Third-Degree Price Discrimination With Interdependent Demands

This paper analyzes the price, output, and welfare effects of third-degree price discrimination for a monopolist who sells in two interdependent markets. The case where the two goods sold by the monopolist are complements is analyzed as well as the more typical case where the two goods are substitutes. The economic effects of price discrimination are shown to depend on the type and strength of demand interdependence, the curvature of the demands and the slope of marginal cost. The circumstances under which price discrimination causes both market prices to either rise or fall are also analyzed.     

Price and quality discrimination in durable goods monopoly with resale trading

We examine a durable goods monopolist’s optimal dynamic price and product quality strategy when buyers are rational and can trade used durables among themselves. In contrast to the usual credibility problem of the durable goods monopolist, intertemporal quality discrimination introduces a time-inconsistency problem of not raising prices against high-valuation consumers who delay purchase for quality upgrades. Resale trading ameliorates this time-inconsistency problem and allows the monopolist to effectively price discriminate, especially when the buyers are patient. The monopolist’s optimal price and quality offers in the new good market exhibit complex dynamic patterns, and new good prices can fall as product quality improves even in the absence of entry threats or learning economies. Initial quality distortions are followed by steady-state quality allocations that are always efficient for the high-valuation buyers, but sometimes also for the marginal consumer-types. Both the resale trading frequency and the price discount for secondhand goods are driven by the pace of strategic quality obsolescence in the new good market.     

Spatial Price Discrimination in Input Markets with an Endogenous Market Boundary

This paper examines the welfare effect of third-degree price discrimination in a vertically related market with one upstream monopolist that sells its input to a continuum of downstream markets. Assume that the market boundary of the monopolist is endogenously determined. It is found that social welfare is necessarily lower under discriminatory than uniform pricing, even if the market area of the former is greater than that of the latter. This finding is contrary to that in the extant literature on price discrimination in final goods markets.     

PARALLEL TRADE,INTERNATIONAL EXHAUSTION AND INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS: A WELFARE ANALYSIS*

This paper analyses the issue of parallel trade (arbitrage) for products protected by intellectual property rights. We discuss a basic trade‐off that arises between the ex post better allocation that typically occurs under parallel trade when demand dispersion is not too high, and the ex ante reduced product quality because of lower investment. We show that the size of the welfare effects is significantly affected by the presence of a ‘generic’ product, which represents a form of competition for the monopolist. The monopolist will introduce a ‘fighting brand’ to compete with the generic, which dilutes but does not eliminate the result on the adverse effects of parallel trade on investments.     

Intertemporal Price Discrimination in Frictionless Durable Goods Monopolies

I show that small differences in quality and production costs between durables and non-durables in a product line allow a durable goods monopolist to intertemporally price discriminate even with continuous trading. In particular, a monopolist would want to both sell and rent out a durable to achieve price discrimination. This incentive to price discriminate simultaneously creates inefficient delay in the sale of the durable good, a finite trading period and long run efficiency of the market. The Coase conjecture fails because the non-durable good acts as an outside option that guarantees a minimum profit in the market for durables.     

Strategic Bidding By Potential Competitors: Will Monopoly Persist?

Who will win the bidding to become the sole producer of a new product: the monopolist of a related product or a new entrant? When there exists potential entry to the monopolist’s existing business, the standard result that monopoly persists (Gilbert and Newbery, ‘Preemptive Patenting and the Persistence of Monopoly’, American Economic Review, 72, pp. 514–526, 1982) may or may not hold, depending crucially on how the new product relates to the existing product of the monopolist. The monopolist tends to win the bidding and to dominate both products if the two products are strategic complements; and the entrant tends to win the bidding if the two products are strategic substitutes.     

Product innovation with vertical differentiation: Is a monopolist's incentive weaker?

