Collusion,entry, and market shares

This paper analyzes market entry and collusion in a model of duopoly with product-specific-set-up costs. The analysis demonstrates that collusion can alter the incentives for entry deterrence. We find conditions under which an established firm will permit entry and collude with a potential entrant even though entry deterrence is a viable option under noncooperative oligopoly rules. Conditions are also specified in which entry will be effectively impeded and collusion will not be undertaken.     

Collusion between two-sided platforms

We study the price and welfare effects of collusion between two-sided platforms and show that they depend on whether collusion occurs on both sides or a single side of the market, and whether users single-home or multi-home. Our most striking result is that one-sided collusion leads to lower (resp. higher) prices on the collusive (resp. competitive) side if the cross-group externalities exerted on the collusive side are positive and sufficiently strong. One-sided collusion may, therefore, benefit the users on the collusive side and harm the users on the competitive side. Our findings have implications regarding cartel detection and damages actions.     

The Effect of Bid Rigging on Prices: A Study of the Highway Construction Industry

This paper examines the effect of multimarket contact in afirst price sealed bid government procurement auction market. It investigates whether bidprices in the highway construction industry are related to conditions that favor the formation of a cartel.Repeated contacts among firms are found to have a significantly positive effect on the winning low bidwhich leads to higher profit. Further, rivalry among few firms tends to exacerbate the multimarket effect.The results in this study additionally support the recent theoretical predictions that collusion isbetter sustainable during economic downturns.     

Collusion Under Imperfect Monitoring with Asymmetric Firms

We explore the effects of asymmetries in capacity constraints on collusion where market demand is uncertain and where firms’ sales and prices are private information. We show that all firms can infer when at least one firm's sales are below some firm‐specific ‘trigger level.’ When firms use this public information to monitor the collusive agreement, price wars may occur on the equilibrium path. Symmetry facilitates collusion but, if price wars are sufficiently long, then the optimal collusive prices of symmetric capacity distributions are lower on average than the competitive prices of asymmetric capacity distributions. We draw conclusions for merger policy.     

Symbiotic production: The case of telecommunication pricing

In this paper we analyze a generalization of vertical monopolies in which monopoly suppliers trade essential inputs with one another. The most obvious applications of the model, which we call symbiotic production, are to postal and telecommunications services. We show how producers can use per-unit tariffs to achieve cooperative outcomes without colluding directly over consumer prices. We then show the firms have an incentive to collude in the setting of tariffs but that suchcollusion will lower consumer prices. This assumes that the suppliers are otherwise unfettered. In contrast, if the constituent monopolies are regulated, we show that collusion enables the firms to completely undo the restraints of regulation. The model has important policy implications for the international telecommunications market.     

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.     

CooperationV. Rivalry and factors facilitating collusion

A perennial topic in industrial economics is collusion. Kwoka and Ravenscraft (1986) developed a model to measure the collusiveness of conjectures across industries as a function of intra-industry rivalry among leading firms. But extensive literature suggests that the degree of collusion may also depend upon underlying market characteristics. We modify the Kwoka and Ravenscraft model to account for this. Our results suggest that underlying market characteristics do matter. Intra-industry rivalry and conjectures vary with the level and stability of concentration, and to a lesser degree with product homogeneity.     

Machine learning with screens for detecting bid-rigging cartels

We combine machine learning techniques with statistical screens computed from the distribution of bids in tenders within the Swiss construction sector to predict collusion through bid-rigging cartels. We assess the out of sample performance of this approach and find it to correctly classify more than 84% of the total of bidding processes as collusive or non-collusive. We also discuss tradeoffs in reducing false positive vs. false negative predictions and find that false negative predictions increase much faster in reducing false positive predictions. Finally, we discuss policy implications of our method for competition agencies aiming at detecting bid-rigging cartels.     

Collusion or Competition? Interfirm Relationships in the Chinese Auto Industry

The Chinese passenger‐vehicle industry contains a large number of manufacturers. Some of them are members of big corporate groups centered around state owned enterprises. These corporate relationships may facilitate collusion. This paper applies the non‐nested hypothesis test methodology to data on passenger vehicles to identify whether price collusion exists within corporate groups or across groups. Our empirical results support the assumption of Bertrand Nash competition in the Chinese passenger‐vehicle industry: We find no evidence for within or cross‐group price collusion. Our policy experiments show that indigenous brands will gain market shares and profits if within‐group companies merge.     

Bundling,tying, and collusion

Tying a good produced monopolistically with a complementary good produced in an oligopolistic market in which there is room for collusion can be profitable if some buyers of the oligopoly good have no demand for the monopoly good. The reason is that a tie makes part of the demand in the oligopolistic market out of the reach of the tying firm's rivals, which decreases the profitability of deviating from a collusive agreement. Tying may thus facilitate collusion. It may also allow the tying firm to alter market share allocation in a collusive oligopolistic market.     

In Which Industries is Collusion More Likely? Evidence from the UK

I examine the factors facilitating or hindering collusion using a comprehensive data set on the incidence of price–fixing across UK manufacturing industries in the 1950s. The econometric results suggest that collusion is more likely the higher the degree of capital intensity and less likely in advertising–intensive than in low–advertising industries. There is also some evidence of a non–monotonic relationship between market growth and the likelihood of collusion. There is no clear link between concentration and the incidence of collusion.     

