Patent-investment games under asymmetric information
This paper analyzes preemptive patenting in a two-stage real options game where an incumbent firm competes with a potential entrant firm for the patent of a substitute product in a product market with profit flow uncertainty. The incumbent suffers loss of monopoly in the product market if the entrant acquires the patent of a substitute product and later commercializes the product. Our patent-investment game model assumes that the entrant has complete information on the incumbent’s commercialization cost while the incumbent only knows the distribution of the entrant’s cost. We investigate the impact of information asymmetry on the preemption strategies adopted by the two competing firms on patenting the substitute product by comparing the optimal preemption strategies and the real option value functions of the two competing firms under complete information and information asymmetry. Our analysis reveals that the informationally disadvantaged incumbent always suffers from loss in its real option value of investment since it tends to act more aggressively in competing for the patent. On the other hand, the real option value of investment of the informationally advantaged entrant may be undermined or enhanced. The incumbent’s aggressive response under information asymmetry may lead to reversal of winner in the patent race. We also examine how information asymmetry may affect the occurrence of sleeping patent and the corresponding expected duration between the two stages of patenting and product commercialization.
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.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Volume (Year): 223 (2012)
Issue (Month): 2 ()
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/eor|
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.:
- Fudenberg, Drew & Levine, David, 1986.
"Limit games and limit equilibria,"
Journal of Economic Theory,
Elsevier, vol. 38(2), pages 261-279, April.
- Drew Fudenberg & David Levine, 1983. "Limit Games and Limit Equilibria," UCLA Economics Working Papers 289, UCLA Department of Economics.
- Fudenberg, Drew & Levine, David, 1986. "Limit Games and Limit Equilibria," Scholarly Articles 3350443, Harvard University Department of Economics.
- Drew Fudenberg & David K. Levine, 1986. "Limit Games and Limit Equilibria," Levine's Working Paper Archive 220, David K. Levine.
- Jacco Thijssen & Kuno Huisman & Peter Kort, 2006. "The effects of information on strategic investment and welfare," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 28(2), pages 399-424, 06.
- J.J.J. Thijssen & K.J.M. Huisman & P.M. Kort, 2003. "The Effects of Information on Strategic Investment and Welfare," Trinity Economics Papers 200310, Trinity College Dublin, Department of Economics.
- Lambrecht, Bart & Perraudin, William, 2003. "Real options and preemption under incomplete information," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 27(4), pages 619-643, February.
- Chi Leung & Yue Kwok, 2011. "Real options game analysis of sleeping patents," Decisions in Economics and Finance, Springer;Associazione per la Matematica, vol. 34(1), pages 41-65, May.
- Harris, Christopher J & Vickers, John S, 1985. "Patent Races and the Persistence of Monopoly," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(4), pages 461-481, June.
- Gilbert, Richard J & Newbery, David M G, 1982. "Preemptive Patenting and the Persistence of Monopoly," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 72(3), pages 514-526, June. Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)