This paper compares the incentives for product innovation across different market structures when the new product is vertically differentiated and of lower quality, a common case empirically. We show that innovation incentive rankings across market structures can differ substantially when the new product is of lower rather than higher quality. In particular, the incentive to add the new product can be greater for a monopolist over the old product than for a firm that would face any degree of competition from the old product. This incentive ranking cannot occur when, instead, the new product is of higher quality as has been analyzed in previous work. Moreover, in that case, the incentive ranking is the same whether the market is covered or not covered, whereas in our setting the ranking can differ. With the market covered, our setting provides another environment where the monopolist can have the greatest incentive to innovate, as previously shown when the new product is horizontally differentiated. Together, both settings show that Arrow's famous result—a secure monopolist gains less from a nondrastic process innovation than would a competitive firm—does not always extend to nondrastic product innovations. However, in all the cases analyzed here, consumer welfare (though not total welfare) is always lower under monopoly, even when only the monopolist would add the new product.     

Vertical Contracts and Downstream Entry*

We study the implications of different contractual forms in a market with an incumbent upstream monopolist and free downstream entry. We show that traditional conclusions regarding the desirability of linear contracts radically change when entry in the downstream market is endogenous rather than exogenous. By triggering more entry than two-part tariffs, wholesale price contracts can generate higher aggregate output, consumer surplus, and welfare. In light of this, the upstream monopolist may prefer to trade with wholesale price contracts as well as to give up part of its bargaining power when it is high.     

Price and quantity experimentation: A synthesis

This paper compares experimentation about product differentiation in a linear setting under four market structures: quantity-setting and price-setting monopoly, Cournot and Bertrand duopoly. Quantity-setting firms always experiment by raising their quantities and the monopolist experiments relatively more than the duopolists. A price-setting monopolist does not experiment. The value of information to Bertrand duopolists may be positive or negative depending on the degree of product differentiation. When information is valuable, price-setting duopolists experiment by lowering prices. A numerical example indicates that the intensity of experimentation is higher in a Cournot duopoly than in a Bertrand duopoly.     

Horizontal product differentiation,prices and quantity selection of a multi-product monopolist

A monopolist which serves a market in which tastes are uniformly spread along a circumference of a circle selects an optimal set of product varieties. The cost of installing an additional variety increases with the difference from the ‘main product’. It is shown that variety prices decrease and the degree of differentiation between any two varieties increases as products get more differentiated.     

Vertical integration in a monopolistically competitive industry

This paper considers forward vertical integration by a monopolist producer of an intermediate good when the downstream industry is monopolistically competitive. Alternative methods of vertical control are considered in addition to the usual input mark-up; these include franchise fees, royalties, and resale price maintenance. It is found that these methods in combination achieve perfect or near-perfect replication of the outcome under full vertical integration. The case where downstream products are differentiated by location in a circular space is studied in detail, and alternative outcomes are ranked according to their social desirability.     

OPTIMAL PRICING AND QUALITY CHOICE WHEN INVESTMENT IN QUALITY IS IRREVERSIBLE

This paper examines the price and quality choice of a single product, risk-neutral monopolist who can delay irreversible investments required for market entry. It is shown that the price and quality she chooses at entry increase with uncertainty about the size of future demand. In a Stackelberg leader-follower game, the leader and follower pre-commit immediately up to a certain level of uncertainty. In this case the leader produces the higher quality good. When uncertainty is higher than this threshold, the follower will wait and enter the market later with a higher quality good.     

An antitrust analysis of bundled loyalty discounts

Consider a monopolist in one market that faces competition in a second market. Bundled loyalty discounts, in which customers receive a price break on the monopoly good in exchange for making all purchases from the monopolist, have ambiguous welfare effects. Such discounts should not always be treated as a form of predatory pricing. In some settings, they act as tie-in sales. Existing tests for whether such discounts violate competition laws do not track changes in consumer surplus or total surplus. We apply a new test to an illustrative example based on SmithKline that assumes the “tied” market has homogeneous goods. If the tied market is characterized by Hotelling competition, bundling by the monopolist causes the rival firm to reduce its price. In numerical examples, we find that this can deter entry or induce exit.     

