Downstream Competition, Foreclosure, and Vertical Integration

This paper analyzes the effect of competition among downstream firms on an upstream firm's payoff and on its incentive to integrate vertically when firms in both segments negotiate optimal contracts. We argue that as downstream competition becomes more intense, the upstream firm obtains a larger share of a smaller downstream industry profit. The upstream firm may encourage downstream competition (even excessively) in response to high downstream bargaining power. The option of vertical integration may be a barrier to entry downstream and may trigger strategic horizontal spinoffs or mergers. We extend the analysis to upstream competition.     

Vertical Disintegration

With economies of scale, a vertically integrated firm can lower its upstream cost by supplying downstream competitors. The competitors may strategically choose not to purchase from the integrated firm, unless the latter's price for the intermediate good is sufficiently lower than those of alternative suppliers. In a simple model of dynamic scale economies through learning by doing, equilibrium vertical disintegration occurs if and only if total industry profit is higher under vertical separation than under integration. The model bridges a logical gap in George Stigler's classic theory on vertical organization, and sheds light on the widely observed phenomenon of vertical disintegration .     

Vertical integration and disruptive cross‐market R&D

We study how vertical market structure affects the incentives of suppliers and customers to develop a new input that will enable the innovator to replace the incumbent supplier. In a vertical setting with an incumbent monopoly upstream supplier and two downstream firms, we show that vertical integration reduces the R&D incentives of the integrated parties, but increases that of the nonintegrated downstream rival. Strategic vertical integration may occur whereby the upstream incumbent integrates with a downstream firm to discourage or even preempt downstream disruptive R&D. Depending on the R&D costs, vertical integration may lower the social rate of innovation.     

Vertical Foreclosure, Technological Choice, and Entry on the Intermediate Market

This paper analyzes the profitability of vertical integration for an upstream monopoly facing a potential competitor. We show that it depends on the technology used by the firm when it integrates. We distinguish two types of technologies: standard technologies, used by nonintegrated firms, and nonstandard technologies, reserved for integrated firms and implying the complete foreclosure of nonintegrated firms. Vertical integration with the adoption of a nonstandard technology dominates vertical integration with the adoption of a standard technology and is profitable, as long as the degree of competition in the downstream industry is sufficiently low.     

Vertical Foreclosure, Technological Choice, and Entry on the Intermediate Market

This paper analyzes the profitability of vertical integration for an upstream monopoly facing a potential competitor. We show that it depends on the technology used by the firm when it integrates. We distinguish two types of technologies: standard technologies, used by nonintegrated firms, and nonstandard technologies, reserved for integrated firms and implying the complete foreclosure of nonintegrated firms. Vertical integration with the adoption of a nonstandard technology dominates vertical integration with the adoption of a standard technology and is profitable, as long as the degree of competition in the downstream industry is sufficiently low.     

Product Differentiation and Upstream-Downstream Relations

This paper examines the relationship between a differentiated downstream market and a specialized upstream market. We analyze three different types of vertical relation between the upstream and downstream sectors when the upstream market supplies specialized and complementary inputs to a downstream product-differentiated market. The first is the benchmark case of decentralized markets, the second is a network of alliances among upstream suppliers, and the third is partial vertical integration. We identify the perfect equilibrium for a symmetric model in each case and show that there is no simple relationship between the degree of connection between upstream and downstream firms and profitability. The key factor affecting prices and the relative profitability of the different market organizations is the degree of product differentiation among the downstream firms, because it affects the intensity of competition among upstream suppliers. We show that vertical foreclosure is not an equilibrium strategy.     

Vertical Integration and Proprietary Information Transfers

Suppose that rival downstream producers of a final good contract with the same upstream supplier of an input and, in the process, reveal private information. A vertical merger between the upstream supplier and one of the downstream firms may dissipate the information advantage of the remaining downstream firms. The welfare consequences of such a merger and related information sharing depend on the value of information, the benefits of integration apart from information sharing, and the nature of upstream competition. In this paper, conditions are found under which owners of a vertically integrated firm are better off breaking up into independent firms. This result may explain AT&T's recent spinoff of Lucent Technologies. Further results suggest that a prohibition on information transfers, such as that often proposed by the Federal Trade Commission and Department of Justice as a precursor to approving vertical mergers, may actually reduce expected consumer surplus and expected social welfare.     

