Wild Bids. Gambling for Resurrection in Procurement Contracts
AbstractThis paper analyses the problem of abnormally low tenders in the procurement process. Limited liability causes firms in a bad financial situation to bid more aggressively than financially healthy firms in the procurement auction. Therefore, it is likely that the winning firm is a firm in financial difficulties with a high risk of bankruptcy. The paper focuses on the regulatory practice of surety bonds to face this problem. We show that the use of surety bonds reduces and sometimes eliminates the problem of abnormally low tenders. We provide a characterization of the optimal surety bond and show that the U.S. practice of requiring that surety bonds cover over 100% of the contract price can be excessive, implying overinsurance to the problem of abnormally low tenders.
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.
Bibliographic InfoArticle provided by Springer in its journal Journal of Regulatory Economics.
Volume (Year): 26 (2004)
Issue (Month): 1 (07)
Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.springerlink.com/link.asp?id=100298
Other versions of this item:
- Aleix Calveras & Juan J. Ganuza & Esther Hauk, 2001. "Wild bids. Gambling for resurrection in procurement contracts," Economics Working Papers 553, Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra, revised Apr 2001.
- L51 - Industrial Organization - - Regulation and Industrial Policy - - - Economics of Regulation
- H57 - Public Economics - - National Government Expenditures and Related Policies - - - Procurement
- D44 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure and Pricing - - - Auctions
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.:
- Juan J. Ganuza, 1998. "Competition and cost overruns. Optimal misspecification of procurement contracts," Economics Working Papers 471, Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra, revised Mar 2002.
- Alessandro Bucciol & Ottorino Chillemi & Giacomo Palazzi, 2011.
"Cost Overrun and Auction Format in Public Works,"
17/2011, University of Verona, Department of Economics.
- Gunnar Alexandersson & Staffan HultÃ©n, 2006. "Predatory bidding in competitive tenders: A Swedish case study," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 22(1), pages 73-94, July.
- Chang, Wei-Shiun & Salmon, Timothy C. & Saral, Krista Jabs, 2013. "Procurement Auctions with Renegotiation and Wealth Constraints," MPRA Paper 50137, University Library of Munich, Germany.
- RLobert F. Vesztegy, Serizawa & Kenju Akai & Tatsuyoshi Saijo & Shigehiro Serizawa, 2009. "Auctions with Endogenous Price Ceiling:Theoretical and Experimental Results," ISER Discussion Paper 0747, Institute of Social and Economic Research, Osaka University.
- Pablo F. Beker & Ángel Hernando-Veciana, 2011. "Persistent markups in bidding markets with financial constraints," Economics Working Papers we1133, Universidad Carlos III, Departamento de Economía.
- Kenju Akai & Shigehiro Serizawa, 2009. "Auctions for Public Construction with Corner-cutting," ISER Discussion Paper 0740r, Institute of Social and Economic Research, Osaka University, revised Jul 2010.
- Beker, Pablo & Hernando-Veciana, Angel, 2013. "Bidding Markets with Financial Constraints," The Warwick Economics Research Paper Series (TWERPS) 1017, University of Warwick, Department of Economics.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Guenther Eichhorn) or (Christopher F. Baum).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.