IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/fem/femwpa/2004.147.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Sequential vs. Single-Round Uniform-Price Auctions

Author

Listed:
  • Claudio Mezzetti

    (University of North Carolina)

  • Aleksandar Pekec

    (The Fuqua School of Business, Duke University)

  • Ilia Tsetlin

    (INSEAD)

Abstract

We study sequential and single-round uniform-price auctions with affiliated values. We derive symmetric equilibrium for the auction in which k1 objects are sold in the first round and k2 in the second round, with and without revelation of the first-round winning bids. We demonstrate that auctioning objects in sequence generates a lowballing effect that reduces first-round revenue. Thus, revenue is greater in a single-round, uniform auction for k = k1 + k2 objects than in a sequential uniform auction with no bid announcement. When the first-round winning bids are announced, we also identify two informational effects: a positive effect on second-round price and an ambiguous effect on first-round price. The expected first-round price can be greater or smaller than with no bid announcement, and greater or smaller than the expected price in a single-round uniform auction. As a result, total expected revenue in a sequential uniform auction with winning-bids announcement can be greater or smaller than in a single-round uniform auction.

Suggested Citation

  • Claudio Mezzetti & Aleksandar Pekec & Ilia Tsetlin, 2004. "Sequential vs. Single-Round Uniform-Price Auctions," Working Papers 2004.147, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
  • Handle: RePEc:fem:femwpa:2004.147
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://feem-media.s3.eu-central-1.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/NDL2004-147.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Krishna, Vijay, 2009. "Auction Theory," Elsevier Monographs, Elsevier, edition 2, number 9780123745071.
    2. Motty Perry & Philip J. Reny, 1999. "On The Failure of the Linkage Principle in Multi-Unit Auctions," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 67(4), pages 895-900, July.
    3. William Vickrey, 1961. "Counterspeculation, Auctions, And Competitive Sealed Tenders," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 16(1), pages 8-37, March.
    4. Paul Klemperer, 1999. "Auction Theory: A Guide to the Literature," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 13(3), pages 227-286, July.
    5. Angeles de Frutos, Maria & Rosenthal, Robert W., 1998. "On Some Myths about Sequenced Common-Value Auctions," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 23(2), pages 201-221, May.
    6. Mezzetti, Claudio & Tsetlin, Ilia, 2008. "On the lowest-winning-bid and the highest-losing-bid auctions," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 44(9-10), pages 1040-1048, September.
    7. Donald B. Hausch, 1986. "Multi-Object Auctions: Sequential vs. Simultaneous Sales," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(12), pages 1599-1610, December.
    8. Milgrom, Paul R & Weber, Robert J, 1982. "A Theory of Auctions and Competitive Bidding," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 50(5), pages 1089-1122, September.
    9. Klemperer, Paul, 1999. " Auction Theory: A Guide to the Literature," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 13(3), pages 227-86, July.
    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. Jun Zhang & Ruqu Wang, 2009. "The Role of Information Revelation in Elimination Contests," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 119(536), pages 613-641, March.
    2. Mezzetti, Claudio, 2008. "Aversion to Price Risk and the Afternoon Effect," The Warwick Economics Research Paper Series (TWERPS) 857, University of Warwick, Department of Economics.
    3. Paschmann, Martin, 2017. "Economic Analysis of Price Premiums in the Presence of Non-convexities - Evidence from German Electricity Markets," EWI Working Papers 2017-12, Energiewirtschaftliches Institut an der Universitaet zu Koeln (EWI).
    4. Mezzetti, Claudio & Tsetlin, Ilia, 2008. "On the lowest-winning-bid and the highest-losing-bid auctions," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 44(9-10), pages 1040-1048, September.
    5. Hu, Audrey & Zou, Liang, 2015. "Sequential auctions, price trends, and risk preferences," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 158(PA), pages 319-335.
    6. Ginsburgh, V. & van Ours, J.C., 2003. "How to Organize Sequential Auctions : Results of a Natural Experiment by Christie's," Other publications TiSEM 01ec6d80-7501-441c-a60b-c, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    7. Rosato, Antonio, 2014. "Loss Aversion in Sequential Auctions: Endogenous Interdependence, Informational Externalities and the "Afternoon Effect"," MPRA Paper 56824, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    8. Ming Hu & Zizhuo Wang & Yinbo Feng, 2020. "Information Disclosure and Pricing Policies for Sales of Network Goods," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 68(4), pages 1162-1177, July.
    9. Knaut, Andreas & Paschmann, Martin, 2017. "Decoding Restricted Participation in Sequential Electricity Markets," EWI Working Papers 2017-5, Energiewirtschaftliches Institut an der Universitaet zu Koeln (EWI), revised 31 Aug 2017.
    10. Francesco Giovannoni & Miltiadis Makris, 2014. "Reputational Bidding," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 55(3), pages 693-710, August.
    11. Congjun Rao & Yong Zhao & Junjun Zheng & Mark Goh & Cheng Wang, 2017. "Bidding Behavior and Equilibrium Excursion of Uniform Price Auction Mechanism," Asia-Pacific Journal of Operational Research (APJOR), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 34(06), pages 1-17, December.
    12. Paul Pezanis-Christou, 2013. "Asymmetric Multiple-Object First-Price Auctions," School of Economics and Public Policy Working Papers 2013-07, University of Adelaide, School of Economics and Public Policy.

