Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

Private Monitoring in Auctions

Contents:

Author Info

  • Andreas Blume
  • Paul Heidhues

Abstract

We study collusion in repeated first-price auctions under the condition of minimal information release by the auctioneer. In each auction a bidder only learns whether or not he won the object. Bidders do not observe other bidders’ bids, who participates or who wins in case they are not the winner. We show that for large enough discount factors collusion can nevertheless be supported in the infinitely repeated game. While there is a unique Nash equilibrium in public strategies, in which bidders bid competitively in every period, there are simple Nash equilibria in private strategies that support bid rotation. Equilibria that either improve on bid rotation or satisfy the requirement of Bayesian perfection, but not both, are only slightly more complex. Our main result is the construction of perfect Bayesian equilibria that improve on bid rotation. These equilibria require complicated inferences off the equilibrium path. A deviator may not know who has observed his deviation and consequently may have an incentive to use strategic experimentation to learn about the bidding behavior of his rivals. ZUSAMMENFASSUNG - (Privates Monitoring in Auktionen) Der Beitrag untersucht, inwieweit Bieter Kollusion, bzw. stillschweigende Abkommen, in wiederholten Erstpreisauktionen aufrecht erhalten können, in welchen der Auktionator alle Informationen zurückhält. Nach jeder Auktion lernt ein Bieter nur, ob er das Objekt gewonnen hat oder nicht. Ein Bieter kann weder die Gebote der anderen Bieter beobachten, noch kann er beobachten, welche Bieter an der Auktion teilgenommen haben und wer gewonnen hat - solange er nicht selbst das Objekt erhält. Wir zeigen, dass in dem unendlich wiederholten Spiel für hinreichend geduldige Bieter Kollusion möglich ist. Es existiert zwar ein eindeutiges Gleichgewicht in öffentlichen Strategien, in welchem die Bieter in jeder Periode kompetitiv bieten, aber es gibt einfache Nash-Gleichgewichte in privaten Strategien, die Bieterrotation durchsetzen. Wir zeigen auch, dass Bieterrotation das Ergebnis eines perfekt bayesianischen Gleichgewichtes sein kann. Nash-Gleichgewichte, die höhere erwartete Gewinne als Bieterrotation erzielen, sind nur ein wenig komplexer. Das Hauptergebnis ist die Konstruktion von (essentiell) perfekt bayesianischen Gleichgewichten, welche höhere Gewinne als Bieterrotation erzielen. Nach Abweichungen vom Gleichgewichtspfad, müssen die Bieter in diesen Gleichgewichten komplizierte Rückschlüsse auf das Verhalten Ihrer Wettbewerber ziehen. So weiß ein Bieter nach bestimmten Abweichungen nicht, ob diese von seinen Mitspielern beobachtet wurden, und hat ein Interesse daran, durch strategisches experimentieren das Bietverhalten seiner Rivalen kennenzulernen.

Download Info

If 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.
File URL: http://skylla.wz-berlin.de/pdf/2003/ii03-14.pdf
File Function: Full text (original version)
Download Restriction: no

Bibliographic Info

Paper provided by Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin (WZB), Research Unit: Competition and Innovation (CIG) in its series CIG Working Papers with number SP II 2003-14.

as in new window
Length: 44 pages
Date of creation: Sep 2003
Date of revision:
Publication status: Forthcoming in the Journal of Economic Theory .
Handle: RePEc:wzb:wzebiv:spii2003-14

Contact details of provider:
Postal: Reichpietschufer 50, 10785 Berlin, Germany
Phone: (++49)(30) 25491-441
Fax: (++49)(30) 25491-442
Email:
Web page: http://www.wzb.eu/mp/wiw/default.en.htm
More information through EDIRC

Related research

Keywords: Itacit collusion; repeated auctions; supergames; contagion; bid-rotation; trigger strategies.;

Other versions of this item:

Find related papers by JEL classification:

