IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecolet/v120y2013i3p579-582.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Most-favored-customer pricing, product variety, and welfare

Author

Listed:
  • Granero, Lluís M.

Abstract

Most-favored-customer (MFC) clauses are usually seen as anticompetitive co-ordination devices that firms adopt for the purpose of higher prices. Here, I examine the welfare impact of MFC clauses under endogenous product variety. Product variety is relevant because prospective higher prices from MFC clauses can be anticipated by multi-product firms in their provision of product lines. Under such circumstances, I find that these clauses can be socially harmful, but this is not always the case: they tend to be socially neutral for relatively large fixed costs of product-line assortment, harmful for intermediate costs, and beneficial for relatively small costs.

Suggested Citation

  • Granero, Lluís M., 2013. "Most-favored-customer pricing, product variety, and welfare," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 120(3), pages 579-582.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecolet:v:120:y:2013:i:3:p:579-582
    DOI: 10.1016/j.econlet.2013.06.028
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0165176513003108
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.econlet.2013.06.028?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ramon Caminal & Lluís M. Granero, 2012. "Multi‐product Firms and Product Variety," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 79(314), pages 303-328, April.
    2. Neilson, William S. & Winter, Harold, 1992. "Unilateral most-favored-customer pricing : A comparison with Stackelberg," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 38(2), pages 229-232, February.
    3. Thomas E. Cooper, 1986. "Most-Favored-Customer Pricing and Tacit Collusion," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 17(3), pages 377-388, Autumn.
    4. William S. Neilson & Harold Winter, 1993. "Bilateral Most-Favored-Customer Pricing and Collusion," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 24(1), pages 147-155, Spring.
    5. Morten Hviid & Greg Shaffer, 2010. "Matching Own Prices, Rivals' Prices Or Both?," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 58(3), pages 479-506, September.
    6. Joseph E. Stiglitz & G. Frank Mathewson (ed.), 1986. "New Developments in the Analysis of Market Structure," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262690934, April.
    7. Yongmin Chen & Michael H. Riordan, 2007. "Price and Variety in the Spokes Model," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 117(522), pages 897-921, July.
    8. Anne T. Coughlan & Greg Shaffer, 2009. "—Price-Matching Guarantees, Retail Competition, and Product-Line Assortment," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 28(3), pages 580-588, 05-06.
    9. Zhang, Z John, 1995. "Price-Matching Policy and the Principle of Minimum Differentiation," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(3), pages 287-299, September.
    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. Oksana Loginova, 2019. "Price Competition Online: Platforms vs. Branded Websites," Working Papers 1906, Department of Economics, University of Missouri.
    2. Begoña Casino & Lluís M. Granero, 2021. "Green products, market structure, and welfare," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 134(2), pages 103-125, October.

    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. Morten Hviid & Greg Shaffer, 2010. "Matching Own Prices, Rivals' Prices Or Both?," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 58(3), pages 479-506, September.
    2. Pinar Akman & Morten Hviid, 2005. "A Most-Favoured-Customer Guarantee with a Twist," Working Paper series, University of East Anglia, Centre for Competition Policy (CCP) 2005-08, Centre for Competition Policy, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK..
    3. Pavel Kireyev & Vineet Kumar & Elie Ofek, 2017. "Match Your Own Price? Self-Matching as a Retailer’s Multichannel Pricing Strategy," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 36(6), pages 908-930, November.
    4. Kazuhiro Ohnishi, 2010. "Most-Favoured-Customer Pricing and Labour-Managed Oligopoly," Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, Springer, vol. 10(1), pages 33-40, March.
    5. Cohen-Vernik, Dinah & Pazgal, Amit, 2017. "Price Adjustment Policy with Partial Refunds," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 93(4), pages 507-526.
    6. Klibanoff Peter & Kundu Tapas, 2010. "Monopoly Pricing under a Medicaid-Style Most-Favored-Customer Clause and Its Welfare Implication," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 10(1), pages 1-43, August.
    7. Leslie M. Marx & Greg Shaffer, 2004. "Opportunism in Multilateral Vertical Contracting: Nondiscrimination, Exclusivity, and Uniformity: Comment," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 94(3), pages 796-801, June.
    8. Trost, Michael, 2021. "The collusive efficacy of competition clauses in Bertrand Markets with capacity-constrained retailers," Hohenheim Discussion Papers in Business, Economics and Social Sciences 04-2021, University of Hohenheim, Faculty of Business, Economics and Social Sciences.
    9. Constantinou, Evangelos & Bernhardt, Dan, 2018. "The price-matching dilemma," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 97-113.
    10. Yuxin Chen & Chakravarthi Narasimhan & Z. John Zhang, 2001. "Consumer Heterogeneity and Competitive Price-Matching Guarantees," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(3), pages 300-314, June.
    11. Trost, Michael, 2022. "Unraveling the spreading pattern of collusively effective competition clauses," Hohenheim Discussion Papers in Business, Economics and Social Sciences 01-2022, University of Hohenheim, Faculty of Business, Economics and Social Sciences.
    12. Foros, Øystein & Kind, Hans Jarle & Shaffer, Greg, 2015. "Apple's Agency Model and the Role of Resale Price Maintenance," Discussion Papers 2015/32, Norwegian School of Economics, Department of Business and Management Science.
    13. Caminal, Ramon, 2010. "Markets and linguistic diversity," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 76(3), pages 774-790, December.
    14. Kazuhiro Ohnishi, 2011. "A Quantity-Setting Mixed Duopoly with Inventory Investment as a Coordination Device," Annals of Economics and Finance, Society for AEF, vol. 12(1), pages 109-119, May.
    15. Aguirre Pérez, Iñaki, 2011. "Multimarket Competition and Welfare Effects of Price discrimination," IKERLANAK info:eu-repo/grantAgreeme, Universidad del País Vasco - Departamento de Fundamentos del Análisis Económico I.
    16. Arcan Nalca & Tamer Boyaci & Saibal Ray, 2013. "Competitive Price-Matching Guarantees: Equilibrium Analysis of the Availability Verification Clause Under Demand Uncertainty," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 59(4), pages 971-986, April.
    17. Kazuhiro Ohnishi, 2003. "A Note on the Most‐Favoured‐Customer Pricing Policy," Bulletin of Economic Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 55(4), pages 407-413, October.
    18. Eyal Biyalogorsky & Eitan Gerstner, 2004. "Contingent Pricing to Reduce Price Risks," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(1), pages 146-155, March.
    19. Spier, Kathryn E., 2001. "The Use of “Most-Favored-Nation” Clauses in Settlement of Litigation," Berkeley Olin Program in Law & Economics, Working Paper Series qt7hm4d39g, Berkeley Olin Program in Law & Economics.
    20. Xu, Frances Zhiyun, 2011. "Optimal best-price policy," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 29(5), pages 628-643, September.

    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:eee:ecolet:v:120:y:2013:i:3:p:579-582. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/ecolet .

    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.