IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/gamebe/v153y2025icp42-66.html

The matching benefits of market thickness

Author

Listed:
  • Loertscher, Simon
  • Muir, Ellen V.

Abstract

The ability of larger markets to mitigate the incentive problem created by private information has been the focus of a sizable economics literature. In contrast, the fact that thicker markets also reduce the double coincidence of wants problem has received little attention. Modeling thin markets as bilateral trade involving independent private values and thick markets as Walrasian markets with a continuum of traders, we analyze and quantify the matching benefits of market thickness. These benefits increase with the nicheness of a product, which we measure as the mass of values and costs outside an interval of overlapping support where there are positive gains from trade. For sufficient nicheness, profit-maximizing intermediaries operating thick markets outperform ex post efficient bilateral trade. However, with bilateral trade as an outside option, traders of niche products are most vulnerable to intermediaries' market power. Extensions consider fixed costs of operating thick markets and finitely thick markets.

Suggested Citation

  • Loertscher, Simon & Muir, Ellen V., 2025. "The matching benefits of market thickness," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 153(C), pages 42-66.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:gamebe:v:153:y:2025:i:c:p:42-66
    DOI: 10.1016/j.geb.2025.05.010
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0899825625000764
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.geb.2025.05.010?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

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Erik Brynjolfsson & Yu (Jeffrey) Hu & Michael D. Smith, 2003. "Consumer Surplus in the Digital Economy: Estimating the Value of Increased Product Variety at Online Booksellers," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 49(11), pages 1580-1596, November.
    2. Loertscher, Simon & Mezzetti, Claudio, 2021. "A dominant strategy, double clock auction with estimation-based tatonnement," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 16(3), July.
    3. Daniel F. Spulber, 2002. "Market Microstructure and Incentives to Invest," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 110(2), pages 352-381, April.
    4. Bulow, Jeremy & Klemperer, Paul, 1996. "Auctions versus Negotiations," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 86(1), pages 180-194, March.
    5. Loertscher, Simon & Muir, Ellen V. & Taylor, Peter G., 2022. "Optimal market thickness," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 200(C).
    6. John Rust & George Hall, 2003. "Middlemen versus Market Makers: A Theory of Competitive Exchange," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 111(2), pages 353-403, April.
    7. Bulow, Jeremy & Roberts, John, 1989. "The Simple Economics of Optimal Auctions," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 97(5), pages 1060-1090, October.
    8. Hagerty, Kathleen M. & Rogerson, William P., 1987. "Robust trading mechanisms," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 42(1), pages 94-107, June.
    9. William Vickrey, 1961. "Counterspeculation, Auctions, And Competitive Sealed Tenders," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 16(1), pages 8-37, March.
    10. McAfee, R. Preston, 1992. "A dominant strategy double auction," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 56(2), pages 434-450, April.
    11. Gehrig, Thomas, 1993. "Intermediation in Search Markets," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 2(1), pages 97-120, Spring.
    12. Kojima, Fuhito & Yamashita, Takuro, 2017. "Double auction with interdependent values: incentives and efficiency," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 12(3), September.
    13. Gresik, Thomas A. & Satterthwaite, Mark A., 1989. "The rate at which a simple market converges to efficiency as the number of traders increases: An asymptotic result for optimal trading mechanisms," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 304-332, June.
    14. Loertscher, Simon & Niedermayer, Andras, 2020. "Entry-deterring agency," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 172-188.
    15. Myerson, Roger B. & Satterthwaite, Mark A., 1983. "Efficient mechanisms for bilateral trading," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 265-281, April.
    16. Rustichini, Aldo & Satterthwaite, Mark A & Williams, Steven R, 1994. "Convergence to Efficiency in a Simple Market with Incomplete Information," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 62(5), pages 1041-1063, September.
    17. Mussa, Michael & Rosen, Sherwin, 1978. "Monopoly and product quality," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 301-317, August.
    18. Martin W. Cripps & Jeroen M. Swinkels, 2006. "Efficiency of Large Double Auctions," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 74(1), pages 47-92, January.
    19. Roger B. Myerson, 1981. "Optimal Auction Design," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 6(1), pages 58-73, February.
