Pricing with customer recognition

This article studies the dynamic effects of behaviour-based price discrimination and customer recognition in a duopolistic market where the distribution of consumers' preferences is discrete. Consumers are myopic and firms are forward looking. In the static and first-period equilibrium firms choose prices with mixed strategies. When price discrimination is allowed, forward-looking firms have an incentive to avoid customer recognition, thus the probability that both will have positive first-period sales decreases as they become more patient. Furthermore, an asymmetric equilibrium sometimes exists, yielding a 100–0 division of the first-period sales. As a whole, price discrimination is bad for profits but good for consumer surplus and welfare.     

Vertical Market Participation

Firms that operate at both levels of vertically related Cournot oligopolies will purchase some input supplies from independent rivals, even though they can produce the good at a lower cost, driving up input price for nonintegrated firms at the final good level. Foreclosure, which avoids this strategic behavior, yields better market performance than Cournot beliefs.     

Asymmetries in cost structures and incentives towards price competition

This paper provides some theoretical grounds to relate asymmetries in cost structures and incentives towards price competition. Typically low cost firms favor price competition whereas the reserve is true for high cost firms. Increased price competition will tend to diminish price-cost margins for all firms but the low cost firms may increase their total profits through an enlarged market share. This analysis depends on two relevant parameters: the way the overall market will react to increased price competition and interfirm cross elasticities. This is proved using comparative statics at the Nash equilibrium of an oligopolistic model.     

The advantage of being first and competition between firms

It is frequently suggested that the first brand in a product market enjoys a price advantage over its imitators due to imperfect information about product quality. This article considers the effect of this advantage on prices and market shares in a dominant firm price leadership model. An established firm with a price advantage faces free entry by firms producing unbranded products (generics). In equilibrium, the first brand enjoys a market share advantage over entrants in entry and post entry periods. If the initial price disadvantage is large, entry will not occur.     

On scale economies and exhaustible resource markets

This paper considers an exhaustible resource market where firms realize economies of scale in the production of the resource, and may augment reserves through exploration. With the non-convexities inherent in this model, the typical firm's optimal decisions are corner solutions. It either operates at full intensity or not at all. Firms with larger current reserves have a greater incentive to produce today; firms with smaller reserves will tend to hold their reserves for production at a later date. It follows that the market supply curve in any given period is a step function. As price rises, production increases discontinuously: at discrete intervals, the marginal firm will change from not producing today to producing all of its reserves. With such a supply curve, the market may or may not clear. Simulation of this model suggests: (i) the chance of market clearing in any period is near 1/2; (ii) such an industry is unlikely to exhibit a significant increase in concentration over time.     

Austrian-style gasoline price regulation: How it may backfire

In January 2011, a price regulation was established in the Austrian gasoline market which prohibits firms from raising their prices more than once per day. Similar restrictions have been discussed in New York State and Germany. Despite their intuitive appeal, this article argues that Austrian-type policies may actually harm consumers. In a two-period duopoly model with consumer search, I show that under the regulation, firms will distort their prices intertemporally in such a way that their aggregate expected profit remains unchanged. This implies that, as some consumers find it optimal to delay their purchase due to expected price savings, but find it inconvenient to do so, a friction is introduced that decreases net consumer surplus in the market.     

Identifying Participants in a Price-fixing Conspiracy: Output & Market Share Tests Reexamined

If there is a cartel agreement among a subset of firms in an industry, it should be predicted that all firms in that industry will increase prices. Nevertheless, industry prices alone should not indicate that a particular firm is guilty of that conspiracy. According to the output test and its market share variant – proposed by Blair and Romano – if the output or the market share of the firm that claims to be innocent in the collusive activity rises in response to the price increase, that firm's claim should be accepted as true. Using a collusive variant of the dominant firm model, this paper shows that these are not robust tests to reveal either innocence or guilt, and characterizes cases where they may pardon a guilty firm (Type I error) or indict an innocent firm (Type II error). This paper also shows that a market share test can not be used to prove a dominant firm's intent for predatory pricing.     

An oligopoly model of ocean liner shipping

In this paper I develop a simultaneous equations oligopoly model of the regulated international ocean liner shipping industry. The firms act as a cartel to determine price jointly and then set their own quality levels to maximize individual profits. The cartel does not attain monopoly profits, because each conference member myopically determines quality without regard for overall cartel profits. The results indicate that an increase in the number of firms in the cartel will increase both cartel price and quality level. An increase in price will also lead to an increase in quality level.I would like to thank Professors Alamarin Phillips, Robert Summers, and Bruce Allen for their helpful comments on earlier research for my dissertation in the Economics Department of the University of Pennsylvania on which this work is based. I am especially grateful to Professor Lawrence J. White for his encouragement and valuable suggestions at various stages of my work.     

