IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/coecpo/v20y2002i3p316-329.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Theory And Practice In The Classroom: A Repeated Game Of Multimarket Oligopoly

Author

Listed:
  • Timothy L. Sorenson

Abstract

This article describes a repeated game of multimarket contact, designed to be played throughout an entire term. Besides enjoying reciprocal advantages in their home markets, firms are perfectly informed after every round about each other's decisions. For most of the game, it appears there is always a future in which to punish deviations, and (with the game's parameters) zero‐cost punishments can always be implemented. Thus the game provides all the elements for an escape from the prisoner's dilemma. Theoretical foundations, predictions, and some results are also discussed.

Suggested Citation

  • Timothy L. Sorenson, 2002. "Theory And Practice In The Classroom: A Repeated Game Of Multimarket Oligopoly," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 20(3), pages 316-329, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:coecpo:v:20:y:2002:i:3:p:316-329
    DOI: 10.1093/cep/20.3.316
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1093/cep/20.3.316
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1093/cep/20.3.316?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hughes, Kirsty & Oughton, Christine, 1993. "Diversification, Multi-market Contact and Profitability," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 60(238), pages 203-224, May.
    2. Philip M. Parker & Lars-Hendrik Roller, 1997. "Collusive Conduct in Duopolies: Multimarket Contact and Cross-Ownership in the Mobile Telephone Industry," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 28(2), pages 304-322, Summer.
    3. Huck, Steffen & Normann, Hans-Theo & Oechssler, Jorg, 2000. "Does information about competitors' actions increase or decrease competition in experimental oligopoly markets?," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 18(1), pages 39-57, January.
    4. Scott, John T, 1982. "Multimarket Contact and Economic Performance," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 64(3), pages 368-375, August.
    5. Charles A. Holt & Monica Capra, 2000. "Classroom Games: A Prisoner's Dilemma," The Journal of Economic Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 31(3), pages 229-236, September.
    6. Alison J. Kirby, 1988. "Trade Associations as Information Exchange Mechanisms," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 19(1), pages 138-146, Spring.
    7. Feinberg, Robert M., 1984. "Mutual forbearance as an extension of oligopoly theory," Journal of Economics and Business, Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 243-249, May.
    8. J. Patrick Meister, 1999. "Oligopoly-An In-Class Economic Game," The Journal of Economic Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 30(4), pages 383-391, December.
    9. Richard N. Clarke, 1983. "Collusion and the Incentives for Information Sharing," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 14(2), pages 383-394, Autumn.
    10. Farrell, Joseph & Maskin, Eric, 1989. "Renegotiation in repeated games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 1(4), pages 327-360, December.
    11. Vives, Xavier, 1984. "Duopoly information equilibrium: Cournot and bertrand," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 34(1), pages 71-94, October.
    12. Cason, Timothy N & Mason, Charles F, 1999. "Information Sharing and Tacit Collusion in Laboratory Duopoly Markets," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 37(2), pages 258-281, April.
    13. Lode Li, 1985. "Cournot Oligopoly with Information Sharing," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 16(4), pages 521-536, Winter.
    14. F. T. Dolbear & L. B. Lave & G. Bowman & A. Lieberman & E. Prescott & F. Rueter & R. Sherman, 1968. "Collusion in Oligopoly: An Experiment on the Effect of Numbers and Information," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 82(2), pages 240-259.
    15. B. Douglas Bernheim & Michael D. Whinston, 1990. "Multimarket Contact and Collusive Behavior," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 21(1), pages 1-26, Spring.
    16. Hemenway, David & Moore, Robert L & Whitney, James, 1987. "The Oligopoly Game," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 25(4), pages 727-730, October.
    17. Abreu, Dilip, 1986. "Extremal equilibria of oligopolistic supergames," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 191-225, June.
    18. Charles F. Mason & Owen R. Phillips, 1997. "Information And Cost Asymmetry In Experimental Duopoly Markets," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 79(2), pages 290-299, May.
    19. William Novshek & Hugo Sonnenschein, 1982. "Fulfilled Expectations Cournot Duopoly with Information Acquisition and Release," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 13(1), pages 214-218, Spring.
    20. Mason, Charles F & Phillips, Owen R & Nowell, Clifford, 1992. "Duopoly Behavior in Asymmetric Markets: An Experimental Evaluation," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 74(4), pages 662-670, November.
    21. Keser, Claudia, 1993. "Some Results of Experimental Duopoly Markets with Demand Intertia," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(2), pages 133-151, June.
    22. Steven Pilloff, 1999. "Multimarket Contact in Banking," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 14(2), pages 163-182, March.
    23. Jans, Ivette & Rosenbaum, David I., 1997. "Multimarket contact and pricing: Evidence from the U.S. cement industry," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 15(3), pages 391-412, May.
    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


