Output Commitment through Product Bundling: Experimental Evidence
AbstractWe analyze the impact of product bundling in experimental markets. A firm has monopoly power in one market but faces competition by a second firm in another market. We compare treatments where the monopolist can bundle its two products to treatments where it cannot, and we contrast simultaneous and sequential order of moves. Our data indicate support for the theory of product bundling, even though substantial payoff differences between players exist. With bundling and simultaneous moves, the monopolist offers the predicted number of units. When the monopolist is the Stackelberg leader, the predicted equilibrium is better attained with bundling although in theory bundling should not make a difference here. In sum: bundling works as a commitment device that enables the transfer of market power from one market to another.
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 of Vienna, Department of Economics in its series Vienna Economics Papers with number 1112.
Date of creation: Dec 2011
Date of revision:
Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.univie.ac.at/vwl
Other versions of this item:
- Jeroen Hinloopen & Wieland Mueller & Hans-Theo Normann, 2011. "Output Commitment through Product Bundling: Experimental Evidence," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 11-170/1, Tinbergen Institute, revised 14 Jul 2013.
- C92 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Laboratory, Group Behavior
- D43 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure and Pricing - - - Oligopoly and Other Forms of Market Imperfection
- L11 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Production, Pricing, and Market Structure; Size Distribution of Firms
- L12 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Monopoly; Monopolization Strategies
- L41 - Industrial Organization - - Antitrust Issues and Policies - - - Monopolization; Horizontal Anticompetitive Practices
This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:
- NEP-ALL-2012-01-03 (All new papers)
- NEP-COM-2012-01-03 (Industrial Competition)
- NEP-EXP-2012-01-03 (Experimental Economics)
- NEP-GTH-2012-01-03 (Game Theory)
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.:
- Muller, Wieland, 2006.
"Allowing for two production periods in the Cournot duopoly: Experimental evidence,"
Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization,
Elsevier, vol. 60(1), pages 100-111, May.
- Müller, W., 2003. "Allowing for Two Production Periods in the Cournot Duopoly: Experimental Evidence," Discussion Paper 2003-42, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
- Müller, W., 2006. "Allowing for two production periods in the Cournot duopoly: Experimental evidence," Open Access publications from Tilburg University urn:nbn:nl:ui:12-175061, Tilburg University.
- Cox, J. & Friedman, D. & Gjerstad, S., 2006.
"A Trackable Model of Reciprocity and Fairness,"
Purdue University Economics Working Papers
1181, Purdue University, Department of Economics.
- James Cox & Daniel Friedman & Steven Gjerstad, 2004. "A Tractable Model of Reciprocity and Fairness," Experimental 0406001, EconWPA.
- James C. Cox & Daniel Friedman & Steven Gjerstad, 2006. "A Tractable Model of Reciprocity and Fairness," Experimental Economics Center Working Paper Series 2006-05, Experimental Economics Center, Andrew Young School of Policy Studies, Georgia State University.
- Boone, J. & Müller, W. & Suetens, S., 2009.
"Naked Exclusion: Towards a Behavioral Approach to Exclusive Dealing,"
2009-30, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
- Boone, Jan & Müller, Wieland & Suetens, Sigrid, 2009. "Naked exclusion: Towards a behavioral approach to exclusive dealing," CEPR Discussion Papers 7303, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
- Boone, J. & Müller, W. & Suetens, S., 2009. "Naked Exclusion: Towards a Behavioral Approach to Exclusive Dealing," Discussion Paper 2009-017, Tilburg University, Tilburg Law and Economic Center.
- Miguel Fonseca & Steffen Huck & Hans-Theo Normann, 2005. "Playing Cournot although they shouldn’t," Economic Theory, Springer, vol. 25(3), pages 669-677, 04.
- Rosario Gomez & Jacob K. Goeree & Charles A. Holt, 1999.
"Predatory Pricing: Rare Like a Unicorn?,"
Virginia Economics Online Papers
339, University of Virginia, Department of Economics.
- Guth, Werner & Schmittberger, Rolf & Schwarze, Bernd, 1982. "An experimental analysis of ultimatum bargaining," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 3(4), pages 367-388, December.
- Claudia M. Landeo & Kathryn E. Spier, 2008.
"Naked Exclusion: An Experimental Study of Contracts with Externalities,"
NBER Working Papers
14115, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Claudia M. Landeo & Kathryn E. Spier, 2009. "Naked Exclusion: An Experimental Study of Contracts with Externalities," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 99(5), pages 1850-77, December.
- Landeo, Claudia M. & Spier, Kathryn E., 2007. "Naked Exclusion: An Experimental Study of Contracts with Externalities," MPRA Paper 9143, University Library of Munich, Germany.
- Anil Caliskan & David Porter & Stephen Rassenti & Vernon L. Smith & Bart J. Wilson, 2007. "Exclusionary Bundling and the Effects of a Competitive Fringe," Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics (JITE), Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 163(1), pages 109-132, March.
- Hans Normann, Bradley Ruffle and Christopher Snyder, 2004.
"Do Buyer-Size Discounts Depend on the Curvature of the Surplus Function? Experimental Tests of Bargaining Models,"
Royal Holloway, University of London: Discussion Papers in Economics
04/01, Department of Economics, Royal Holloway University of London, revised Apr 2004.
- Hans-Theo Normann & Bradley J. Ruffle & Christopher M. Snyder, 2007. "Do buyer-size discounts depend on the curvature of the surplus function? Experimental tests of bargaining models," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 38(3), pages 747-767, 09.
- Hans-Theo Normann & Bradley J. Ruffle & Christopher M. Sndyer, 2003. "Do Buyer-Size Discounts Depend on the Curvature of the Surplus Function? Experimental Tests of Bargaining Models," Experimental 0308001, EconWPA.
- Huck, Steffen & Müller, Wieland & Normann, Hans-Theo, 1999.
"Stackelberg beats Cournot: On collusion and efficiency in experimental markets,"
SFB 373 Discussion Papers
1999,32, Humboldt University of Berlin, Interdisciplinary Research Project 373: Quantification and Simulation of Economic Processes.
- Huck, Steffen & Muller, Wieland & Normann, Hans-Theo, 2001. "Stackelberg Beats Cournot: On Collusion and Efficiency in Experimental Markets," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 111(474), pages 749-65, October.
- Forsythe Robert & Horowitz Joel L. & Savin N. E. & Sefton Martin, 1994. "Fairness in Simple Bargaining Experiments," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 6(3), pages 347-369, May.
- repec:cup:cbooks:9780521493420 is not listed on IDEAS
- Santos-Pinto, Luís, 2008.
"Making sense of the experimental evidence on endogenous timing in duopoly markets,"
Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization,
Elsevier, vol. 68(3-4), pages 657-666, December.
- Santos-Pinto, Luís, 2006. "Making Sense of the Experimental Evidence on Endogenous Timing in Duopoly Markets," MPRA Paper 3142, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 27 Apr 2007.
- Martin, Stephen & Normann, Hans-Theo & Snyder, Christopher M, 2001. "Vertical Foreclosure in Experimental Markets," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 32(3), pages 466-96, Autumn.
- Silvester Van Koten & Andreas Ortmann, 2013. "Self-regulating organizations under the shadow of governmental oversight: An experimental investigation," Discussion Papers 2013-13, School of Economics, The University of New South Wales.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Paper Administrator).
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.