Raising rivals’ cost in multi-unit auctions

The objective many telecom regulators want to achieve when they decide to auction spectrum is that acquiring firms pay a market price (based on the opportunity cost principle). The simultaneous ascending auction may fail in this respect, as it provides bidders with an opportunity to engage in strategic demand reduction. This paper asks whether the combinatorial clock auction (CCA) fares better in this respect. We show that the answer to this question depends on the objectives bidders have. If bidders have only the slightest preference to raise rivals’ cost, they will use the opportunities the CCA provides them to engage in strategic demand expansion. This is even the case when the clock phase ends with excess demand.     

Collusion in a price-quantity oligopoly

In the context of an infinitely repeated oligopoly game, we study collusion among firms that simultaneously choose prices and quantities. We compare a price cartel with a price-quota cartel and analyze when and why firms prefer the latter to the former. Output quota may be required to solve coordination and incentive problems when market demand is sufficiently elastic. If market demand is sufficiently inelastic, then the cartel faces a trade-off between increasing prices and the amount of costly overproduction. We find that a price cartel prices consistently below the monopoly price to mitigate excessive production. In this case, a quota arrangement allows firms to avoid overproduction and to sustain the monopoly price. From a policy perspective, our findings suggest that an overall price increase in conjunction with more stable prices and market shares is indicative of collusion in industries where production precedes sales and outputs are imperfectly observable.     

CUSTOMER POACHING AND ADVERTISING*

This paper is a first look at the dynamic effects of customer poaching in homogeneous product markets, where firms need to invest in advertising to generate awareness. When a firm is able to recognize customers with different purchasing histories, it may send them targeted advertisements with different prices. It is shown that only the firm which advertises the highest price in the first period will engage in price discrimination, a practice that clearly benefits the discriminating firm. This poaching gives rise to ‘the race for discrimination effect,’ through which price discrimination may act actually to soften price competition rather than intensify it. As a result, all firms may become better off, even when only one of them can engage in price discrimination. This paper offers a first attempt to evaluate the effects of price discrimination on the efficiency properties of advertising. In markets with low or no advertising costs, allowing firms to price discriminate leads them to provide too little advertising, which is not good for consumers and overall welfare. Only in markets with high advertising costs, might firms overadvertise. Regarding the welfare effects, price discrimination is generally bad for welfare and consumer surplus, though good for firms.     

The Dominant Firm Model Revisited

This paper extends the standard Forchheimer dominant firm model by making more explicit shifts in the fringe supply when the market price set the dominant firm deviate from its limit price. It demonstrated how, when a dominant firm engages in short-run profit maximization, the market price it sets in the long run will equal its limit price and that, in certain situations, increased production cost for fringe lead to an increase in the number of fringe firms in the long run.     

High‐Reputation Firms and Their Differential Acquisition Behaviors

Research summary: E merging reputation research suggests that high‐reputation firms will act to maintain their reputations in the face of high expectations. Yet, this research remains unclear on how high‐reputation firms do so. We advance this research by exploring three questions related to high‐reputation firms' differential acquisition behaviors: Do high‐reputation firms make more acquisitions than similar firms without this distinction? What kind of acquisitions do they make? How do investors react to high‐reputation firms' differential acquisition behaviors? We find that high‐reputation firms make more acquisitions and more unrelated acquisitions than other firms. Yet, we also find that investors bid down high‐reputation firms' stock more than other firms' in response to acquisition announcements, suggesting that investors are skeptical of how high‐reputation firms maintain their reputations . Managerial summary: W e know that high‐reputation firms wish to maintain their elite standing in the face of high‐market expectations, but we know little about how they do so. We explore this puzzle by investigating how reputation maintenance influences high‐reputation firms' acquisition behaviors. We classify high‐reputation firms are those firms that make Fortune's M ost A dmired annual list, and we find that high‐reputation firms make more acquisitions and more unrelated ones than other firms. Surprisingly, we also find that the market tends to react negatively to these acquisitions. Thus, managers may want to reconsider their strategy of making acquisitions as a means to maintain their firms' high reputations . Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Bertrand equilibrium with differentiated products considering fixed costs: Korean price regulation in the mobile telephone industry

In some industries such as telecommunications and electricity, the fixed costs are so high that competition is not sustainable without considering the fixed cost in pricing. The sustainability of competition is as important as enhancing competition when an industry is in the transitional period from being a monopoly owned or managed by the government to a competitive market structure driven by the market. A price competition model with asymmetric firms and product differentiation is considered in which firms compete with a normal profit constraint. The constraint is related to the sustainability of competition and can be realized through price regulation. With this constraint, firms gain only normal profit in equilibrium despite the asymmetry, and consumer surplus is maximized. The equilibrium is meaningful in defining the industry performance intended through the regulation. Moreover, the price regulation of the Korean mobile telephone market is considered to discuss any implications of this equilibrium.     

