This paper points out that vertical delegation, implemented through the design of quantity discount contracts, may allow upstream producers, as well as downstream retailers, to achieve profits higher than those obtained under vertical integration or contracts based on price restrictions. Our result shows that when downstream competition is sufficiently tough, the design of suitable vertical restraints implements a market outcome closer to the monopoly benchmark, which has a detrimental effect on consumer surplus. Moreover, we argue that legally banning price restricting contracts is suboptimal, the reason being that they remove a double-marginalization effect created by asymmetric information between upstream producers and downstream retailers.
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
page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS
site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Publisher Info
Paper provided by Centre for Studies in Economics and Finance (CSEF), University of Naples, Italy in its series CSEF Working Papers with number
113.
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.:
Dixit, Avinash K, 1986.
"Comparative Statics for Oligopoly,"
International Economic Review,
Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 27(1), pages 107-22, February.
[Downloadable!] (restricted)
Fershtman, Chaim & Judd, Kenneth L & Kalai, Ehud, 1991.
"Observable Contracts: Strategic Delegation and Cooperation,"
International Economic Review,
Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 32(3), pages 551-59, August.
[Downloadable!] (restricted)
Other versions: