Monopolization through acquisition
AbstractThis paper considers the possibility of monopolizing a three-firm industry through acquisition of rivals in the absence of the restrictions imposed by the antitrust authorities. The analysis is conducted in two models: a static and a dynamic model of monopolization by a single buyer. In contrast to preceding models, a firm owner is allowed to use mixed strategies in order to decide whether to sell his firm or not. The static model implies that the monopolization through acquisition can be profitable. However, the dynamic formulation of the problem suggests that the expected profits are much smaller, and may not be sufficient to cover any fixed costs associated with the acquisition process. Moreover, the probability of selling the firm by its owner is almost zero, which makes the whole monopolization process extremely unlikely.
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 University Library of Munich, Germany in its series MPRA Paper with number 43683.
Date of creation: 2005
Date of revision: 2006
monopolization; acquisitions; antitrust policy;
Find related papers by JEL classification:
- L41 - Industrial Organization - - Antitrust Issues and Policies - - - Monopolization; Horizontal Anticompetitive Practices
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.:
- Jean Tirole, 1988. "The Theory of Industrial Organization," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262200716.
- Morton I. Kamien & Israel Zang, 1988.
"The Limits of Monopolization Through Acquisition,"
802, Northwestern University, Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science.
- Kamien, Morton I & Zang, Israel, 1993. "Monopolization by Sequential Acquisition," Journal of Law, Economics and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 9(2), pages 205-29, October.
- Compte, Olivier & Jenny, Frederic & Rey, Patrick, 2002.
"Capacity constraints, mergers and collusion,"
European Economic Review,
Elsevier, vol. 46(1), pages 1-29, January.
- Compte, Olivier & Jenny, François & Rey, Patrick, 2002. "Capacity Constraints, Mergers and Collusion," Open Access publications from University of Toulouse 1 Capitole http://neeo.univ-tlse1.fr, University of Toulouse 1 Capitole.
- Harris, Ellie G, 1994. "Why One Firm Is the Target and the Other the Bidder in Single-Bidder, Synergistic Takeovers," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 67(2), pages 263-80, April.
- Perry, Martin K & Porter, Robert H, 1985. "Oligopoly and the Incentive for Horizontal Merger," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 75(1), pages 219-27, March.
- Jacek Prokop, 2009. "Monopolisation of triopoly -- revisited," International Journal of Computational Economics and Econometrics, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 1(2), pages 113-125, January.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Ekkehart Schlicht).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.