Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login

Firm size inequality and market power

Contents:

Author Info

  • Barla, Philippe

Abstract

In this paper, we reexamine the relationship between performance and concentration in the light of modern oligopoly theory. More specifically, we examine the link that exists between firm size inequality (FSI) and market power. Traditional theory predicts that market power should be higher in markets where FSI is high. Using a model with capacity constraints and endogenous conduct, we show that the market power-FSI relationship is in fact more complex. We show that two effects are at play leading to a U-shaped relationship between market power and FSI. Another implication of this model is that prices should be more unstable in markets where firms are asymmetric in size. In the second part of this paper, we test these predictions on data for the U.S. airline industry. We estimate a fare equation for a panel of 400 routes. We first show that using traditional measures of market concentration such as the Herfindahl is restrictive. We then show that there is indeed a U- shaped relationship between FSI and Prices holding costs constant and that prices are more unstable in markets where FSI is high.

(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)

Download Info

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/B6V8P-404R38S-1/2/531c8a79d189489f2b9c8318ef4c3865
Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

Bibliographic Info

Article provided by Elsevier in its journal International Journal of Industrial Organization.

Volume (Year): 18 (2000)
Issue (Month): 5 (July)
Pages: 693-722

as in new window
Handle: RePEc:eee:indorg:v:18:y:2000:i:5:p:693-722

Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/inca/505551

Related research

Keywords:

Other versions of this item:

Find related papers by JEL classification:

References

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
as in new window
  1. Carl Davidson & Raymond Deneckere, 1984. "Excess Capacity and Collusion," Discussion Papers 675, Northwestern University, Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science.
  2. Severin Borenstein, 1992. "The Evolution of U.S. Airline Competition," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 6(2), pages 45-73, Spring.
  3. Koo, Anthony Y. C. & Martin, Stephen, 1984. "Market structure and U.S. trade flows," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 2(3), pages 173-197, September.
  4. Barla, P., 1996. "Rivalry in the U.S. Airline Industry," Papers 9603, Laval - Recherche en Politique Economique.
  5. Schmalensee, Richard, 1989. "Inter-industry studies of structure and performance," Handbook of Industrial Organization, in: R. Schmalensee & R. Willig (ed.), Handbook of Industrial Organization, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 16, pages 951-1009 Elsevier.
  6. Berry, Steven T, 1990. "Airport Presence as Product Differentiation," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 80(2), pages 394-99, May.
  7. Severin Borenstein, 1989. "Hubs and High Fares: Dominance and Market Power in the U.S. Airline Industry," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 20(3), pages 344-365, Autumn.
  8. Douglas W. Caves & Laurits R. Christensen & Michael W. Tretheway, 1984. "Economies of Density versus Economies of Scale: Why Trunk and Local Service Airline Costs Differ," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 15(4), pages 471-489, Winter.
  9. Jan K. Brueckner & Nichola J. Dyer & Pablo T. Spiller, 1992. "Fare Determination in Airline Hub-and-Spoke Networks," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 23(3), pages 309-333, Autumn.
  10. Encaoua, David & Jacquemin, Alexis, 1980. "Degree of Monopoly, Indices of Concentration and Threat of Entry," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 21(1), pages 87-105, February.
  11. Brander, James A. & Zhang, Anming, 1993. "Dynamic oligopoly behaviour in the airline industry," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 11(3), pages 407-435, September.
  12. Levitan, Richard & Shubik, Martin, 1972. "Price Duopoly and Capacity Constraints," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 13(1), pages 111-22, February.
  13. David M. Kreps & Jose A. Scheinkman, 1983. "Quantity Precommitment and Bertrand Competition Yield Cournot Outcomes," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 14(2), pages 326-337, Autumn.
  14. Evans, William N & Kessides, Ioannis N, 1993. "Localized Market Power in the U.S. Airline Industry," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 75(1), pages 66-75, February.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

Citations

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

Cited by:
  1. Roberta Longo & Marisa Miraldo & Andrew Street, 2008. "Price regulation of pluralistic markets subject to provider collusion," Working Papers 045cherp, Centre for Health Economics, University of York.
  2. Carlsson, Fredrik, 2002. "Price and Frequency Choice under Monopoly and Competition in Aviation Markets," Working Papers in Economics 71, University of Gothenburg, Department of Economics.
  3. Paolo Coccorese & Alfonso Pellecchia, 2009. "Multimarket Contact and Profitability in Banking: Evidence from Italy," Journal of Financial Services Research, Springer, vol. 35(3), pages 245-271, June.
  4. Soo Jeoung Sohn, 2006. "Choosing the partners in the licensing alliance," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 27(4), pages 251-260.
  5. Foros, Øystein & Steen, Frode, 2008. "Gasoline prices jump up on Mondays: An outcome of aggressive competition?," CEPR Discussion Papers 6783, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
  6. Steven Pilloff & Stephen Rhoades, 2002. "Structure and Profitability in Banking Markets," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer, vol. 20(1), pages 81-98, February.
  7. Eckert, Andrew, 2003. "Retail price cycles and the presence of small firms," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 21(2), pages 151-170, February.
  8. Swinnen, Johan F.M. & Vandeplas, Anneleen, 2009. "Market Power and Rents in Global Supply Chains," 2009 Conference, August 16-22, 2009, Beijing, China 53213, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
  9. Mulder, Machiel & Haan, Marco A. & Dijkstra, Peter T., 2014. "Industry structure and collusion with uniform yardstick competition: theory and experiments," Research Report 14010-EEF, University of Groningen, Research Institute SOM (Systems, Organisations and Management).
  10. Hagedoorn, John & Lorenz-Orlean, Stefanie & Kranenburg, Hans, 2007. "Inter-firm technology transfer: Partnership-embedded licensing or standard licensing agreements?," MERIT Working Papers 006, United Nations University - Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
  11. Guo, Jinzhong & Xu, Qi & Chen, Qinghua & Wang, Yougui, 2013. "Firm size distribution and mobility of the top 500 firms in China, the United States and the world," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 392(13), pages 2903-2914.
  12. Winther, K. Tobias, 2008. "Analyzing new profit opportunities: a guide to making business projects financially successful," MPRA Paper 11346, University Library of Munich, Germany.
  13. Federico Boffa & Carlo Scarpa, 2009. "An Anticompetitive Effect of Eliminating Transport Barriers in Network Markets," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer, vol. 34(2), pages 115-133, March.
  14. Zhang, Qiong & Yang, Hangjun & Wang, Qiang & Zhang, Anming, 2014. "Market power and its determinants in the Chinese airline industry," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 1-13.
  15. 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.

Lists

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

Statistics

Access and download statistics

Corrections

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:indorg:v:18:y:2000:i:5:p:693-722. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Zhang, Lei).

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.

If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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