IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/telpol/v32yi3-4p273-290.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The effect of incumbent bidding in set-aside auctions: An analysis of prices in the closed and open segments of FCC Auction 35

Author

Listed:
  • Cramton, Peter
  • Ingraham, Allan T.
  • Singer, Hal J.

Abstract

This paper examines the impact of an incumbent carrier's participation in two simultaneously conducted auctions: one set-aside for non-incumbents and one open to all carriers. This paper estimates the extent to which prices in the closed auction were inflated by the participation of incumbents. This paper also estimates what prices would have been in the open auction had incumbents been excluded from bidding in the closed. It is found that an incumbent's participation in the closed auction through a front, Alaska Native, enabled it to win more licenses at lower prices in FCC Auction 35. In contrast, non-incumbents won fewer licenses and paid more for what they won. The econometric techniques employed here to estimate prices in a "but-for" world could be replicated in future damage analysis. Finally, this paper suggests an alternative method of screening bidders seeking access to set-aside auctions that would be consistent with the FCC's goal of promoting competition in the wireless industry.

Suggested Citation

  • Cramton, Peter & Ingraham, Allan T. & Singer, Hal J., 0. "The effect of incumbent bidding in set-aside auctions: An analysis of prices in the closed and open segments of FCC Auction 35," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(3-4), pages 273-290, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:telpol:v:32:y::i:3-4:p:273-290
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0308596107000687
    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 below or search for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Werden, G.J. & G.J. & Froeb, L.M., 1995. "Simulation as an Alternative to Structural Merger Policy in Differentiated Products Industries," Papers 95-02, U.S. Department of Justice - Antitrust Division.
    2. Peter Cramton, 1997. "The FCC Spectrum Auctions: An Early Assessment," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 6(3), pages 431-495, September.
    3. Jeremy T. Fox & Patrick Bajari, 2013. "Measuring the Efficiency of an FCC Spectrum Auction," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 5(1), pages 100-146, February.
    4. Milgrom, Paul R & Weber, Robert J, 1982. "A Theory of Auctions and Competitive Bidding," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 50(5), pages 1089-1122, September.
    5. Bresnahan, Timothy F. & Salop, Steven C., 1986. "Quantifying the competitive effects of production joint ventures," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 4(2), pages 155-175, June.
    6. repec:reg:rpubli:293 is not listed on IDEAS
    7. Reynolds, Robert J. & Snapp, Bruce R., 1986. "The competitive effects of partial equity interests and joint ventures," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 4(2), pages 141-153, June.
    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


    Cited by:

    1. Bajari, Patrick & Yeo, Jungwon, 2009. "Auction design and tacit collusion in FCC spectrum auctions," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 21(2), pages 90-100, June.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Kaplow, Louis & Shapiro, Carl, 2007. "Antitrust," Handbook of Law and Economics, in: A. Mitchell Polinsky & Steven Shavell (ed.), Handbook of Law and Economics, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 15, pages 1073-1225, Elsevier.
    2. Werner Neus & Manfred Stadler & Maximiliane Unsorg, 2020. "Market structure, common ownership, and coordinated manager compensation," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 41(7), pages 1262-1268, October.
    3. Sridhar, V. & Prasad, Rohit, 2021. "Analysis of spectrum pricing for commercial mobile services: A cross country study," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(9).
    4. Hariskos, W. & Königstein, M. & Papadopoulos, K.G., 2022. "Anti-competitive effects of partial cross-ownership: Experimental evidence," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 193(C), pages 399-409.
    5. Ángel L. López & Xavier Vives, 2019. "Overlapping Ownership, R&D Spillovers, and Antitrust Policy," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 127(5), pages 2394-2437.
    6. Fiocco, Raffaele, 2016. "The strategic value of partial vertical integration," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 284-302.
    7. Marie Goppelsroeder & Maarten Pieter Schinkel & Jan Tuinstra, 2008. "Quantifying The Scope For Efficiency Defense In Merger Control: The Werden‐Froeb‐Index," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 56(4), pages 778-808, December.
    8. Jacob P. Gramlich & Serafin J. Grundl, 2017. "Estimating the Competitive Effects of Common Ownership," Finance and Economics Discussion Series 2017-029, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (U.S.).
    9. Brito, Duarte & Ribeiro, Ricardo & Vasconcelos, Helder, 2020. "Overlapping ownership, endogenous quality, and welfare," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 190(C).
    10. Gibbon, Alexandra J. & Schain, Jan Philip, 2020. "Rising markups, common ownership, and technological capacities," DICE Discussion Papers 340, Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf Institute for Competition Economics (DICE).
    11. Peter Cramton, 2002. "Spectrum Auctions," Papers of Peter Cramton 01hte, University of Maryland, Department of Economics - Peter Cramton, revised 16 Jul 2001.
    12. Matthew J. Clayton & S. Abraham Ravid, 1999. "The Effect of Leverage on Bidding Behavior: Theory and Evidence from the FCC Auctions," New York University, Leonard N. Stern School Finance Department Working Paper Seires 99-055, New York University, Leonard N. Stern School of Business-.
    13. Brito, Duarte & Ribeiro, Ricardo & Vasconcelos, Helder, 2018. "Quantifying the coordinated effects of partial horizontal acquisitions," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 108-149.
    14. Chen, Zhiqi & Ross, Thomas W., 2020. "Buffer joint ventures," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 73(C).
    15. Lawrence M. Ausubel & Peter Cramton & Marek Pycia & Marzena Rostek & Marek Weretka, 2014. "Demand Reduction and Inefficiency in Multi-Unit Auctions," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 81(4), pages 1366-1400.
    16. Foros, Øystein & Jarle Kind, Hans & Shaffer, Greg, 2011. "Mergers and partial ownership," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 55(7), pages 916-926.
    17. Gentry, Matthew & Komarova, Tatiana & Schiraldi, Pasquale & Shin, Wiroy, 2019. "On monotone strategy equilibria in simultaneous auctions for complementary goods," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 109-128.
    18. Sven Heim & Kai Hhschelrath & Ulrich Laitenberger & Yossi Spiegel, 2017. "Minority Share Acquisitions and Collusion: Evidence from the Introduction of National Leniency Programs," Working Papers hal-01952937, HAL.
    19. Goeree, Jacob K. & Lien, Yuanchuan, 2014. "An equilibrium analysis of the simultaneous ascending auction," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 153(C), pages 506-533.
    20. Paul Milgrom, 2000. "Putting Auction Theory to Work: The Simultaneous Ascending Auction," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 108(2), pages 245-272, April.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Telecommunications Spectrum auction Bidding fronts Designated entity;

    JEL classification:

    • D44 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design - - - Auctions
    • C78 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Bargaining Theory; Matching Theory
    • L96 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Transportation and Utilities - - - Telecommunications

    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:eee:telpol:v:32:y::i:3-4:p:273-290. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/30471/description#description .

    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.