PRICE DISCRIMINATION IN STACKELBERG COMPETITION*

We examine the effects of price discrimination in the Stackelberg competition model for the linear demand case. We show that the leader does not use any price discrimination at all. Rather, the follower does all price discrimination. The leader directs all of its first mover preemptive advantage to attract the highest value consumers who pay a uniformly high price. We observe that profits and total welfare are larger and consumer surplus is smaller than those of the standard Stackelberg competition model.     

DYNAMIC PRICE DISCRIMINATION WITH ASYMMETRIC FIRMS*

This paper considers variants of a dynamic duopoly model where one firm has a stronger market position than its competitor. Consumers' past purchases may reveal their different valuations for the two firms' products. Price discrimination based on purchase histories tends to benefit consumers if it does not cause the weaker firm to exit; otherwise it can harm consumers. The effect of price discrimination also depends on firms' cost differences, market competitiveness, and consumers' time horizon. The stronger firm may price below cost in the presence of consumer switching costs, with the purpose and effect of eliminating competition.     

RESALE PRICE MAINTENANCE AND INTERLOCKING RELATIONSHIPS*

Dampening of interbrand as well intrabrand competition is often advanced to justify per se illegality of RPM. We analyze this argument in a context where rival manufacturers distribute their products through the same competing retailers. We show that RPM indeed limits the exercise of competition at both levels and can generate industry‐wide monopoly pricing. The impact on prices depends on the extent of potential competition at either level as well as on the parties' influence in determining the terms of the contracts. Our analysis sheds a new light on ongoing legal developments and is supported by recent empirical studies.     

PRICE DISPERSION AND COMPETITION WITH DIFFERENTIATED SELLERS*

I measure price dispersion among differentiated retail gasoline sellers and study the relationship between dispersion and the local competitive environment. Significant price dispersion exists even after controlling for differences in station characteristics, and price differences between sellers change frequently. The extent of price dispersion is related to the density of local competition, but this relationship varies significantly depending on the type of seller and the composition of its competitors. These findings are consistent with interactions between seller and consumer heterogeneity that are not well understood in the existing price dispersion literature.     

RETAIL GASOLINE PRICE DYNAMICS AND LOCAL MARKET POWER*

Using monthly data from the 48 contiguous states (except Nevada) for the 1988–2002 period, it is shown that retail gasoline prices respond faster to wholesale price increases than to equivalent wholesale price decreases. Moreover, markets with high average retail‐wholesale margins experience a slower adjustment and a more asymmetric response. Since gasoline is the only variable input, average margins in a state likely reflect the degree of retail market power. This suggests that sticky prices and response asymmetries in the gasoline market are, at least partially, a consequence of retail market power.     

MANAGERIAL INCENTIVES AND THE PRICE EFFECTS OF MERGERS*

Most analysis of market power assumes that managers are perfect agents for shareholders. This paper relaxes that assumption. When managers of a multi‐product firm exert unobservable effort to improve product quality, there is a trade‐off between providing adequate effort incentives and ensuring sufficient price‐coordination between the product divisions. This makes some intra‐firm price competition optimal, explaining why many multi‐product firms allow for competition between divisions. When there are effort spillovers, the optimal amount of price competition can be as great as when the products are under separate ownership. Even with some profit‐sharing, intra‐firm price competition can reduce quality‐adjusted price, which has important implications for antitrust policy.     

PRICE COMPETITION IN U.S. BREWING*

This study utilizes a brand‐level dataset that captures a unique natural experiment, a 100% increase in the excise tax, to evaluate different pricing models in the U.S. beer industry. To assess the plausibility of different models, the increase in marginal cost resulting from the tax increase is exploited: observed prices in the post‐increase period are compared to the prices that should be observed under various pricing models. Three types of models are analyzed: Bertrand‐Nash, leadership, and collusion. Results indicate that extreme cases of collusion can be confidently ruled out while several models may explain the observed prices equally well.     

MARKET POWER AND PRICE MOVEMENTS OVER THE BUSINESS CYCLE*

This paper develops and tests implications of an oligopoly‐pricing model. The model predicts that during a demand expansion, the short run competitive price is a pure strategy Nash equilibrium but in a recession, firms set prices above the competitive price. Thus, price markups over the competitive price are countercyclical. Prices set during a recession are more variable than prices set in expansions because firms employ mixed strategy pricing in recessions. The empirical analysis utilizes Hamilton's time series switching regime filter to test the predictions of the model. Fourteen out of fifteen industries have fluctuations consistent with this oligopoly‐pricing model.     