    20. Simon Loertscher & Ellen V. Muir, 2022. "Monopoly Pricing, Optimal Randomization, and Resale," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 130(3), pages 566-635.
    21. Mark A. Satterthwaite & Steven R. Williams, 2002. "The Optimality of a Simple Market Mechanism," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 70(5), pages 1841-1863, September.
    22. Tymon Tatur, 2005. "On the Trade off Between Deficit and Inefficiency and the Double Auction with a Fixed Transaction Fee," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 73(2), pages 517-570, March.
    23. Joel Waldfogel, 2017. "How Digitization Has Created a Golden Age of Music, Movies, Books, and Television," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 31(3), pages 195-214, Summer.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Loertscher, Simon & Mezzetti, Claudio, 2021. "A dominant strategy, double clock auction with estimation-based tatonnement," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 16(3), July.
    2. Loertscher, Simon & Marx, Leslie M., 2020. "Asymptotically optimal prior-free clock auctions," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 187(C).
    3. Kiho Yoon, 2021. "Robust double auction mechanisms," Papers 2102.00669, arXiv.org, revised May 2022.
    4. Yoon, Kiho, 2008. "The participatory Vickrey-Clarke-Groves mechanism," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 44(3-4), pages 324-336, February.
    5. Loertscher, Simon & Muir, Ellen V. & Taylor, Peter G., 2022. "Optimal market thickness," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 200(C).
    6. Bichler, Martin & Kohring, Nils & Oberlechner, Matthias & Pieroth, Fabian R., 2023. "Learning equilibrium in bilateral bargaining games," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 311(2), pages 660-678.
    7. Dütting, Paul & Talgam-Cohen, Inbal & Roughgarden, Tim, 2017. "Modularity and greed in double auctions," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 83199, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    8. Satterthwaite, Mark A. & Williams, Steven R. & Zachariadis, Konstantinos E., 2014. "Optimality versus practicality in market design: A comparison of two double auctions," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 248-263.
    9. Sarkar, Soumendu, 2018. "Convergence of VCG mechanism to ex-post budget balance in a model of land acquisition," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 37-46.
    10. Soumendu Sarkar, 2022. "Optimal mechanism for land acquisition," Review of Economic Design, Springer;Society for Economic Design, vol. 26(1), pages 87-116, March.
    11. Song, Yangwei, 2022. "Approximate Bayesian Implementation and Exact Maxmin Implementation: An Equivalence," Rationality and Competition Discussion Paper Series 362, CRC TRR 190 Rationality and Competition.
    12. Loertscher, Simon & Niedermayer, Andras, 2020. "Entry-deterring agency," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 172-188.
    13. Tobias Widmer & Paul Karaenke & Vijayan Sugumaran, 2021. "Two‐sided service markets: Effects of quality differentiation on market efficiency," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 42(3), pages 588-604, April.
    14. Moshe Babaioff & Kira Goldner & Yannai A. Gonczarowski, 2019. "Bulow-Klemperer-Style Results for Welfare Maximization in Two-Sided Markets," Papers 1903.06696, arXiv.org, revised Dec 2019.
    15. Sanghoon Kim, 2024. "Informed agent’s advice in bargaining under two-sided incomplete information," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 143(2), pages 183-205, October.
    16. Dütting, Paul & Talgam-Cohen, Inbal & Roughgarden, Tim, 2017. "Modularity and greed in double auctions," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 59-83.
    17. Renato Gomes & Alessandro Pavan, 2011. "Price Discrimination in Many-to-Many Matching Markets," Discussion Papers 1540, Northwestern University, Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science.
    18. Loertscher, Simon & Marx, Leslie M., 2023. "Asymptotically optimal prior-free asset market mechanisms," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 137(C), pages 68-90.
    19. Yoon, Kiho, 2001. "The Modified Vickrey Double Auction," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 101(2), pages 572-584, December.
    20. Loertscher, Simon & Marx, Leslie M., 2017. "Club good intermediaries," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 430-459.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • D47 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design - - - Market Design
    • D82 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Asymmetric and Private Information; Mechanism Design
    • L12 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Monopoly; Monopolization Strategies

    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:eee:gamebe:v:153:y:2025:i:c:p:42-66. 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/inca/622836 .

    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.