Capacity, Entry and Forward Induction
AbstractWe introduce avoidable fixed costs into the capacity and entry model of Dixit (1980) to produce a coordination problem among multiple postentry equilibria. Elimination of weakly dominated strategies makes it possible for the entrant to play a knockout strategy, consisting of a large capacity commitment which selects the entrant's preferred postentry equilibrium and drives the incumbent from the market. The incumbent must respond to the knockout threat by using judo tactics, involving a reduction in its capacity commitment. In subgame perfect equilibria which are robust to elimination of weakly dominated strategies, the incumbent must accept a market share smaller than the entrant's if avoidable fixed costs are sufficiently high, or cede the market to the entrant if avoidable fixed costs are higher still.
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 Northwestern University, Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science in its series Discussion Papers with number 888.
Date of creation: May 1990
Date of revision:
Contact details of provider:
Postal: Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science, Northwestern University, 580 Jacobs Center, 2001 Sheridan Road, Evanston, IL 60208-2014
Web page: http://www.kellogg.northwestern.edu/research/math/
More information through EDIRC
Other versions of this item:
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.:
- Gal-Or, Esther, 1985. "First Mover and Second Mover Advantages," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 26(3), pages 649-53, October.
- Jovanovic, Boyan & Lach, Saul, 1989.
"Entry, Exit, and Diffusion with Learning by Doing,"
American Economic Review,
American Economic Association, vol. 79(4), pages 690-99, September.
- David M Kreps & Robert Wilson, 2003.
Levine's Working Paper Archive
618897000000000813, David K. Levine.
- Schmalensee, Richard, 1983. "Advertising and Entry Deterrence: An Exploratory Model," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 91(4), pages 636-53, August.
- Mailath George J., 1993. "Endogenous Sequencing of Firm Decisions," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 59(1), pages 169-182, February.
- McLean, Richard P. & Riordan, Michael H., 1989. "Industry structure with sequential technology choice," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 47(1), pages 1-21, February.
- Eric Maskin & Jean Tirole, 2010.
"A Theory of Dynamic Oligopoly, 1: Overview and Quantity Competition with Large Fixed Costs,"
Levine's Working Paper Archive
397, David K. Levine.
- Maskin, Eric & Tirole, Jean, 1988. "A Theory of Dynamic Oligopoly, I: Overview and Quantity Competition with Large Fixed Costs," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 56(3), pages 549-69, May.
- J. Tirole & E. Maskin, 1982. "A Theory of Dynamic Oligopoly, I: Overview and Quantity Competition with Large-Fixed Costs," Working papers 320, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Department of Economics.
- Kenneth L. Judd, 1983.
"Credible Spatial Preemption,"
577, Northwestern University, Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science.
- Gal-Or, Esther, 1987. "First Mover Disadvantages with Private Information," Review of Economic Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 54(2), pages 279-92, April.
- Baumol, William J & Willig, Robert D, 1981. "Fixed Costs, Sunk Costs, Entry Barriers, and Sustainability of Monopoly," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, vol. 96(3), pages 405-31, August.
- Franco Modigliani, 1958. "New Developments on the Oligopoly Front," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 66, pages 215.
- Cabral, Luís M B & Ross, Thomas, 2007.
"Are Sunk Costs a Barrier to Entry?,"
CEPR Discussion Papers
6162, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
- Luís Cabral & Thomas Ross, 2007. "Are Sunk Costs a Barrier to Entry?," Working Papers 19, Portuguese Competition Authority.
- Luis M.B. Cabral & Thomas Ross, 2006. "Are Sunk Costs A Barrier To Entry?," Working Papers 06-09, New York University, Leonard N. Stern School of Business, Department of Economics.
- Arthur J. Rolnick & Bruce D. Smith & Warren E. Weber, 1998.
"Lessons from a laissez-faire payments system: the Suffolk Banking System, 1825-58,"
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, issue May, pages 105-116.
- Arthur J. Rolnick & Bruce D. Smith & Warren E. Weber, 1998. "Lessons from a laissez-faire payments system: the Suffolk Banking System (1825-58)," Quarterly Review, Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis, issue Sum, pages 11-21.
- Kyle Bagwell & Garey Ramey, 1990.
"Advertising and Coordination,"
903, Northwestern University, Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science.
- Wickelgren, Abraham L., 2006. "The effect of exit on entry deterrence strategies," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 54(1), pages 226-240, January.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Fran Walker).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.