INPUT PRICE DISCRIMINATION WHEN BUYERS OPERATE IN MULTIPLE MARKETS*

This paper revisits third‐degree price discrimination when input buyers serve multiple product markets. Such circumstances are prevalent since buyers often use the same input to produce different outputs, and even homogenous outputs are routinely sold through different locations. The typical view is that price discrimination stifles efficiency (and welfare) by resulting in price concessions to less efficient firms. When buyers serve multiple markets, price discrimination leads to price breaks for firms in markets with lower demand. When lower demand markets also have less competition, price discrimination can provide welfare gains by shifting output to less competitive markets.     

THE DEADWEIGHT LOSS OF COUPON REMEDIES FOR PRICE OVERCHARGES*

Consumers injured by price overcharges often are awarded coupons that can be used for a limited period of time to purchase the good at a price below that which prevails after the overcharge has been eliminated. Coupon remedies cause a deadweight loss by inducing excessive consumption by consumers with relatively low demand during the remedy period. The magnitude of the loss can be comparable to that caused by the price overcharge. As demand variability goes to zero, the deadweight loss from coupon remedies goes to zero. Eliminating the expiration date for the use of coupons does not eliminate the loss.     

EDGEWORTH PRICE CYCLES: EVIDENCE FROM THE TORONTO RETAIL GASOLINE MARKET*

I exploit a new station‐level, twelve‐hourly price dataset to examine the strong retail price cycles in the Toronto gasoline market. The cycles appear similar to theoretical Edgeworth Cycles: strongly asymmetric, tall, rapid, and highly synchronous across stations. I test a series of predictions made by the theory about how firm behaviors would differentially evolve over the path of a cycle. The evidence is consistent with the existence of Edgeworth Cycles and inconsistent with competing hypotheses. While the cycles are an interesting phenomenon for study in their own right, the evidence has important policy and welfare implications.     

MARKET POWER,VERTICAL INTEGRATION AND THE WHOLESALE PRICE OF GASOLINE*

This paper examines empirically the relationship between vertical integration and wholesale gasoline prices. We use discrete and differential changes in the extent of vertical integration generated by mergers in West Coast gasoline refining and retailing markets to test for incentives to raise rivals' costs. The research design allows us to test for a relationship between vertical integration and wholesale prices, controlling for horizontal market structure, cost shocks and trends. We find evidence consistent with the strategic incentive to raise competitors' input costs. This suggests that vertical integration can have a significant impact on wholesale prices.     

PENNIES FROM EBAY: THE DETERMINANTS OF PRICE IN ONLINE AUCTIONS*

This paper presents an exploratory analysis of the determinants of prices in online auctions for collectible United States one‐cent coins at the eBay web site. Starting with an initial data set of 20,000 auctions, we perform regression analysis on a restricted sample of 461 coins for which we obtained estimates of book value. We have three major findings. First, a seller's feedback ratings, reported by other eBay users, have a measurable effect on her auction prices. Negative feedback ratings have a much greater effect than positive feedback ratings do. Second, minimum bids and reserve prices have positive effects on the final auction price. In particular, minimum bids appear only to have a significant effect when they are binding on a single bidder, as predicted by theory. Third, when a seller chooses to have her auction last for a longer period of days, this significantly increases the auction price on average.     

POSTING MULTIPLE PRICES TO REDUCE THE EFFECTIVENESS OF CONSUMER PRICE SEARCH*

In a model of competition with imperfect consumer price information and incomplete price search, some consumers may end up comparing prices originating from the same supplier: either because one firm sets multiple prices or because a group of firms colludes. This leads to added monopoly power for these firms, and average prices in the mixed strategy equilibrium become higher. There is a shift in welfare from consumers to producers, both with exogenous and endogenous consumer search behaviour. However consumers might search more or less with multiple prices. The implications for the price‐setting equilibrium, competition policy and recent judgements are considered.     

THE PRICE EFFECT OF ELIMINATING POTENTIAL COMPETITION: EVIDENCE FROM AN AIRLINE MERGER*

This paper analyzes the gain in pricing power that a firm achieves by merging with a potential competitor in its market. Using pricing data for the merger of USAir and Piedmont, empirical analysis finds that prices rose by 5.0 to 6.0 per cent on routes that one carrier served and the other was a potential entrant. This was more than half the increase on routes where the two carriers had been direct competitors. Other important factors included carrier size, market concentration, incumbent's identity and the potential entrant's presence at one or both endpoints.