Oligopoly intermediation,relative rivalry and market conduct

We consider two firms that compete against each other jointly in upstream and downstream markets under two pricing games: Purchasing to stock (PTS), in which firms select input prices prior to setting consumer prices; and purchasing to order (PTO), in which firms sell forward contracts to consumers prior to selecting input prices. The antitrust implications of the model depend on the relative degree of oligopoly rivalry in the upstream and downstream markets. Firms strategically precommit to setting prices in the less rivalrous market, which serves to soften competition in the more rivalrous market, resulting in anticompetitive effects. Bertrand prices emerge in equilibrium when the markets are equally rivalrous, while Cournot outcomes arise with upstream monopsony or downstream monopoly markets. The slope of firm reaction functions depends on relative rivalry, a feature we use to derive testable hypotheses for antitrust analysis of a wide variety of industry practices.     

Outsourcing induced by strategic competition

We show that intermediate goods can be sourced to firms on the “outside” (that do not compete in the final product market), even when there are no economies of scale or cost advantages for these firms. What drives the phenomenon is that “inside” firms, by accepting such orders, incur the disadvantage of becoming Stackelberg followers in the ensuing competition to sell the final product. Thus they have incentive to quote high provider prices to ward off future competitors, driving the latter to source outside.     

Search engines: Left side quality versus right side profits

Search engines face an interesting tradeoff in choosing the way to display their results. While providing high quality unpaid, or “left side” results attracts users, doing so can also cannibalize the revenue that comes from paid ads on the “right side”. This paper examines this tradeoff, focusing, in particular, on the role of users' post-search interaction with the websites whose links are displayed. In the model, high quality left side results boost demand from users, causing them to tolerate a search engine on which advertisers do not offer the lowest possible prices for the goods that they sell. However, because websites appearing on the left side still have an incentive to compete in the same market as advertisers, an increase in quality on the left side may reduce advertisers' equilibrium prices. I analyze the circumstances under which this will occur and discuss the model's potential implications for antitrust policy.     

Is targeted advertising always beneficial?

In this paper, we study a simple model in which two horizontally differentiated firms compete in prices and targeted advertising on an initially uninformed market. First, the Nash equilibrium is fully characterized. We prove that when the advertising cost is low, firms target only their “natural markets”, while they cross-advertise when this cost is high. Second, the outcome at equilibrium is compared with random advertising. Surprisingly, we prove that firms' equilibrium profits may be lower with targeted advertising relative to random advertising, while firms are given more options with targeted advertising.     

The incentives for takeover in oligopoly

We present a model of takeover where the target optimally sets its reserve price. Under relatively standard symmetry restrictions, we obtain a unique equilibrium. The probability of takeover is only a function of the number of firms and of the insiders' share of total industry gains due to the increase in concentration. Our main application is to the linear Cournot and Bertrand models. A takeover is more likely under Bertrand competition if goods are substitutes, and more likely under Cournot competition if goods are complements.     

A Stackelberg model of pricing of complementary goods under information asymmetry

We consider a duopoly market where two separate firms offer complementary goods in a leader–follower type move. Each firm has private forecast information about the uncertain market demand and decides whether to share it with the other firm. We show that information sharing would benefit the leader firm but hurt the follower firm as well as the total system if the follower firm shares information unconditionally. We then devise a “simple to implement” information sharing scheme under which both firms and the total system are better off. We also provide several interesting managerial insights and establish the robustness of the model in managing a supply chain through our analytical and simulation results.     

Durable goods oligopoly

This paper models a durable-goods oligopoly as a differential game. Two cases are treated: sales, where firms cannot lease but must sell the good in question, and leasing, where firms do not sell but only rent. In the sales case, firms face increasing marginal cost of production and the good in question depreciates. For this case, a rational expectations feedback Nash equilibrium is constructed for which monopoly or oligopoly output is less than the efficient level. This gap between oligopoly and competitive output diminishes as the number of firms increases. When firms can only lease the good, the good is assumed not to depreciate and the monopoly level of steady state output is compared with the level of steady state output for a feedback equilibrium duopoly. For this case, the duopoly equilibrium has steady-state output that is less than the corresponding efficient level, but greater than the monopoly level. The leasing model is shown to be isomorphic to the adjustment-cost duopoly model of Driskill and McCafferty (Journal of Economic Theory, 49 (1989) 324–338).     

