Cartel Stability with Time-dependent Detection Probabilities
AbstractTo account for the illegal nature of price-fixing agreements, detection probabilities are introduced in a dynamic oligopoly. It follows that for a trigger strategy to sustain a non-cooperative collusive equilibrium as a SPNE both the discount rate and all per-period detection probabilities have to be `low enough'. Also, the domain reduces for which strictest incentive compatibility constraint is binding of the concomitant non-stationary supergame if (i) any per-period detection probability increases, (ii) prospective fine payments are increased, (iii) the period of limitation is reduced for violating antitrust laws.
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 InfoPaper provided by Tinbergen Institute in its series Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers with number 03-104/1.
Date of creation: 23 Dec 2003
Date of revision:
Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.tinbergen.nl
Cartel stability; trigger strategy; detection probabilities; period of limitation;
Find related papers by JEL classification:
- L12 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Monopoly; Monopolization Strategies
- L41 - Industrial Organization - - Antitrust Issues and Policies - - - Monopolization; Horizontal Anticompetitive Practices
This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:
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.:
- Segerstrom, Paul S., 1988. "Demons and repentance," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 32-52, June.
- Motta, Massimo & Polo, Michele, 2003.
"Leniency programs and cartel prosecution,"
International Journal of Industrial Organization,
Elsevier, vol. 21(3), pages 347-379, March.
- Motta, M. & Polo, M., 1999. "Leniency Programs and Cartel Prosecution," Economics Working Papers eco99/23, European University Institute.
- Massimo Motta & Michele Polo, . "Leniency Programs and Cartel Prosecution," Working Papers 150, IGIER (Innocenzo Gasparini Institute for Economic Research), Bocconi University.
- Motta, Massimo & Polo, Michele, 2000. "Leniency Programs and Cartel Prosecution," CEPR Discussion Papers 2349, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
- Verboven, Frank, 1998.
"Localized Competition, Multimarket Operation, and Collusive Behavior,"
International Economic Review,
Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 39(2), pages 371-98, May.
- Verboven, F., 1995. "Localized Competition, Multimarket Operation and Collusive Behavior," Discussion Paper 1995-49, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
- Thomas VON UNGERN-STERNBERG, 1988.
"Cartel Stability in Sealed Bid Second Price Auctions,"
Cahiers de Recherches Economiques du DÃ©partement d'EconomÃ©trie et d'Economie politique (DEEP)
8802, Université de Lausanne, Faculté des HEC, DEEP.
- von Ungern-Sternberg, Thomas, 1988. "Cartel Stability in Sealed Bid Second Price Auctions," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(3), pages 351-58, March.
- Harrington, Joseph Jr., 2003. "Some implications of antitrust laws for cartel pricing," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 79(3), pages 377-383, June.
- Joseph E Harrington Jr, 2002.
"Cartel Pricing Dynamics in the Presence of an Antitrust Authority,"
Economics Working Paper Archive
487, The Johns Hopkins University,Department of Economics, revised May 2003.
- Joseph E. Harrington, Jr., 2004. "Cartel Pricing Dynamics in the Presence of an Antitrust Authority," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 35(4), pages 651-673, Winter.
- Joseph E. Harrington, Jr., 2003. "Cartel Pricing Dynamics in the Presence of an Antitrust Authority," Computing in Economics and Finance 2003 26, Society for Computational Economics.
- Bryant, Peter G & Eckard, E Woodrow, Jr, 1991. "Price Fixing: The Probability of Getting Caught," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 73(3), pages 531-36, August.
- Friedman, James W, 1971. "A Non-cooperative Equilibrium for Supergames," Review of Economic Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(113), pages 1-12, January.
- Ghosal, Vivek & Gallo, Joseph, 2001. "The cyclical behavior of the Department of Justice's antitrust enforcement activity," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 19(1-2), pages 27-54, January.
- Charles F. Mason & Owen R. Phillips, 2002. "In Support of Trigger Strategies: Experimental Evidence from Two-Person Noncooperative Games," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 11(4), pages 685-716, December.
- Ross, Thomas W., 1992.
"Cartel stability and product differentiation,"
International Journal of Industrial Organization,
Elsevier, vol. 10(1), pages 1-13, March.
- Tom Ross, 1990. "Cartel Stability And Product Differentiation," Carleton Industrial Organization Research Unit (CIORU) 90-04, Carleton University, Department of Economics.
- Abreu, Dilip, 1986. "Extremal equilibria of oligopolistic supergames," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 191-225, June.
- Jeroen Hinloopen, 2004. "The Pro-collusive Effect of Increased Cartel Detection Probabilities," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 04-117/1, Tinbergen Institute.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Antoine Maartens (+31 626 - 160 892)).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.