IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/revfin/v22y2018i5p1631-1665..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Theory of Costly Sequential Bidding
[Strategic jump bidding in English auctions]

Author

Listed:
  • Kent D Daniel
  • David Hirshleifer

Abstract

We model sequential bidding in a private value English auction when it is costly to submit or revise a bid. We show that, even when bid costs approach zero, bidding occurs in repeated jumps, consistent with certain types of natural auctions such as takeover contests. In contrast with most past models of bids as valuation signals, every bidder has the opportunity to signal and increase the bid by a jump. Jumps communicate bidders’ information rapidly, leading to contests that are completed in a few bids. The model additionally predicts; informative delays in the start of bidding; that the probability of a second bid decreases in, and the jump increases in, the first bid; that objects are sold to the highest valuation bidder; and that revenue and efficiency relationships between different auctions hold asymptotically.

Suggested Citation

  • Kent D Daniel & David Hirshleifer, 2018. "A Theory of Costly Sequential Bidding [Strategic jump bidding in English auctions]," Review of Finance, European Finance Association, vol. 22(5), pages 1631-1665.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:revfin:v:22:y:2018:i:5:p:1631-1665.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/rof/rfy009
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mark Bagnoli & Ted Bergstrom, 2006. "Log-concave probability and its applications," Studies in Economic Theory, in: Charalambos D. Aliprantis & Rosa L. Matzkin & Daniel L. McFadden & James C. Moore & Nicholas C. Yann (ed.), Rationality and Equilibrium, pages 217-241, Springer.
    2. Jeremy Bulow & Paul Klemperer, 2009. "Why Do Sellers (Usually) Prefer Auctions?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 99(4), pages 1544-1575, September.
    3. Bulow, Jeremy & Klemperer, Paul, 1996. "Auctions versus Negotiations," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 86(1), pages 180-194, March.
    4. Dimopoulos, Theodosios & Sacchetto, Stefano, 2014. "Preemptive bidding, target resistance, and takeover premiums," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 114(3), pages 444-470.
    5. Betton, Sandra & Eckbo, B Espen, 2000. "Toeholds, Bid Jumps, and Expected Payoffs in Takeovers," Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 13(4), pages 841-882.
    6. Burkart, Mike, 1995. "Initial Shareholdings and Overbidding in Takeover Contests," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 50(5), pages 1491-1515, December.
    7. James W. Roberts & Andrew Sweeting, 2013. "When Should Sellers Use Auctions?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 103(5), pages 1830-1861, August.
    8. Johannes Hörner & Nicolas Sahuguet, 2007. "Costly Signalling in Auctions -super-1," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 74(1), pages 173-206.
    9. Betton, Sandra & Eckbo, B. Espen & Thorburn, Karin S., 2009. "Merger negotiations and the toehold puzzle," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 91(2), pages 158-178, February.
    10. Ruback, Richard S, 1983. "The Cities Service Takeover: A Case Study," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 38(2), pages 319-330, May.
    11. In-Koo Cho & David M. Kreps, 1987. "Signaling Games and Stable Equilibria," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 102(2), pages 179-221.
    12. Michael J. Fishman, 1988. "A Theory of Preemptive Takeover Bidding," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 19(1), pages 88-101, Spring.
    13. Peter Cramton, 1997. "The FCC Spectrum Auctions: An Early Assessment," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 6(3), pages 431-495, September.
    14. Berkovitch, Elazar & Khanna, Naveen, 1990. "How Target Shareholders Benefit from Value-Reducing Defensive Strategies in Takeovers," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 45(1), pages 137-156, March.
    15. Bikhchandani, Sushil, 1988. "Reputation in repeated second-price auctions," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 46(1), pages 97-119, October.
    16. Christopher Avery, 1998. "Strategic Jump Bidding in English Auctions," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 65(2), pages 185-210.
    17. Jeremy Bulow & Paul Klemperer, 2009. "Why Do Sellers (Usually) Prefer Auctions?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 99(4), pages 1544-75, September.
    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. Delnoij, Joyce & Rezaei, Sarah & Rijt, Arnout van de, 2023. "Jump bidding does not reduce prices: Field-experimental evidence from online auctions," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 209(C), pages 308-325.

