Scale economies and existence of sustainable monopoly prices

The size of the firm relative to market demand is crucial to a determination of whether there exist sustainable monopoly prices. In the one product case the size of the firm is its minimum efficient scale. In the multiproduct case size is defined by a set of outputs at which cost complementarities are present. The analysis shows that when the size of the firm is sufficiently large, there exist anonymously equitable Aumann-Shapley prices. Further, at these prices natural monopoly is sustainable against rival entry. The Aumann-Shapley price are also shown to be quantity sustainable in the sense of Brock and Scheinkman.     

Nonlinear mean-reversion to purchasing power parity: exponential smooth transition autoregressive models and stochastic unit root processes

The purpose of this paper is to show an empirical test of subadditivity based on a sufficient condition-namely, transray convexity coupled with global economies of scale-which has not been commonly used in the literature. We use this sufficient condition to test the hypothesis of subadditivity of the cost function in the largest Portuguese Telecommunications firm, CTT, and find that the market for telecommunications services in Portugal was a natural monopoly in the period analysed.     

Price cap regulation of a dominant firm facing competition

Price cap regulation is typically applied to natural monopolies operating with subadditive costs. Price caps are known to provide superior incentives for the regulated monopoly to pursue cost reduction and, in a multiservice/product context, undertake welfare enhancing price discrimination. It is well known that capping a Laspeyres index of the firm’s prices induces the monopoly to charge socially optimal “Ramsey” prices in the long run. This paper examines the suitability of the Laspeyres form of regulation when the regulated firm faces competition in the market for one of its services (outputs). We present the appropriately modified Ramsey pricing rule for the regulated dominant firm and demonstrate that capping a Laspeyres index of the dominant firm’s prices leads to prices that satisfy this pricing rule in the long run.     

Price Caps and Output Floors: A Comparison of Simple Regulatory Rules

We study in this paper a simple alternative to price cap regulation. The mechanism, which we label 'output floor' regulation, requires the regulated firm to supply a given level of output. This rule is as simple as price cap regulation, and performs identically when the regulated firm is a natural monopoly; however, we show that, in the presence of a competitive fringe, output floor regulation yields lower prices and stronger incentives for cost reduction. Its introduction, however, is likely to be resisted by the industry, since it lowers managerial utility and shareholders' profits.     

强自然垄断定价理论与中国电价规制制度分析

强自然垄断行业由于其定价方面的两难困境 ,需要规制者对其产品定价进行规制以在厂商利润与社会福利之间进行权衡。边际成本定价原则并不适合于自然垄断厂商。本文在规制定价理论以及激励规制理论的基础上 ,对中国电力定价问题进行了分析 ,认为电价改革的第一步应在发电环节中引入竞争的基础上 ,对不同效率类型的电力厂商设计不同激励强度的定价机制 ,另外本文尝试着对不同技术效率的电力厂商列出了不同激励强度的价格规制方案菜单     

Using Market Structure to Regulate a Vertically Integrated Monopolist

A natural monopolist whose cost is private information produces a good which is combined with another good that can be produced by the monopolist or by other firms. The agency that regulates the monopolist can impose any of several different market structures in the industry: integrated monopoly, vertical separation with free entry downstream, or liberalization downstream (both integrated and independent production). When several firms produce downstream, a Cournot quantity-setting game with free entry determines the market price. We derive the optimal contracts to offer the monopolist under all three market structures and examine the influence of downstream cost differences on access prices.We then study the optimal regulatory policy where the regulator can condition the downstream market structure on the monopolist's cost report to the regulator. The optimal regulatory policy awards a monopoly to a low-cost upstream firm, but requires free entry downstream if the monopolist reports high upstream costs. Thus, the choice of market structure is an additional tool to limit rent extraction by the monopolist. Simulation analysis reveals the possibility of significant welfare gains from this additional regulatory tool.     

Cost-Padding in Profit-Regulated Firms*

When entry into an industry is restricted, economic regulation of that industry is often directed at preventing existing firms from monopoly pricing behaviour. One form of such regulation is to set prices so as to control the level of profits earned by these firms. This paper briefly reviews the relevant economic literature and presents a model of the regulated firm in which such price-setting procedures provide an incentive to inflate costs above minimum levels. The welfare cost of this form of regulation can then exceed that occurring at the unconstrained monopoly outcome. The setting of air fares under the Two-Airline Policy and the regulation of natural gas in NSW are discussed in the context of this analysis.     

The Cost Structure of Australian Telecommunications

Since 1991 Australian telecommunications has undergone substantial reform. To a large extent, the economic correctness of pro-competitive policy depends on the non-existence of natural monopoly technology. This paper provides estimates of the Australian telecommunications system cost structure, and tests for subadditivity from 1943 to 1991. Additivity of the cost function after 1945 rejects the natural monopoly hypothesis and supports recent government policy. Diminished natural monopoly characteristics suggest that co-ordination between firms through networking can achieve similar economies as internal co-ordination within a monopoly. This finding is important, given the trend towards network unbundling, and service provision through interconnection.     

The importance of management and transaction costs for large UK firms

This article develops an approach to the firm using the principle that any organization is an amalgam of two production functions: a control function and a real function. The resulting non-linear regression equation allows estimation of model parameters that can be used to calculate firm-specific production and transaction costs. The paper uses a sample of large UK firms for the four years 1980, 1986, 1992 and 1997. The parameter and cost estimates appear intuitively plausible given developments in competitive conditions and environmental uncertainties. Broadly speaking the results support the view that transaction cost economizing is a primary determinant of improved firm performance. This result is particularly apparent when monopoly power and the positive dynamic advantages of firm slack are identified.     