Input Price Discrimination and Allocation Efficiency

This research examines the effects of input price discrimination on allocation efficiency and social welfare. Instead of assuming constant marginal costs, we allow downstream firms to produce under increasing marginal costs. When downstream firms operate in separate markets, even though total output remains unchanged, consumer surplus and social welfare could be greater under discriminatory pricing than under uniform pricing. Moreover, the social desirability of input price discrimination can still hold true when downstream firms compete either in Cournot or Bertrand fashion.

     

Entry,imperfect competition,and futures market for the input

We analyze firms' entry, production and hedging decisions under imperfect competition. We consider an oligopoly industry producing a homogeneous output in which risk-averse firms face an entry cost upon entering the industry, and then compete in Cournot with one another. Each firm faces uncertainty in the input cost when making production decision, and has access to the futures market to hedge the random cost. We provide two sets of results. First, under general assumptions about risk preferences, demand, and uncertainty, we characterize the unique equilibrium. In contrast to previous results in the literature (without entry), both production and output price depend on uncertainty and risk aversion. Specifically, when entry is endogenized and the futures price is not actuarially fair, access to the futures market does not lead to separation. Second, to study the effect of access to the futures market on entry and production, we restrict attention to constant absolute risk aversion (CARA) preferences, a linear demand, and a normal distribution for the spot price. In general, the effect of access to the futures market on the number of firms and production is ambiguous.     

The Strategic Effect of Bundling: A New Perspective

This paper investigates the strategic effect of the bundling strategy that is adopted by a multi-product firm that produces two complementary goods and faces one single-product rival in each market. I consider both the Cournot and Bertrand cases. When firms compete in quantities, bundling is completely ineffective. Under price competition, selling as a package is profitable when market competition is particularly tough. In such circumstances, the multi-product firm resorts to bundling to dampen the negative impact of low brand differentiation and/or scarce product complementarity. However, overall prices increase as a result of bundling, and not only consumer surplus, but also total social welfare, shrink.     

Upstream Competition between Vertically Integrated Firms

We propose a model of two‐tier competition between vertically integrated firms and unintegrated downstream firms. We show that, even when integrated firms compete in prices to offer a homogeneous input, the Bertrand logic may collapse, and the input may be priced above marginal cost in equilibrium. These partial foreclosure equilibria are more likely to exist when downstream competition is fierce or when unintegrated downstream competitors are relatively inefficient. We discuss the impact of several regulatory tools on the competitiveness of the wholesale market.     

R&D and product obsolescence

Claims of planned obsolescence have often been made by various consumer groups. Bulow (1986) examined a monopolist's choice of product durability and found that firms who sell their products tend to choose lower durability levels than firms that rent. We argue that the speed of new product development may be a more appropriate proxy for obsolescence than is durability. Reformulating Bulow's model in terms of R&D choice rather than durability choice, we find that sales firms engage in higher levels of R&D than do rental firms. Additionally, we provide an empirical example using data from the copier and computer industries which also suggests a strong positive relationship between the R&D intensity of a firm and the proportion of output sold versus rented.     

Cournot and Bertrand equilibria compared: substitutability,complementarity and concavity

This paper assesses the view that Bertrand equilibrium is intrinsically more competitive than Cournot equilibrium. We consider an oligopoly model with linear demand, and a mixture of substitute and complementary products. Our results provide support for the conventional wisdom, and also indicate its limitations. We provide counter-examples showing that no clear-cut comparison of prices and quantities is possible without strategic complementarity in either of the two games. However, price competition is indeed more competitive according to the following criteria: lower mark-up/output ratios, larger average output, and lower average price.     

How do Participants in Research Joint Ventures Diversify?

This paper investigates the incentives to participate in research joint ventures from the perspective of overall business diversification behavior. It presents evidence that: (a) RJVs tend to put together industrial activities differently than single firms; and, (b) the diversification decisions of RJV participants are triggered partly differently than the analogous decisions of firms that have not participated in the examined large set of RJVs. The results indicate that RJVs facilitate experimentation. They also indicate that the policy debate on inter-firm cooperation in R & D must consider the likely differences in strategic behavior between frequent RJV participants and other firms.     

