Monopolisation of triopoly – revisited
AbstractThe main objective of this paper is to provide a new insight into the possibility of monopolising a three-firm industry through acquisition of rivals in the absence of restrictions imposed by the antitrust authorities. The dynamic model of monopolisation under Cournot-type rivalry among oligopolists implies that the monopolisation through acquisition is not profitable because of the free riding among the owners of firms. However, in a model of triopoly where the acquirer could become the market leader of the Stackelberg type, we show that a single buyer can monopolise an industry through acquisition of rivals. It means that the monopolisation of triopoly may not be prevented by the market alone. This finding has an important regulatory implication different from the results of the previous models: an active intervention of antitrust authorities in the market with only three firms is necessary to block mergers and acquisitions.
Download InfoIf 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.
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 InfoArticle provided by Inderscience Enterprises Ltd in its journal Int. J. of Computational Economics and Econometrics.
Volume (Year): 1 (2009)
Issue (Month): 2 ()
Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.inderscience.com/browse/index.php?journalID==311
triopoly monopolisation; mergers; acquisitions; free riding; antitrust policy; computational economics; dynamic modelling; rivalry; regulations.;
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.:
- Kamien, Morton I & Zang, Israel, 1990.
"The Limits of Monopolization through Acquisition,"
The Quarterly Journal of Economics,
MIT Press, vol. 105(2), pages 465-99, May.
- Morton I. Kamien & Israel Zang, 1987. "The Limits of Monopolization Through Acquisition," Discussion Papers 754, Northwestern University, Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science.
- Morton I. Kamien & Israel Zang, 1988. "The Limits of Monopolization Through Acquisition," Discussion Papers 802, Northwestern University, Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science.
- David Hennessy, 2000.
"Cournot Oligopoly Conditions under which Any Horizontal Merger Is Profitable,"
Review of Industrial Organization,
Springer, vol. 17(3), pages 277-284, November.
- Hennessy, David A., 2000. "Cournot Oligopoly Conditions Under Which Any Horizontal Merger is Profitable," Staff General Research Papers 1699, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
- Mihkel M. Tombak, 2002. "Mergers to Monopoly," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 11(3), pages 513-546, 09.
- Jean Tirole, 1988. "The Theory of Industrial Organization," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262200716.
- Harris, Ellie G, 1994. "Why One Firm Is the Target and the Other the Bidder in Single-Bidder, Synergistic Takeovers," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 67(2), pages 263-80, April.
- Prokop, Jacek, 2005. "Monopolization through acquisition," MPRA Paper 43683, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 2006.
- Kamien, Morton I & Zang, Israel, 1993. "Monopolization by Sequential Acquisition," Journal of Law, Economics and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 9(2), pages 205-29, October.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Graham Langley).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.