IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/jindec/v36y1988i3p281-99.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Entry for Buyout

Author

Listed:
  • Rasmusen, Eric

Abstract

The possibility of buying out an entrant has an import ant effect on entry deterrence. Entrants can blackmail the incumbent by threatening to keep prices low, and buyout can make entry profitab le which otherwise would not be. In particular, the entry-deterrence policy of excess capacity to reduce the postentry price can not only fail, but work against the incumbent. The presence of multiple oligop olistic incumbents or multiple potential entrants, however, can disco urage entry for buyout. Copyright 1988 by Blackwell Publishing Ltd.

Suggested Citation

  • Rasmusen, Eric, 1988. "Entry for Buyout," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(3), pages 281-299, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:jindec:v:36:y:1988:i:3:p:281-99
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0022-1821%28198803%2936%3A3%3C281%3AEFB%3E2.0.CO%3B2-P&origin=bc
    File Function: full text
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to JSTOR subscribers. See http://www.jstor.org for details.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Joshua S. Gans & Scott Stern, 2000. "Incumbency and R&D Incentives: Licensing the Gale of Creative Destruction," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 9(4), pages 485-511, December.
    2. Mason, Robin & Weeds, Helen, 2013. "Merger policy, entry, and entrepreneurship," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 23-38.
    3. Joshua Gans & Scott Stern, 2003. "When does funding research by smaller firms bear fruit?: Evidence from the SBIR program," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 12(4), pages 361-384.
    4. Steven Callander & Niko Matouschek, 2022. "The Novelty of Innovation: Competition, Disruption, and Antitrust Policy," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(1), pages 37-51, January.
    5. Ben Mermelstein & Volker Nocke & Mark A. Satterthwaite & Michael D. Whinston, 2020. "Internal versus External Growth in Industries with Scale Economies: A Computational Model of Optimal Merger Policy," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 128(1), pages 301-341.
    6. Josh Lerner & Jean Tirole, 2004. "Efficient Patent Pools," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 94(3), pages 691-711, June.
    7. Cabral, Luis M. B., 2003. "Horizontal mergers with free-entry: why cost efficiencies may be a weak defense and asset sales a poor remedy," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 21(5), pages 607-623, May.
    8. Kevin A. Bryan & Erik Hovenkamp, 2020. "Antitrust Limits on Startup Acquisitions," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 56(4), pages 615-636, June.
    9. Esmée Dijk & José Luis Moraga-González & Evgenia Motchenkova, 2023. "Start-up Acquisitions and the Entrant’s and Incumbent’s Innovation Portfolios," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 23-047/VII, Tinbergen Institute.
    10. Argentesi, Elena & Buccirossi, Paolo & Calvano, Emilio & Duso, Tomaso & Marrazzo, Alessia & Nava, Salvatore, 2021. "Merger Policy in Digital Markets: An Ex Post Assessment," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 17(1), pages 95-140.
    11. Igor Letina & Armin Schmutzler & Regina Seibel, 2020. "Killer acquisitions and beyond: policy effects on innovation strategies," ECON - Working Papers 358, Department of Economics - University of Zurich, revised Jul 2023.
    12. Weeds, Helen & Mason, Robin, 2002. "The Failing Firm Defence: Merger Policy and Entry," CEPR Discussion Papers 3664, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    13. Gilbert, Richard J. & Katz, Michael L., 2022. "Dynamic merger policy and pre-merger product choice by an entrant," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 81(C).
    14. Kaplow, Louis, 2021. "Horizontal merger analysis," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 79(C).
    15. Gugler, Klaus & Szücs, Florian & Wohak, Ulrich, 2023. "Start-up Acquisitions, Venture Capital and Innovation: A Comparative Study of Google, Apple, Facebook, Amazon and Microsoft," Department of Economics Working Paper Series 340, WU Vienna University of Economics and Business.
    16. Henkel, Joachim & Rønde, Thomas & Wagner, Marcus, 2015. "And the winner is—Acquired. Entrepreneurship as a contest yielding radical innovations," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(2), pages 295-310.
    17. Jean-Michel Benkert, Igor Letina, Shuo Liu, 2023. "Startup Acquisitions: Acquihires and Talent Hoarding," Diskussionsschriften dp2309, Universitaet Bern, Departement Volkswirtschaft.
    18. Christopher Teh & Dyuti Banerjee & Chengsi Wang, 2022. "Acquisition-induced kill zone," Monash Economics Working Papers 2022-24, Monash University, Department of Economics.
    19. Ramón Faulí-Oller & Joel Sandonís, 2007. "Downstream Mergers And Entry," Working Papers. Serie AD 2007-21, Instituto Valenciano de Investigaciones Económicas, S.A. (Ivie).
    20. Calvano, Emilio & Polo, Michele, 2021. "Market power, competition and innovation in digital markets: A survey," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 54(C).
    21. Gunther Tichy, 2001. "What Do We Know about Success and Failure of Mergers?," Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, Springer, vol. 1(4), pages 347-394, December.
    22. Konrad, Kai A. & Skaperdas, Stergios, 1997. "Credible threats in extortion," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 23-39, May.
    23. Ralph M. Braid, 2016. "Potential merger-forcing entry reduces maximum spacing between firms in spatial competition," Papers in Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 95(3), pages 653-669, August.
    24. James D. Dana & Kathryn Spier, 2000. "Entry Deterrence in a Duopoly Model," Econometric Society World Congress 2000 Contributed Papers 1451, Econometric Society.
    25. Jean-Michel Benkert & Igor Letina & Shuo Liu, 2023. "Startup Acquisitions: Acquihires and Talent Hoarding," Papers 2308.10046, arXiv.org, revised Feb 2024.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:jindec:v:36:y:1988:i:3:p:281-99. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0022-1821 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.