Market size matters
AbstractThis paper empirically examines the effects of market size on producers' sizes in retail trade industries with many producers. A robust prediction of oligopoly theory is that larger markets are more competitive and have lower price-cost markups. Because producers in more competitive markets must sell more at a lower markup to recover their fixed costs, oligopoly theory implies that larger and more competitive markets have larger producers. Our estimated market size effects indicate whether or not this prediction of oligopoly theory carries over to competition among many producers. ; Our analysis uses observations from thirteen retail trade industries across 225 metropolitan statistical areas. In most of the industries we examine, producers are larger in larger markets, even after controlling for differences between markets' demographic and factor prices. This is the case whether we measure producers' sizes with their average sales or average employment. Thus, our results indicate that increasing the number of competitors decreases markups for most of the industries we examine.
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 Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago in its series Working Paper Series with number WP-03-12.
Date of creation: 2003
Date of revision:
Contact details of provider:
Postal: P.O. Box 834, 230 South LaSalle Street, Chicago, Illinois 60690-0834
Web page: http://www.chicagofed.org/
More information through EDIRC
Other versions of this item:
- Jeffrey R. Campbell & Hugo A. Hopenhayn, 2002. "Market Size Matters," NBER Working Papers 9113, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Jeffrey Campbell, 2000. "Market Size Matters," Econometric Society World Congress 2000 Contributed Papers 1225, Econometric Society.
- L11 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Production, Pricing, and Market Structure; Size Distribution of Firms
- L16 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Industrial Organization and Macroeconomics; Macroeconomic Industrial Structure
This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:
- NEP-ALL-2003-10-28 (All new papers)
- NEP-COM-2003-10-28 (Industrial Competition)
- NEP-ENT-2003-10-28 (Entrepreneurship)
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.:
- Kyle Bagwell & Garey Ramey & Daniel F. Spulber, 1997.
"Dynamic Retail Price and Investment Competition,"
RAND Journal of Economics,
The RAND Corporation, vol. 28(2), pages 207-227, Summer.
- Pakes, A. & Ericson, R., 1990.
"Empirical Implications Of Alternative Models Of Firm Dynamics,"
594, Yale - Economic Growth Center.
- Pakes, Ariel & Ericson, Richard, 1998. "Empirical Implications of Alternative Models of Firm Dynamics," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 79(1), pages 1-45, March.
- Ariel Pakes & Richard Ericson, 1989. "Empirical Implications of Alternative Models of Firm Dynamics," NBER Working Papers 2893, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Powell, James L & Stock, James H & Stoker, Thomas M, 1989. "Semiparametric Estimation of Index Coefficients," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 57(6), pages 1403-30, November.
- Hart, Oliver D, 1985. "Monopolistic Competition in the Spirit of Chamberlin: A General Model," Review of Economic Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 52(4), pages 529-46, October.
- Lucia Foster & John Haltiwanger & C.J. Krizan, 2002.
"The Link Between Aggregate and Micro Productivity Growth: Evidence from Retail Trade,"
NBER Working Papers
9120, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- C.J. Krizan & John Haltiwanger & Lucia Foster, 2002. "The Link Between Aggregate and Micro Productivity Growth: Evidence from Retail Trade," Working Papers 02-18, Center for Economic Studies, U.S. Census Bureau.
- Ericson, Richard & Pakes, Ariel, 1995. "Markov-Perfect Industry Dynamics: A Framework for Empirical Work," Review of Economic Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 62(1), pages 53-82, January.
- Wolinsky, Asher, 1986. "True Monopolistic Competition as a Result of Imperfect Information," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, vol. 101(3), pages 493-511, August.
- Bresnahan, Timothy F & Reiss, Peter C, 1991.
"Entry and Competition in Concentrated Markets,"
Journal of Political Economy,
University of Chicago Press, vol. 99(5), pages 977-1009, October.
- Jovanovic, Boyan, 1982. "Selection and the Evolution of Industry," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 50(3), pages 649-70, May.
- Michael J. Mazzeo, 2002. "Product Choice and Oligopoly Market Structure," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 33(2), pages 221-242, Summer.
- Steven T. Berry & Joel Waldfogel, 2001. "Do Mergers Increase Product Variety? Evidence From Radio Broadcasting," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, vol. 116(3), pages 1009-1025, August.
- Peter Davis, 2006. "Spatial competition in retail markets: movie theaters," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 37(4), pages 964-982, December.
- Kyle Bagwell & Garey Ramey, 1992.
1034, Northwestern University, Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science.
This item has more than 25 citations. To prevent cluttering this page, these citations are listed on a separate page. reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.Access and download statisticsgeneral information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Bernie Flores).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.