From goods to service(s): Divergences and convergences of logics

There are two logics or mindsets from which to consider and motivate a transition from goods to service(s). The first, “goods-dominant (G-D) logic”, views services in terms of a type of (e.g., intangible) good and implies that goods production and distribution practices should be modified to deal with the differences between tangible goods and services. The second logic, “service-dominant (S-D) logic”, considers service - a process of using ones resources for the benefit of and in conjunction with another party - as the fundamental purpose of economic exchange and implies the need for a revised, service-driven framework for all of marketing. This transition to a service-centered logic is consistent with and partially derived from a similar transition found in the business-marketing literature — for example, its shift to understanding exchange in terms value rather than products and networks rather than dyads. It also parallels transitions in other sub-disciplines, such as service marketing. These parallels and the implications for marketing theory and practice of a full transition to a service-logic are explored.     

Optimal strategy of multi-product retailers with relative thinking and reference prices

Experimental evidence suggests that consumers are affected by reference prices and by relative price differences (“relative thinking”). A linear-city model of two retailers that sell two goods suggests how this consumer behavior affects firm strategy and market outcomes. A simple model analyzes the case in which all consumers want to buy both goods. An extended version adds consumers who want only one good. Relative thinking leads firms to increase the markup on the good with the higher reference price and decrease the markup on the other good, possibly to a negative markup. Stronger relative thinking increases the firms' profits.     

Equilibrium price dispersion with heterogeneous searchers

Firms simultaneously set prices in a homogeneous-product market where uninformed consumers search for price information. Some uninformed consumers are “local” searchers who visit only one seller, whereas others search sequentially with an optimal reservation price. Equilibrium prices may follow a mixture distribution, with clusters of high and low prices separated by a zero-density gap. When the (exogenous) reservation price of local searchers depart from that of the optimizing sequential searchers by a relatively small amount, the presence of local searchers either has no effect on market outcomes or benefits all consumers. A reduction in search cost sometimes leads to higher equilibrium prices.     

Do firms sell forward for strategic reasons? An application to the wholesale market for natural gas

Cournot models of oligopolistic interaction in forward and spot markets have shown that firms may sell forward for risk-hedging reasons only, or for both risk-hedging and strategic considerations. Using data from the Dutch wholesale market for natural gas where we observe the number of players, spot and forward sales, churn rates and prices, this paper presents evidence that strategic reasons play an important role at explaining the observed firms’ hedging activity. Our test for strategic behavior is based on the theoretical relationship between the number of sellers and the incentives to sell forward: if risk-hedging is the only motive behind firms’ decision to sell forward, then hedging activity ought to decrease in the number of firms; otherwise, if strategic reasons are relevant, then firms incentives to sell forward should increase in the number of competitors.     

Optimal bid disclosure in patent license auctions under alternative modes of competition

The literature on patent license auctions in oligopoly assumed that the auctioneer reveals the winning bid and stressed that this gives firms an incentive to bid high in order to signal an aggressive output strategy in a downstream Cournot market game, and conversely bid low to signal acquiescent pricing in a Bertrand market game. The present paper examines the information revealed by publishing the winning or the losing or no bid, assuming an oligopoly with differentiated goods. We rank disclosure rules and find that it is not optimal for the innovator to disclose the winning bid, regardless of the mode of competition.     

Incentivizing R&D: Prize or subsidies?

This paper studies the optimal design of R&D contests. A “sponsor” (e.g. the US Department of Defense or the World Health Organization) wants to improve the quality of the winning products. To do so, it partitions its budget between two schemes: an inducement prize and efficiency-enhancing subsidies to the firms competing in the contest. Prizes and subsidies have different functions, and they provide complementary incentives. In the optimally designed contest, subsidies increase while the prize decreases, if the innovation process is more challenging. Further, sensible conditions are identified under which the optimal contest implements either a “handicapping” scheme (by preferentially subsidizing the “underdog”) or a “national champion” scheme (by favoring the “favorite”). Our analysis yields a number of useful implications and sheds light on an array of R&D incentive schemes, such as the DoD's design competitions and vaccine development incentives.