TYING,COMPATIBILITY AND PLANNED OBSOLESCENCE*

According to the hypothesis of planned obsolescence, a durable goods monopolist without commitment power has an excessive incentive to introduce new products that make old units obsolete, and this reduces its overall profitability. In this paper, I reconsider the above hypothesis by examining the role of competition in a monopolist's upgrade decision. I find that, when a system add‐on is competitively supplied, a monopolist chooses to tie the add‐on to a new system that is only backward compatible, even if a commitment of not introducing the new system is available and socially optimal. Tying facilitates a price squeeze.     

Multilateral Vertical Contracting with an Alternative Supply: The Welfare Effects of a Ban on Price Discrimination

Rey and Tirole [Handbook of Industrial Organization. Amsterdam: Elsevier (2005)] considered a model in which a monopolist sells to downstream firms using nonlinear contracts. They showed that banning price discrimination fully restores the supplier’s ability to leverage its monopoly power by enabling it to commit not to offer side discounts. I show that the situation changes when the supplier competes against a fringe of less efficient rivals rather than being a monopolist. Then banning price discrimination may cause per-unit prices to fall and welfare to increase. The dominant supplier can take advantage of a strategic bargaining effect: reducing the per-unit price makes the outside option of buying from the fringe less profitable, allowing the dominant supplier to extract more bargaining surplus through the fixed fee.     

On Stability in Competition: Tying and Horizontal Product Differentiation

We combine Hotelling’s model of product differentiation with tie-in sales. A monopolist in one market competes with another firm in a second market. In equilibrium firms choose zero product differentiation. Due to the tying structure no firm can gain the whole market by a small price reduction. A differentiation effect due to tie-in sales leads to this equilibrium stability.      

Pricing strategy, quality signaling, and entry deterrence

I investigate a pricing strategy that is aimed at deterring entry by applying a two-period model of a durable-goods monopolist. There exists an incumbent that is of two types, that is, high and low quality types. They differ in terms of their R&D capabilities, and the incumbent's type is assumed to be unknown to an entrant. If the entrant decided to enter the market, Nash–Bertrand price competition ensues between the incumbent and the entrant. I show that not only limit pricing but also prestige pricing signals the incumbent's quality type, which serves to discourage entry. In the prestige pricing, the high-quality type sells the products at an intentionally higher price. I also show that although limit pricing is more desirable than prestige pricing from a social welfare viewpoint, the incumbent can still choose prestige pricing.     

Optimal best-price policy

A best-price policy (BP) is a promise by a seller to give her customer a refund if she reduces her price after the customer has already purchased the product. We characterize the optimal BP policy as when the seller can control both the policy length (when the promise expires) and the refund scale (what portion of the price difference is refunded). We explain why the policy length is finite and varies across industries. In a setting where consumers' valuations decline over time, we show that a finite-length BP allows the seller to commit to not lowering her price too soon, while at the same time letting her capture some of the benefits of intertemporal price discrimination. However, because the decline in consumers' valuations is uncertain, a BP does not allow the monopolist to achieve the profit she could earn with a full commitment.     

Pricing the razor: A note on two-part tariffs

The “razor-and-blades” pricing strategy involves setting a low price for a durable basic product (razors) and a high price for a complementary consumable (blades). In a timeless model, Oi (1971) showed that if consumers' demand curves differ and do not cross and unit costs are constant, a monopolist should always price blades above cost. This note studies the optimal razor price. With a uniform distribution of parallel linear demand curves it is never optimal to sell the razor below cost, while with two types of consumers and non-crossing linear demands it is optimal to do so for some parameter values.     

Bundling, Competition and Quality Investment: A Welfare Analysis

We investigate how bundling affects investment in product quality, and derive welfare implications. A monopolist in a primary market competes with a rival in a complementary market. Bundling is the monopolist’s preferred strategy, since it either extracts surplus from the rival’s investment, or forces the rival to provide low quality. Bundling may reduce welfare without foreclosing the rival, but improves welfare when preventing undesirable investment. Since prohibiting bundling is not appropriate, we introduce a price test for bundled offers that preserves efficiencies from both bundling and quality investment, thereby improving welfare relative to the ‘do-nothing’ scenario. We consequently argue that this test should be applied whenever possible.