    Cited by:

    1. Correa, Manuel & García-Quero, Fernando & Ortega-Ortega, Marta, 2016. "A role-play to explain cartel behavior: Discussing the oligopolistic market," International Review of Economics Education, Elsevier, vol. 22(C), pages 8-15.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Saadet Kasman & Adnan Kasman, 2016. "Multimarket contact, market power and financial stability in the Turkish banking industry," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 50(2), pages 361-382, March.
    2. Degl’Innocenti, Marta & Girardone, Claudia & Torluccio, Giuseppe, 2014. "Diversification, multimarket contacts and profits in the leasing industry," Journal of International Financial Markets, Institutions and Money, Elsevier, vol. 31(C), pages 231-252.
    3. Sjaak Hurkens, 2014. "Bayesian Nash equilibrium in “linear” Cournot models with private information about costs," International Journal of Economic Theory, The International Society for Economic Theory, vol. 10(2), pages 203-217, June.
    4. Pham, Tho & Talavera, Oleksandr & Yang, Junhong, 2016. "Multimarket Competition and Profitability: Evidence from Ukrainian banking," MPRA Paper 72376, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    5. Timothy L. Sorenson, 2007. "Credible collusion in multimarket oligopoly," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 28(2), pages 115-128.
    6. Qiu, Larry D. & Zhou, Wen, 2006. "International mergers: Incentives and welfare," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(1), pages 38-58, January.
    7. António Brandão & Joana Pinho, 2015. "Asymmetric Information And Exchange Of Information About Product Differentiation," Bulletin of Economic Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 67(2), pages 166-185, April.
    8. Chun‐Hao Chang & Arun J. Prakash & Shu Yeh, 2004. "Sale of monopoly information and behavior of rivaling clients: A theoretical perspective," Review of Financial Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 13(3), pages 283-304.
    9. Medín, J. Andrés Faíña & Rodríguez, Jesús López & Rodríguez, José López, 2003. "Information Exchanges in Cournot Duopolies," Revista Brasileira de Economia - RBE, EPGE Brazilian School of Economics and Finance - FGV EPGE (Brazil), vol. 57(1), January.
    10. Maura P. Doyle & Christopher M. Snyder, 1999. "Information Sharing and Competition in the Motor Vehicle Industry," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 107(6), pages 1326-1364, December.
    11. Malueg, David A. & Tsutsui, Shunichi O., 1998. "Distributional assumptions in the theory of oligopoly information exchange1," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 16(6), pages 785-797, November.
    12. Silva, Rosario, 2015. "Multimarket contact, differentiation, and prices of chain hotels," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 305-315.
    13. Chang, Chun-Hao & Prakash, Arun J. & Yeh, Shu, 2004. "Sale of monopoly information and behavior of rivaling clients: A theoretical perspective," Review of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 13(3), pages 283-304.
    14. Arie, Guy & Markovich, Sarit & Varela, Mauricio, 2017. "On the competitive effects of multimarket contact," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 116-142.
    15. Jos Jansen, 2008. "Information Acquisition and Strategic Disclosure in Oligopoly," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 17(1), pages 113-148, March.
    16. Myatt, David P. & Wallace, Chris, 2015. "Cournot competition and the social value of information," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 158(PB), pages 466-506.
    17. Fabio Tramontana, 2013. "Information exchange in a Cournot duopoly with nonlinear demand function," DEM Working Papers Series 049, University of Pavia, Department of Economics and Management.
    18. Zhongyuan Hao & Li Jiang & Wenli Wang, 2018. "Impacts of sequential acquisition, market competition mode, and confidentiality on information flow," Naval Research Logistics (NRL), John Wiley & Sons, vol. 65(2), pages 135-159, March.
    19. William Novshek & Lynda Thoman, 2006. "Capacity Choice and Duopoly Incentives for Information Sharing," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 72(4), pages 808-825, April.
    20. Myeonghwan Cho, 2019. "Investor’s Information Sharing with Firms in Oligopoly," Korean Economic Review, Korean Economic Association, vol. 35, pages 439-469.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:coecpo:v:20:y:2002:i:3:p:316-329. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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 CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/weaaaea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.