The study investigates collusion-nonfacilitating features of one-sided auctions. We report the results of oral nondescending bid auction experiments in which the strict bid improvement rule was absent, and compare them with the results of sealed bid auction experiments. In the sealed bid experiments the outcomes converged to the competitive equilibrium. In the oral auctions, collusive outcomes emerged and were sustained with bidders using bid matching strategies. We conclude that oral auctions provide opportunities for tacit coordination and collusion enforcement that do not exist under the sealed bid. Therefore, the strict bid improvement rule becomes critical for breaking collusion. Copyright Kluwer Academic Publishers 1999
Download Info
To download:
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the
proper application to
view it first. Information about this may be contained
in the File-Format links below. 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.
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.:
Cited by: (explanations, 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.)