A firm may decide to have some of its customers sign exclusive contracts in order to deprive a rival of the minimum viable size, exclude it from the market, and enjoy increased market power. If contracts are required to be simple enough, this strategy may induce inefficient exclusion even if the excluded firm is present at the contracting stage. Exclusive contracts may thus cause inefficient eviction, not only entry-deterrence, even though the former is less likely than the latter. However, complex enough contracts, if feasible, would allow agents to reach a Pareto-optimum, without inefficient exclusion.
Download Info
To download:
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the
proper application to
view it first. Information about this may be contained
in the File-Format links below. In case of further problems read
the IDEAS help
file. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS
site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
References listed on IDEAS 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.:
Rasmusen, Eric B & Ramseyer, J Mark & Wiley, John S, Jr, 1991.
"Naked Exclusion,"
American Economic Review,
American Economic Association, vol. 81(5), pages 1137-45, December.
[Downloadable!] (restricted)
B. Douglas Bernheim & Michael D. Whinston, 1998.
"Exclusive Dealing,"
Journal of Political Economy,
University of Chicago Press, vol. 106(1), pages 64-103, February.
[Downloadable!] (restricted)
Other versions:
B. Douglas Bernheim & Michael D. Whinston, 1996.
"Exclusive Dealing,"
NBER Working Papers
5666, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
[Downloadable!] (restricted)