Competition,comparison, and innovation

Competitive firms can make a comparison with each other and easily figure out the better strategy, while monopoly firms cannot. Therefore, a competitive firm may be more likely to try low cost innovations than a monopoly firm may.     

Competition and regulation with product differentiation

We consider a market for differentiated products, where one good is supplied by a regulated monopolist and competitive firms operate in an unregulated segment. In this setting we investigate the issue of whether to allow the monopolist to diversify into the unregulated segment by owning a competitive firm. Under asymmetric cost information, if goods are substitutes a diversified monopolist, which exaggerates its costs in the regulated segment to charge a higher regulated price, stimulates the demand for the competitive affiliate. This strengthens the firm??s incentive to inflate costs, since doing so generates a positive informational spillover to its profits in the competitive segment. Consequently, a regime of separation, which prevents the firm from operating in the competitive segment, is welfare-enhancing. Conversely, with complements, cost exaggeration in the regulated monopoly reduces the demand and harms profits in the competitive segment, and allowing the monopolist to diversify into the competitive segment therefore generates countervailing incentives, which weaken the firm??s interest in cost manipulation and improve social welfare.     

A market test for natural monopoly in local exchange

Is the incumbent local exchange carrier (LEC) a natural monopolist? The analysis indicates that the LEC cost function is not supportable: LECs appear to be either nonsustainable natural monopolies or non natural monopolies over the set of services they currently offer. However, recent technological changes suggest that whether LECs are natural monopolies over their current offerings is immaterial for policy making, because competitors are enjoying economies of scope in offering both LEC and non LEC services. Based on these results, deregulation of LECs is discussed in a Type I/Type II error framework.     

MONOPOLY POWER AND DOWNWARD PRICE RIGIDITY UNDER COSTLY PRICE ADJUSTMENT

A method of 'backward deduction' is used to analyse the decisions of a firm, setting price and quantity before demand observations are made, with the option to adjust price at a cost after demand is observed. It is shown for such a firm that the events of (1) downward price rigidity; (2) overproduction; and (3) a high degree of monopoly power are closely related. The paper distinguishes itself from the previous literature on costly price adjustment in its treatment of disequilibrium situations and focus on monopoly power in relation to price rigidity. The main results are obtained for a linear demand curve and a uniform demand distribution.     

Public Monopoly,Mixed Oligopoly and Productive Efficiency

In general, the introduction of competition into the public sector seems to lead to higher cost‐efficiency in service production. However, there are examples of substantial cost increases in some areas. In this paper, using a mixed oligopoly model, we investigate the effects of deregulation on the cost‐reducing incentives of a public firm. Our results show that a firm that is a public monopoly has greater incentive to conduct cost‐reducing investment than a public firm within mixed oligopoly market.     

Bottleneck co-ownership as a regulatory alternative

This paper proposes a regulatory mechanism for vertically related industries in which the upstream “bottleneck” segment faces significant returns to scale while other (downstream) segments may be more competitive. In the proposed mechanism, the ownership of the upstream firm is allocated to downstream firms in proportion to their shares of input purchases. This mechanism, while preserving downstream competition, partially internalizes the benefits of exploiting economies of scale resulting from an increase in downstream output. We show that this mechanism is more efficient than a disintegrated market structure in which the upstream natural monopoly bottleneck sets a price equal to average cost.     

Moral hazard,Bertrand competition and natural monopoly

In the traditional model of Bertrand price competition among symmetric firms, there is no restriction on the number of firms that are active in equilibrium. A symmetric equilibrium exists with the different firms sharing the market. I show that this does not hold if we preserve the symmetry between firms but introduce moral hazard with a customer-sensitive probability of exposure; competition necessarily results in a natural monopoly with only one active firm. Sequential price announcements and early adoption are some equilibrium selection mechanisms that help to pin down the identity of the natural monopolist. The insights of the basic model are robust to many extensions.     

自然垄断的"三位一体"理论

传统自然垄断理论是建立在规模经济、范围经济和成本劣加性基础之上的，本文认为社会总价值或总效用和社会净收益的优加性是比成本劣加性更好地定义自然垄断的概念，并在对规模经济、范围经济和网络经济重新定义的基础上，从规模经济、范围经济、网络经济“三位一体”角度重新解释了自然垄断概念，提出了自然垄断的“三位一体”理论，为自然垄断产业规制及其改革奠定理论和实证基础。     

Licensing a quality-enhancing innovation to an upstream firm

This paper examines the case where a patent holder who is not a producer licenses its quality-enhancing innovation to an upstream firm, which sells its product through a downstream monopoly. It is found that the patent holder prefers a two-part tariff contract, which includes both a fixed-fee and per-unit output royalty. However, the royalty included in the licensing contract makes each firm price at a markup over marginal cost and therefore makes both consumers and the society worse off, if the innovation is small and the supplier is weak. From a welfare perspective, licensing by means of an ad valorem tax is more efficient, as it allows the upstream firm to be less aggressive when trading with the downstream firm.     

SUBSIDIZATION AND BARGAINING IN MIXED OLIGOPOLIES

In this paper, we consider political interaction in a mixed oligopoly by characterizing how a subsidy is endogenously determined through the bargaining process between firms and politicians. We discuss how the nature of the political equilibrium changes with the type of competition, the specification of the cost function, and the timing of the game. We show that when bargaining between firms and politicians takes place, the resulting social welfare may be even worse than that under a public firm monopoly.