Picking a loser: Strategic surprise in a design and development game

We take a setting in which upstream players produce design ideas and downstream players select among these ideas to develop finished products. Design diversity is valuable at the upstream stage and coordination is valuable at the downstream stage. However, this outcome is not always realized. We show that an intermediary between upstream and downstream can improve on equilibrium outcomes by acting as a coordination and commitment device whose optimal policy must sometimes reward inferior ideas. We apply the model to technology standards, trend‐driven industries, political primaries, and the management of process innovation. We discuss incentives to vertically integrate.     

Endogenous R&D Networks among Upstream Firms

This paper studies the endogenous formation of R&D networks among upstream firms and the welfare implications thereof. Both under an upstream price setting and an upstream quantity setting, it is shown that the complete R&D network emerges in equilibrium but only if spillovers are sufficiently low. Yet, under a quantity setting, the complete network arises within a larger range of spillovers. In both cases, however, there is a potential conflict between private incentives for R&D collaboration and societal ones. We discuss policy measures that may help to steer firms towards a more socially desirable outcome. Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Explaining Vertical Integration Strategies: Market Power, Transactional Attributes and Capabilities

abstract    We analyse vertical boundaries of firms by identifying and comparing industrial, transactional and firm-specific factors in such a way that industrial organization, new institutional economics and the capability-based view are all taken into account. After testing the model in 155 firms in the Spanish meat industry, we observe that only factors associated with both transaction costs and capabilities have a statistical and economic relevance for explaining vertical integration. Firms vertically integrate to create specific investment between stages of the value chain, to internally exploit their pool of knowledge and capacities, and to guarantee quality of inputs and services employed. On the other hand, firms avoid high levels of vertical integration in the presence of high demand changes in order to stay flexible. Finally, providers or clients with market power do not seem to affect vertical boundaries in any consistent way.     

Outsourcing with labor management

A vertically integrated Labor Managed (LM) monopoly is compared to a decentralized market arrangement where production is segmented among an upward LM firm producing an input and a downstream LM manufacturer of the final good. Unlike what usually occurs among profit maximizing firms, the vertical arrangement with outsourcing is socially superior to the vertically integrated one. However, the upstream section has an incentive to outsource, while the downstream section would rather oppose it.     

Joint Private Safety Standards and Vertical Relationships in Food Retailing

In recent years, it has become common for downstream firms to impose Joint Private Standards (JPSs) on upstream producers. In this paper, we present an original model of a vertical relationship, explaining the incentives for and the effects of such JPSs with an example concerning food safety. The risk of a food crisis is endogenously determined. Using the concept of cartel stability ( d’Aspremont et al., 1983 ), it is shown that liability rules are crucial for JPSs to emerge, that a JPS can become a minimum quality standard, and that a more stringent JPS does not necessarily reduce the market risk.     

Vertical Integration, Foreclosure, and profits in the Presence of Double Marginalization

Whether vertical integration between a downstream oligopolist and an upstream oligopolist is profitable for an integrated pair of firms is shown to depend on whether one means by this that profits increase no matter what other firms do, that all integrated firms are better off when all firms are integrated than when none are, or simply that no downstream-upstream pair of firms has an incentive to deviate from a situation where all firms are integrated. It is also shown to depend on the number of firms in each oligopoly and on the type of interaction that is assumed between firms that are integrated and firms that are not. In particular, it is shown that if no restriction is put on trade between integrated and nonintegrated firms, integrated firms may continue to purchase inputs from the nonintegrated upstream firms, with the goal of raising their downstream rivals' costs. Furthermore, even though firms are identical, asymmetric equilibria, where integrated and nonintegrated firms coexist, may actually arise as an outcome of the integration game.     