This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

References

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.:
as in new window
  1. Bhaskar, V. & Obara, Ichiro, 2002. "Belief-Based Equilibria in the Repeated Prisoners' Dilemma with Private Monitoring," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 102(1), pages 40-69, January.
  2. Michihiro Kandori & Ichiro Obara, 2004. "Efficiency in Repeated Games Revisited: The Role of Private Strategies," Levine's Bibliography 122247000000000055, UCLA Department of Economics.
  3. David M Kreps & Robert Wilson, 2003. "Sequential Equilibria," Levine's Working Paper Archive 618897000000000813, David K. Levine.
  4. Skrzypacz, Andrzej & Hopenhayn, Hugo, 2004. "Tacit collusion in repeated auctions," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 114(1), pages 153-169, January.
  5. Susan Athey & Kyle Bagwell & Chris Sanchirico, 2004. "Collusion and Price Rigidity," Review of Economic Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 71(2), pages 317-349, 04.
  6. Radner, Roy & Myerson, Roger & Maskin, Eric, 1986. "An Example of a Repeated Partnership Game with Discounting and with Uniformly Inefficient Equilibria," Review of Economic Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 53(1), pages 59-69, January.
  7. Michi Kandori, 2010. "Social Norms and Community Enforcement," Levine's Working Paper Archive 630, David K. Levine.
  8. Aoyagi, Masaki, 2003. "Bid rotation and collusion in repeated auctions," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 112(1), pages 79-105, September.
  9. Mirman, L.J. & Samuelson, L. & Urbano, A., 1989. "Monopoly Experimentation," Papers 8-89-7, Pennsylvania State - Department of Economics.
    • Mirman, Leonard J & Samuelson, Larry & Urbano, Amparo, 1993. "Monopoly Experimentation," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 34(3), pages 549-63, August.
  10. Athey, Susan, 2001. "Single Crossing Properties and the Existence of Pure Strategy Equilibria in Games of Incomplete Information," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 69(4), pages 861-89, July.
  11. Drew Fudenberg & David K. Levine & Eric Maskin, 1994. "The Folk Theorem with Imperfect Public Information," Levine's Working Paper Archive 394, David K. Levine.
  12. Rothschild, Michael, 1974. "A two-armed bandit theory of market pricing," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 9(2), pages 185-202, October.
  13. Ellison, Glenn, 1994. "Cooperation in the Prisoner's Dilemma with Anonymous Random Matching," Review of Economic Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 61(3), pages 567-88, July.
  14. Jeffrey Ely, 2000. "A Robust Folk Theorem for the Prisoners' Dilemma," Econometric Society World Congress 2000 Contributed Papers 0210, Econometric Society.
  15. Aghion Philippe & Bolton, Patrick & Harris Christopher & Jullien Bruno, 1991. "Optimal learning by experimentation," CEPREMAP Working Papers (Couverture Orange) 9104, CEPREMAP.
  16. Robert H. Porter & J. Douglas Zona, 1992. "Detection of Bid Rigging in Procurement Auctions," NBER Working Papers 4013, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  17. Athey, Susan & Bagwell, Kyle, 2001. "Optimal Collusion with Private Information," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 32(3), pages 428-65, Autumn.
  18. Ben-Porath, Elchanan & Kahneman, Michael, 1996. "Communication in Repeated Games with Private Monitoring," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 70(2), pages 281-297, August.
  19. Marshall, R.C. & Richard J.F., 1995. "Bider Collusion at Forest Service Timber Sales," Papers 7-95-3, Pennsylvania State - Department of Economics.
  20. Lebrun, Bernard, 1999. "First Price Auctions in the Asymmetric N Bidder Case," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 40(1), pages 125-42, February.
  21. McAfee, R. Preston & McMillan, John., 1990. "Bidding Rings," Working Papers 726, California Institute of Technology, Division of the Humanities and Social Sciences.
  22. Blume, Andreas & Heidhues, Paul, 2004. "All equilibria of the Vickrey auction," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 114(1), pages 170-177, January.
  23. Matthew O. Jackson & Leo K. Simon & Jeroen M. Swinkels & William R. Zame, 2002. "Communication and Equilibrium in Discontinuous Games of Incomplete Information," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 70(5), pages 1711-1740, September.
  24. Masaki Aoyagi, 2002. "Efficient Collusion in Repeated Auctions with Communication," ISER Discussion Paper 0566, Institute of Social and Economic Research, Osaka University.
  25. McLennan, Andrew, 1984. "Price dispersion and incomplete learning in the long run," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 7(3), pages 331-347, September.
  26. Dufwenberg, Martin & Gneezy, Uri, 2002. "Information disclosure in auctions: an experiment," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 48(4), pages 431-444, August.
  27. Aghion, Philippe, et al, 1991. "Optimal Learning by Experimentation," Review of Economic Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 58(4), pages 621-54, July.
  28. Pesendorfer, Martin, 2000. "A Study of Collusion in First-Price Auctions," Review of Economic Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 67(3), pages 381-411, July.
  29. Andreas Blume & Paul Heidhues, 2008. "Modeling Tacit Collusion in Auctions," Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics (JITE), Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 164(1), pages 163-184, March.
  30. Hendricks, Kenneth & Porter, Robert H, 1988. "An Empirical Study of an Auction with Asymmetric Information," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 78(5), pages 865-83, December.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