Anti‐Competitive Interconnection: the effects of the elasticity of consumers' expectations and the shape of the network effects function

I find that interconnection might cause the market to be less competitive, and might lead to an increase in the price firms charge for their product. Absent interconnection, firms compete for a consumer for two reasons. The first reason is to obtain revenue from selling the product to a consumer (as in the case without network effects). The second reason is that by expanding the network by one more consumer, the product becomes more attractive to all other consumers. Interconnection eliminates the second reason—when firms interconnect, they are no longer concerned with consumers' following the crowd. I show that consumers and society might be worse off from interconnection. I focus on two factors that make the (post‐interconnection) price increase larger: consumer expectations that are highly sensitive to prices and consumers putting a high value on small increases in network size at the equilibrium market shares. Both of these factors make firms highly competitive, but only if the firms' products' networks are not interconnected.     

ESTIMATING MARK‐UPS FROM PLANT‐LEVEL DATA*

Typical plant‐level data sets do not report quantities. This paper shows that estimating mark‐ups (price‐cost ratio) in product‐differentiated industries using deflated sales to proxy quantity is not appropriate due to unobserved price heterogeneity. This paper presents an econometric model for estimating mark‐ups that controls for unobserved prices. The model shows that ignoring price heterogeneity results in mark‐up estimates that converge to one, whatever the value of the true price‐cost ratio. Estimates obtained using real data are consistent with this result, as they reveal that ignoring price heterogeneity leads to spurious evidence of firms with little or no market power.     

Strengthening a weak rival for a fight

We provide a new model wherein firms of different productivities survive in an industry despite the threat of entry by high productivity firms. We demonstrate that an efficient incumbent has a unilateral incentive to establish a relational contract, softening price competition to strengthen its inefficient rival in a war of attrition that emerges post-entry, and raising the price of the inefficient firm in the acquisition market. We show that this equilibrium gives rise to persistent performance differences, market compression, and stability in the identity of firms in the market. Moreover, the relational contracting equilibrium is facilitated by strong anti-trust laws.     

The determinants of merger waves: An international perspective

One of the most conspicuous features of mergers is that they come in waves that are correlated with increases in share prices and price/earnings ratios. We use a natural way to discriminate between pure stock market influences on firm decisions and other influences by examining merger patterns for both listed and unlisted firms. If “real” changes in the economy drive merger waves, as some neoclassical theories of mergers predict, both listed and unlisted firms should experience waves. We find significant differences between listed and unlisted firms as predicted by behavioral theories of merger waves.     

Mixed Oligopoly and Market Power Mitigation: Evidence from the Colombian Wholesale Electricity Market*

Using information on price bids in wholesale electricity pools and empirical techniques described in the literature on electricity markets, this study identifies the market power mitigation effect of public firms in the Colombian market. The results suggest that while private firms exercise less market power than is predicted by a profit-maximization model, there are marked differences between private and public firms in their exercise of unilateral market power. These findings support the hypothesis of the market power mitigation effect of public firms.     

Timing the Start of Material Substitution Projects: Creating Switching Options under Volatile Material Prices

Firms developing new products often face the challenge of making investment decisions under uncertain input–cost conditions due to the price volatilities of the materials they use. These decisions need to be made long before the final products are launched on the market. Therefore, firms that invest in the opportunity to switch materials in a timely manner will have the flexibility to react to material price changes and realize competitive advantages. However, volatile material prices may also cause a firm to delay investment. Using real‐options reasoning, this paper studies the influence of input‐cost fluctuations on the timing decision to start new product development (NPD) and thus create the follow‐on opportunity to later replace an existing product. A model that combines waiting and switching options to derive influencing factors of the flexibility value that triggers the investment is developed and tested on a sample of material substitution projects from manufacturing firms. The results show how price uncertainty of the new and the old material, their joint price development, the expected project duration, and competitive preemption are related to the propensity to delay the start of NPD. The findings provide new insights on how timing in adopting materials can be used to hedge exposure to volatile material prices. The insights are relevant for adopters and producers of new materials, as well as for policy makers who strive for supporting the diffusion of new materials.