Vertical externality and strategic delegation

This paper examines the effects of vertical externality generated by the upstream monopoly on the incentives that owners of competing downstream firms give their managers. It is shown that the introduction of the upstream monopoly may have significant effects on the incentive schemes for the downstream firms' managers. In particular, it is shown that in equilibrium, each owner obtains the simple Nash equilibrium outcome regardless of the mode of competition (quantity or price) in the downstream market. Copyright © 2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

A transaction cost approach to a paradox in international marketing

Why do firms that make specific downstream investments as they start international operations, sometimes turn to more market-like arrangements as they gain international experience and their international sales increase? This paradox in international marketing is the key question to be addressed in this article. We use the concept of dynamic or temporary governance costs to examine the paradox. The pattern of internationalization in the Norwegian farmed salmon industry provides an example whereby Norwegian exporters established their own sales offices in several international markets in the early stages of internationalization, but subsequently disintegrated vertically and came to rely on more market-like arrangements. An analysis of the internationalization of this industry suggests that, over time, the market provided better capabilities than vertical integration. This reduced the transaction costs, thus making vertical disintegration an efficient strategy.     

Wholesale price discrimination: Innovation incentives and upstream competition

In intermediate good markets where there are alternative supply sources, wholesale price discrimination may enhance innovation incentives downstream. We consider a vertical chain where a dominant firm and a competitive fringe supply imperfect substitutes to duopoly retailers which carry both varieties. We show that a ban on price discrimination by the dominant supplier makes uniform pricing credible and reduces retailers’ incentives to decrease the cost of acquiring the competitively supplied variety, leading to higher upstream profits and lower downstream welfare. Our analysis complements existing results by identifying a novel channel through which wholesale price discrimination can improve dynamic market efficiency.     

Option Contracts and Vertical Foreclosure

A model of vertical integration is studied. Upstream firms sell differentiated inputs; downstream firms bundle them to make final products. Downstream products are sold as option contracts, which allow consumers to choose from a set of commodities at predetermined prices. The model is illustrated by examples in telecommunication and health markets. Equilibria of the integration game must result in upstream input foreclosure and downstream monopolization. Consumers may or may not benefit from integration.     

Vertical Networks and US Auto Parts Exports: Is Japan Different?

In a model where upstream network insiders conduct relationship-specific investment, downstream firms have an incentive to transact within networks. Evidence from US auto parts exports to 26 auto-producing countries supports key predictions of the model. Greater production scale for assemblers lowers imported parts per car. Vertical networks matter in two ways. First, although Japan's average import levels are not unusually low, non-Japanese suppliers have relatively low market penetration for parts categories where vertical keiretsu are prominent in Japan. Second, US-owned assembly abroad and foreign-owned parts production in the US both stimulate parts exports.     

UK Intra-industry Trade with the EU North and South

This paper tests the traditional country and industry hypotheses of intra-industry trade (IIT) in vertically and horizontally differentiated products in the context of the UK's bilateral trade with EU countries. It distinguishes empirically between IIT in vertically and horizontally differential goods, between trade with EU 'North' and 'South' and between the effects of using GDP proxies and direct measures of national factor endowment differences. The paper shows that the robustness of the results of earlier multi-country studies are open to challenge, that the separation of IIT into vertical and horizontal IIT offers an important innovation to the empirical work in this area and that further development of large numbers models of IIT in quality differentiated goods is required.     

Foreclosure with Incomplete Information

We investigate the robustness of the new foreclosure doctrine and its associated welfare implications to the introduction of incomplete information. In particular, we let the upstream firm's marginal cost be private information, unknown to the downstream firms. The previous literature has argued that vertical integration is harmful because it allows an upstream monopolist to limit output to monopoly levels, whereas a disintegrated structure will "over-sell," producing more in equilibrium. By contrast, we find that with incomplete information, high-cost firms will often "under-sell" in equilibrium, that is, supply less than their monopoly output. Low-cost firms continue to over-sell, so all types of firms have a reason to integrate downstream, but this is socially harmful only for low-cost types. For high-cost firms vertical integration can be Pareto-improving, resulting in higher output, profits, and consumer surplus.