Citations

Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
as in new window

Cited by:
  1. Rachmilevitch, Shiran, . "Bribing in second-price auctions," Working Papers WP2011/7, University of Haifa, Department of Economics, revised 06 Oct 2011.
  2. David A. Miller, 2012. "Robust Collusion with Private Information," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 79(2), pages 778-811.
  3. Rachmilevitch, Shiran, 2013. "Bribing in first-price auctions," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 77(1), pages 214-228.
  4. Münster, Johannes, 2008. "Repeated contests with asymmetric information," Discussion Papers, Research Unit: Market Processes and Governance SP II 2008-08, Social Science Research Center Berlin (WZB).
  5. Rachmilevitch, Shiran, . "Endogenous Bid Rotation in Repeated Auctions," Working Papers WP2011/9, University of Haifa, Department of Economics, revised 09 Oct 2011.
  6. Rachmilevitch, Shiran, 2013. "Endogenous bid rotation in repeated auctions," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 148(4), pages 1714-1725.
  7. Heidhues, Paul & Rady, Sven & Strack, Philipp, 2012. "Strategic Experimentation with Private Payoffs," Discussion Paper Series of SFB/TR 15 Governance and the Efficiency of Economic Systems 387, Free University of Berlin, Humboldt University of Berlin, University of Bonn, University of Mannheim, University of Munich.
  8. Calzolari, Giacomo & Spagnolo, Giancarlo, 2009. "Relational Contracts and Competitive Screening," CEPR Discussion Papers 7434, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
  9. Andreas Blume, 2011. "Dynamic Coordination Via Organizational Routines," Working Papers 439, University of Pittsburgh, Department of Economics, revised Jan 2011.
  10. Giuseppe Lopomo & Leslie Marx & Peng Sun, 2011. "Bidder collusion at first-price auctions," Review of Economic Design, Springer, vol. 15(3), pages 177-211, September.
  11. Heidhues, Paul & Blume, Andreas & Franco, April, 2013. "Dynamic Coordination via Organizational Routines," Annual Conference 2013 (Duesseldorf): Competition Policy and Regulation in a Global Economic Order 80027, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
  12. Antonio Miralles, 2010. "Self-enforced collusion through comparative cheap talk in simultaneous auctions with entry," Economic Theory, Springer, vol. 42(3), pages 523-538, March.
  13. Rachmilevitch, Shiran, 2014. "First-best collusion without communication," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 224-230.

Lists

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

Statistics

Access and download statistics

Corrections

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wzb:wzebiv:spii2003-14. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Jennifer Rontganger).

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.