    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. Axel Ockenfels & David Reiley & Abdolkarim Sadrieh, 2006. "Online Auctions," NBER Working Papers 12785, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. Ramanathan Subramaniam & R. Venkatesh, 2009. "Optimal Bundling Strategies in Multiobject Auctions of Complements or Substitutes," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 28(2), pages 264-273, 03-04.
    3. Kashyap, Ravi, 2018. "Auction theory adaptations for real life applications," Research in Economics, Elsevier, vol. 72(4), pages 452-481.
    4. Ravi Kashyap, 2018. "Auction Theory Adaptations for Real Life Applications," Papers 1810.01736, arXiv.org, revised May 2019.
    5. Maréchal, François & Morand, Pierre-Henri, 2011. "First-price sealed-bid auctions when bidders exhibit different attitudes toward risk," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 113(2), pages 108-111.
    6. 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.
    7. Adam, Marc T.P. & Krämer, Jan & Müller, Marius B., 2015. "Auction Fever! How Time Pressure and Social Competition Affect Bidders’ Arousal and Bids in Retail Auctions," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 91(3), pages 468-485.
    8. Rachel R. Chen & Robin O. Roundy & Rachel Q. Zhang & Ganesh Janakiraman, 2005. "Efficient Auction Mechanisms for Supply Chain Procurement," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 51(3), pages 467-482, March.
    9. Einy, Ezra & Haimanko, Ori & Orzach, Ram & Sela, Aner, 2002. "Dominance solvability of second-price auctions with differential information," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 37(3), pages 247-258, May.
    10. E Ballestero & C Bielza & D Pla-Santamaría, 2006. "A decision approach to competitive electronic sealed-bid auctions for land," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 57(9), pages 1126-1133, September.
    11. Jay R. Corrigan & Andreas C. Drichoutis & Jayson L. Lusk & Rodolfo M. Nayga & Matthew C. Rousu, 2012. "Repeated Rounds with Price Feedback in Experimental Auction Valuation: An Adversarial Collaboration," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 94(1), pages 97-115.
    12. Elbittar, Alexander, 2009. "Impact of valuation ranking information on bidding in first-price auctions: A laboratory study," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 69(1), pages 75-85, January.
    13. Ronald M. Harstad & Aleksandar Saša Pekeč, 2008. "Relevance to Practice and Auction Theory: A Memorial Essay for Michael Rothkopf," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 38(5), pages 367-380, October.
    14. Hannu Vartiainen, 2003. "Auction Design without Commitment," Working Papers 2003.24, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    15. A. Alexander Elbittar, 2005. "Impact of Valuation Ranking Information on Bidding in First-Price," Microeconomics 0508008, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    16. Marie BLUM, 2021. "Auction hosts: are they really impartial?," Working Papers of LaRGE Research Center 2021-09, Laboratoire de Recherche en Gestion et Economie (LaRGE), Université de Strasbourg.
    17. Estrella Alonso & Juan Tejada, 2010. "Equivalencia de Ingresos en un Duopolio Eléctrico," Latin American Journal of Economics-formerly Cuadernos de Economía, Instituto de Economía. Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile., vol. 47(136), pages 191-215.
    18. Gustavo Vulcano & Garrett van Ryzin & Costis Maglaras, 2002. "Optimal Dynamic Auctions for Revenue Management," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 48(11), pages 1388-1407, November.
    19. Michael H. Rothkopf & Sunju Park, 2001. "An Elementary Introduction to Auctions," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 31(6), pages 83-97, December.
    20. Benoit, Jean-Pierre & Dubra, Juan, 2006. "Information revelation in auctions," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 57(2), pages 181-205, November.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Multi-unit auctions; Sequential auctions; Uniform-price auction; Affiliated values; Information revelation;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D44 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design - - - Auctions
    • D42 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design - - - Monopoly

    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:fem:femwpa:2004.147. 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: Alberto Prina Cerai (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/feemmit.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.