimal quality choice in monopoly. This sheds new light on the influence of industrial policy on market conduct.     

Sequential Entry in a Vertically Differentiated Market

This paper considers a sequential entry game of homogeneous firms in a vertically differentiated market. A firm can choose any variety of products, with a fixed cost per product. Each product can be withdrawn afterwards without exit costs. Then each firm chooses one product at most in equilibrium because of a commitment problem. The first firm chooses the highest quality if the fixed cost is so large that subsequent entry is blockaded. It chooses middle quality to deter entry of a low–quality firm if the fixed cost decreases. Hence everyone becomes worse off as the entrant becomes more dangerous. JEL Classification Numbers: D43, L13.     

Information sharing and the stability of cooperation in research joint ventures*

The model studies information sharing and the stability of cooperation in cost reducing Research Joint Ventures (RJVs). In a three-stage game-theoretic framework, firms decide on participation in a RJV, information sharing along with R&D expenditures, and output. An important feature of the model is that voluntary information sharing between cooperating firms increases information leakage from the RJV to outsiders. It is found that RJVs representing a larger portion of firms in the industry are more likely to share information. It is also found that when sharing information is costless, firms generally don't choose intermediate levels of information sharing: they share all the information or none at all. The size of the RJV is found to depend on three effects: a coordination effect, an information sharing effect, and a competition effect. Depending on the relative magnitudes of these effects, the size of the RJV may increase or decrease with spillovers. In response to an increase in leakages, RJV members reduce their R&D spending. In addition, they either increase the RJV size while maintaining information sharing unchanged (when leakages are low), or they reduce both information sharing and RJV size (when leakages are high).     

Vertical technology transfer and the welfare implications of patent protection

Significant amount of vertical technology transfer occurs between developed and developing-country firms, and many trading companies from developing countries create competition in the developed countries, yet the literature on intellectual property rights did not pay considerable attention to these aspects. In a Cournot oligopoly with vertical technology transfer, we show that patent protection in the developing country raises developed-country welfare if the following three conditions hold together: (i) patent protection in the developing country deters entry in the final goods market, (ii) the marginal cost difference between the incumbent and the entrant final goods sellers is sufficiently small, and (iii) the marginal cost difference between the incumbent and the entrant developing-country producers is sufficiently high. We also show that patent protection in the developing country always creates higher developing-country welfare if no developing-country firm enters the final goods market. We also discuss the implications of Bertrand competition on our results.     

Endogenous cost asymmetry and insufficient entry in the absence of scale economies

The paper by Ghosh and Saha (Econ Theory 30:575–586, 2007) shows that entry can be socially excessive even if there are no scale economies. We show that exogenous cost asymmetry is responsible for this result. In a simple model with R&D investment by the more cost efficient firm, thus creating endogenous cost asymmetry, we show that entry is socially insufficient instead of excessive if the slope of the marginal cost of R&D is not very high.     

Strategic Preemption in a Common Property Resource: A Continuous Time Approach

The threat of future entry affects the exploitation of common property resources in important ways. An incumbent has a strategic incentive to manipulate the resource stock to deter entry or to harvest more stock prior to entry rather than share the resource with the entrant. It is possible that the threat of potential entry can lead to the extinction of the resource even though actual competition would result in a steady state with a positive stock level.     

Spillover, Competition and Better R&D Organization

This paper examines several types of R&D organization, including one noncooperative (independent R&D) form and three cooperative ones (R&D coordination, an R&D consortium and a research joint venture (RJV)). We consider the sharing of both research inputs and outputs in an R&D consortium and an RJV. We show that the superiority of a form of R&D organization cannot be determined uniquely, but should be judged by four parameters. In addition, it is shown that there exist possible mixes of these parameters in which an R&D consortium is superior to either R&D coordination or an RJV in terms of technological improvement and social welfare.
JEL Classification Numbers: L13, L41.