COLLUSION AND RESEARCH JOINT VENTURES*

I examine the question whether cooperation in R&D among firms producing similar products leads to product market collusion. Suppose that firms engage in a stochastic R&D race while maintaining the collusive equilibrium in a repeated‐game framework. Innovation under non‐cooperative R&D leads to an inter‐firm asymmetry, destabilizing collusion in pre‐discovery and post‐discovery periods. Innovation sharing under cooperative R&D preserves the symmetry and also increases total profit, thereby facilitating collusion. However, welfare may increase with cooperative R&D. I also examine the condition for collusion under licensing and compare the results.     

携号转网政策对电信运营商合谋的影响研究

电信业是一个典型的寡头垄断产业,在运营过程中,电信运营商容易达成合谋,同时电信市场较高的转移成本为电信运营商合谋提供一定的基础。本文通过构建博弈模型,研究携号转网政策对电信运营商合谋的影响效应。研究得出：实施携号转网政策,通过有效降低消费者的转移成本,使得电信运营商坚持合谋的临界贴现因子提高,电信运营商将更难坚持合谋。该政策的实施效果随转移成本降低率的提高而增强,随电信运营商产品差异性的不断扩大而减弱。因此,携号转网政策的实施将在一定程度上降低电信运营商的合谋行为。     

An econometric analysis of the European Commission's merger decisions

Using a sample of 96 mergers notified to the European Commission and logit regression techniques, we analyse the Commission's decision process. We find that the probability of a phase-2 investigation and of a prohibition of the merger increases with the parties' market shares. The probabilities increase also when the Commission finds high entry barriers or that the post-merger market structure is conducive to collusion. We do not find significant effects of “political” variables, such as the nationality of the merging firms.     

Market Power and Joint Dominance in U.K. Brewing

Market power and joint dominance are examined in U.K. brewing. I assess unilateral and coordinated effects, where the latter is equated with joint dominance, and show how one can distinguish between the two econometrically. The application makes use of two demand equations: the nested logit of McFadden [1978a] and the distance-metric of Pinkse, Slade, and Brett [2002] . The two equations yield very different predictions concerning elasticities and markups. Nevertheless, although there is evidence of market power using either demand model, that power is due entirely to unilateral effects. In other words, neither model uncovers evidence of coordinated effects (tacit collusion).     

The Effect of Explicit Communication on pricing: Evidence from the Collapse of a Gasoline Cartel

We study the collapse of collusion in Québec's retail gasoline market following a Competition Bureau investigation, and show that it involved two empirical regularities: high margins, and asymmetric price adjustments. Using weekly, station‐level prices we test whether collusion was successful, and whether asymmetric adjustments were part of the cartel's strategy. We do so in the markets targeted by the investigation, and in markets throughout the province with similar pre‐collapse pricing (cyclical markets). Our results suggest that stations in both target and cyclical markets adjusted pricing following the announcement: margins fell (by 30%/15% in target/cyclical markets), and adjustments became more symmetric.     

Fighting collusion in auctions: An experimental investigation

The danger of collusion presents a serious challenge for auctioneers. In this paper, we compare the collusive properties of two standard auctions, the English auction and the first-price sealed-bid auction, and a lesser-known format, the Amsterdam (second-price) auction. In the Amsterdam auction, the highest losing bidder earns a premium for stirring up the price. We study two settings: in one, all bidders can collude, and in another, only a subset is eligible. The experiments show that the Amsterdam auction triggers less collusion than the standard auctions. We compare experimental results to theoretical predictions, and provide an explanation where they differ.     

Forward Contracts,Market Structure and the Welfare Effects of Mergers

We examine how forward contracts affect economic outcomes under generalized market structures. In the model, forward contracts discipline the exercise of market power by making profit less sensitive to changes in output. This impact is greatest in markets with intermediate levels of concentration. Mergers reduce the use of forward contracts in equilibrium and, in markets that are sufficiently concentrated, this amplifies the adverse effects on consumer surplus. Additional analyses of merger profitability and collusion are provided. Throughout, we illustrate and extend the theoretical results using Monte Carlo simulations. We discuss the practical relevance for antitrust enforcement.     

Great School Milk Conspiracies Revisited

This paper revisits a particular case involvingtwo dairy processing companies accused ofrigging bids in northern Kentucky schooldistricts during the 1980s. Evidence andarguments presented to support a conclusion ofovert collusion are reassessed. Analyses ofincumbency rates, market shares, bid levels, biddispersions, bid distance relationships, exactbidding differentials, and bids from hellindicate that the two dairies may have beenengaged in tacit collusion instead of overt collusion.     

An Anticompetitive Effect of Eliminating Transport Barriers in Network Markets

This paper examines the welfare effects of physically interconnecting two (network) markets that were previously separated. In each market a different set of capacity-constrained firms operate. Firms engage in a supergame and collude whenever it is rational for them to do so.We find that, under certain parametric restrictions, interconnection of the two markets reduces total welfare. The collusive horizon may extend from a single market to the overall integrated market. In such case, interconnection can be viewed as “exporting” collusion, rather than competition.