    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. Gentry, Matthew & Stroup, Caleb, 2019. "Entry and competition in takeover auctions," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 132(2), pages 298-324.
    2. David Ettinger & Fabio Michelucci, 2016. "Hiding Information in Open Auctions with Jump Bids," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 126(594), pages 1484-1502, August.
    3. David Ettinger & Fabio Michelucci, 2016. "Creating a winner’s curse via jump bids," Review of Economic Design, Springer;Society for Economic Design, vol. 20(3), pages 173-186, September.
    4. Dodonova, Anna, 2013. "Preemptive bidding in takeover auctions with externality," Journal of Economics and Business, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 35-44.
    5. Dodonova, Anna & Khoroshilov, Yuri, 2020. "Preemptive bidding in common value takeover auctions: Social surplus and the target’s revenue," The North American Journal of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 53(C).
    6. Andrew M. Davis & Elena Katok & Anthony M. Kwasnica, 2014. "Should Sellers Prefer Auctions? A Laboratory Comparison of Auctions and Sequential Mechanisms," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 60(4), pages 990-1008, April.
    7. Schneck, Colin & Bessler, Wolfgang & Zimmermann, Jan, 2014. "Bidder Contests in International Mergers and Acquisitions: The Impact of Toeholds, Preemptive Bidding, and Termination Fees," VfS Annual Conference 2014 (Hamburg): Evidence-based Economic Policy 100493, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    8. Khoroshilov, Yuri, 2012. "Preemptive bidding in takeover auctions with affiliated values," The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 52(4), pages 395-401.
    9. Loyola, Gino, 2012. "Optimal and efficient takeover contests with toeholds," Journal of Financial Intermediation, Elsevier, vol. 21(2), pages 203-216.
    10. Sven Fischer & Werner Güth & Todd R. Kaplan & Ro'i Zultan, 2021. "Auctions With Leaks About Early Bids: Analysis And Experimental Behavior," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 59(2), pages 722-739, April.
    11. Bessler, Wolfgang & Schneck, Colin & Zimmermann, Jan, 2015. "Bidder contests in international mergers and acquisitions: The impact of toeholds, preemptive bidding, and termination fees," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 4-23.
    12. Dai, Yun & Gryglewicz, Sebastian & Smit, Han T.J. & De Maeseneire, Wouter, 2013. "Similar bidders in takeover contests," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 544-561.
    13. Loyola, Gino, 2012. "Auctions vs. negotiations in takeovers with initial stakes," Finance Research Letters, Elsevier, vol. 9(3), pages 111-120.
    14. James W. Roberts & Andrew Sweeting, 2013. "When Should Sellers Use Auctions?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 103(5), pages 1830-1861, August.
    15. Philippe Jehiel & Laurent Lamy, 2020. "On the Benefits of Set-Asides," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 18(4), pages 1655-1696.
    16. Tingjun Liu & Dan Bernhardt, 2021. "Rent Extraction with Securities Plus Cash," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 76(4), pages 1869-1912, August.
    17. Dodonova, Anna, 2017. "Preemptive bidding and Pareto efficiency in takeover auctions," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 159(C), pages 214-216.
    18. Dimopoulos, Theodosios & Sacchetto, Stefano, 2014. "Preemptive bidding, target resistance, and takeover premiums," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 114(3), pages 444-470.
    19. Calcagno, Riccardo & Falconieri, Sonia, 2014. "Competition and dynamics of takeover contests," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 26(C), pages 36-56.
    20. Goldman, Eitan & Qian, Jun, 2005. "Optimal toeholds in takeover contests," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 77(2), pages 321-346, August.

    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:oup:revfin:v:22:y:2018:i:5:p:1631-1665.. 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/eufaaea.html .

    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.