Home  About us  Contact
 

Quantity Competition (quantity + competition)

Distribution by Scientific Domains
Business, Economics, Finance and Accounting100%

Selected Abstracts

Exchange Agreements Facilitate Collusion

GERMAN ECONOMIC REVIEW, Issue 2 2001
Hans-Theo Normann
A duopoly model with quantity competition is analyzed in which firms collude in two markets. There is specialization in production in order to promote efficiency. Firms may then either exclusively market one good each, or they may agree to exchange goods and cross-supply a part of the production to the other firm. It is shown that, compared to specialization in marketing, positive exchanges of goods relax the incentive constraints that limit the extent of collusion. [source]

Process and product innovation: A differential game approach to product life cycle

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ECONOMIC THEORY, Issue 2 2010
Luca Lambertini
C73; D43; D92; O31 We investigate the timing of adoption of product and process innovation using a differential game where firms may invest in both activities. We consider horizontal product innovation that reduces product substitutability, and process innovation that reduces marginal cost. First, we demonstrate that the incentive for cost-reducing investment is relatively higher than the incentive to increase product differentiation. Second, depending on initial conditions: (i) firms activate both types of investment from the very outset to the steady state; (ii) firms initially invest in only one R&D activity and then reach the steady state either carrying out only this activity or carrying out both; or (iii) firms do not invest at all in either type of innovation. Comparing R&D investments under Cournot and Bertrand behavior shows that quantity competition entails lower R&D incentives than price competition in both directions. [source]

Pricing Access to a Monopoly Input

JOURNAL OF PUBLIC ECONOMIC THEORY, Issue 4 2004
David S. Sibley
What price should downstream entrants pay a vertically integrated incumbent monopoly for use of its assets? Courts, legislators, and regulators have at times mandated that incumbent monopolies lease assets required for the production of a retail service to entrants in efforts to increase the competitiveness of retail markets. This paper compares two rules for pricing such monopoly inputs: marginal cost pricing (MCP) and generalized efficient component pricing rule (GECPR). The GECPR is not a fixed price, but is a rule that determines the input price to be paid by the entrant from the entrant's retail price. Comparing the retail market equilibrium under MCP and GECPR, the GECPR leads to lower equilibrium retail prices. If the incumbent is less efficient than the entrant, the GECPR also leads to lower production costs than does the MCP rule. If the incumbent is more efficient than the entrant, however, conditions may exist in which MCP leads to lower production costs than does the GECPR. The analysis is carried out assuming either Bertrand competition, quantity competition, or monopolistic competition between the incumbent and entrant in the downstream market. [source]

Discriminatory input pricing and strategic delegation

MANAGERIAL AND DECISION ECONOMICS, Issue 4 2010
Pei-Cheng Liao
This paper examines how discriminatory input pricing by an upstream monopolist affects the incentives that owners of downstream duopolists offer their managers. Regardless of the mode of competition (quantity or price), owners of downstream firms induce their managers to be more profit-oriented and to behave less aggressively when the monopolist is allowed to price-discriminate than when he charges a uniform price. If the monopolist price-discriminates, managerial downstream firms always earn more than owner-managed profit-maximizing firms. However, if the monopolist charges a uniform price, managerial downstream firms earn more than profit-maximizing counterparts under price competition and earn less under quantity competition. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. [source]

EXPORT SUBSIDIES, COST DIFFERENTIAL AND PRODUCT QUALITY

PACIFIC ECONOMIC REVIEW, Issue 1 2010
Hong Hwang
This paper presents a vertical product differentiation model to examine the relationship between optimal trade policies and product qualities for different export countries under Cournot quantity competition as well as Bertrand price competition. We can also use this quality model to explain why Japan as a high production-cost country may have incentives to offer high subsidies. This is a case that cannot be explained by the strategic trade theory models à la Brander and Spencer (1985) or Eaton and Grossman (1986). [source]