IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2403.07799.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Equitable Pricing in Auctions

Author

Listed:
  • Simon Finster
  • Patrick Loiseau
  • Simon Mauras
  • Mathieu Molina
  • Bary Pradelski

Abstract

We study how pricing affects the division of surplus among buyers in auctions for multiple units. Our equity objective may be important, e.g., for competition concerns in downstream markets, complementing the long-standing debate on revenue and efficiency. We study a canonical model of auctions for multiple indivisible units with unit demand buyers and valuations with a private and a common component and consider all pricing rules that are a mixture (i.e., a convex combination) of pay-as-bid and uniform pricing. We propose the winners' empirical variance (WEV), the expected empirical variance of surplus among the winners, as a metric for surplus equity. We show that, for a range of private-common value proportions, a strictly interior mix of pay-as-bid and uniform pricing minimizes WEV. From an equity perspective, auctions with a higher private value component benefit from more price discrimination, whereas only auctions with a sufficiently high common value justify a more uniform pricing rule. We provide a criterion under which strictly mixed pricing dominates uniform pricing, a partial ranking of different mixed pricing formats, and bounds on the WEV-minimizing pricing under the assumption of log-concave signal distributions. In numerical experiments, we further illustrate the WEV-minimal pricing as a function of the private-common-value mix.

Suggested Citation

  • Simon Finster & Patrick Loiseau & Simon Mauras & Mathieu Molina & Bary Pradelski, 2024. "Equitable Pricing in Auctions," Papers 2403.07799, arXiv.org.
  • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2403.07799
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://arxiv.org/pdf/2403.07799
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Robert Wilson, 1979. "Auctions of Shares," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 93(4), pages 675-689.
    2. Sen, Amartya, 1973. "On Economic Inequality," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780198281931.
    3. Milgrom, Paul R & Weber, Robert J, 1982. "A Theory of Auctions and Competitive Bidding," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 50(5), pages 1089-1122, September.
    4. Harold Cole & Daniel Neuhann & Guillermo Ordoñez, 2022. "Asymmetric Information and Sovereign Debt: Theory Meets Mexican Data," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 130(8), pages 2055-2109.
    5. Marco Reuter & Carl-Christian Groh, 2020. "Mechanism Design for Unequal Societies," CRC TR 224 Discussion Paper Series crctr224_2020_228, University of Bonn and University of Mannheim, Germany.
    6. Back, Kerry & Zender, Jaime F, 1993. "Auctions of Divisible Goods: On the Rationale for the Treasury Experiment," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 6(4), pages 733-764.
    7. Klemperer, Paul, 1998. "Auctions with almost common values: The 'Wallet Game' and its applications," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 42(3-5), pages 757-769, May.
    8. Robert Wilson, 1977. "A Bidding Model of Perfect Competition," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 44(3), pages 511-518.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Matti Keloharju & Kjell G. Nyborg & Kristian Rydqvist, 2003. "Strategic Behavior and Underpricing in Uniform Price Auctions," Working Papers 2003.25, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    2. Matti Keloharju & Kjell G. Nyborg & Kristian Rydqvist, 2005. "Strategic Behavior and Underpricing in Uniform Price Auctions: Evidence from Finnish Treasury Auctions," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 60(4), pages 1865-1902, August.
    3. Cramton, Peter, 1998. "Ascending auctions," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 42(3-5), pages 745-756, May.
    4. Nyborg, Kjell G. & Sundaresan, Suresh, 1996. "Discriminatory versus uniform Treasury auctions: Evidence from when-issued transactions," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 42(1), pages 63-104, September.
    5. Jacob K. Goeree & Theo Offerman, 2003. "Competitive Bidding in Auctions with Private and Common Values," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 113(489), pages 598-613, July.
    6. Liu, Jinzhao & Gao, Shenghao & Zhou, Jun, 2019. "Clustering and discounting in auction-style SEOs – Evidence from China," Pacific-Basin Finance Journal, Elsevier, vol. 57(C).
    7. Ken Hendricks & Robert Porter & Guofu Tan, 2008. "Bidding rings and the winner's curse," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 39(4), pages 1018-1041, December.
    8. Theo Offerman, 2002. "Efficiency in Auctions with Private and Common Values: An Experimental Study," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 92(3), pages 625-643, June.
    9. Alexander Teytelboym & Shengwu Li & Scott Duke Kominers & Mohammad Akbarpour & Piotr Dworczak, 2021. "Discovering Auctions: Contributions of Paul Milgrom and Robert Wilson," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 123(3), pages 709-750, July.
    10. Yuanguang Yu, 2012. "An Optimal Ad Valorem Tax/Subsidy with an Output-Based Refunded Emission Payment for Permits Auction in an Oligopoly Market," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 52(2), pages 235-248, June.
    11. Paul Klemperer, 2002. "What Really Matters in Auction Design," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 16(1), pages 169-189, Winter.
    12. 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.
    13. Kenneth Hendricks & Joris Pinkse & Robert H. Porter, 2003. "Empirical Implications of Equilibrium Bidding in First-Price, Symmetric, Common Value Auctions," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 70(1), pages 115-145.
    14. Keunkwan Ryu & Gyung-Rok Kim & Seonghwan Oh, 2004. "Discriminatory vs Uniform Price Auction: Auction Revenue," Econometric Society 2004 Far Eastern Meetings 539, Econometric Society.
    15. Shiying Chen & Zhenhuan Dong & Chunming Cao & Changjun Zheng, 2022. "Strategy and design of multi‐unit auction in grouped asymmetric setting," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 43(8), pages 3435-3453, December.
    16. Paul Klemperer, 2004. "Auctions: Theory and Practice," Online economics textbooks, SUNY-Oswego, Department of Economics, number auction1.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:arx:papers:2403.07799. 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: arXiv administrators (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://arxiv.org/ .

    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.