IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jetheo/v217y2024ics0022053124000267.html

Who wants to be an auctioneer?

Author

Listed:
  • Severinov, Sergei
  • Virag, Gabor

Abstract

This paper endogenizes the decision whether to post a mechanism or to participate in another trader's mechanism in a competing mechanisms environment. With a population of heterogeneous buyers and sellers facing standard search frictions, each trader in our market has to decide whether to post a mechanism or to visit a mechanism posted by a trader on the other side of the market. We show that the equilibrium in this market is unique and is constrained efficient. Inefficient traders (low-value buyers and high-cost sellers) choose to visit with probability one, while more efficient traders randomize between posting and visiting. The resulting allocation differs substantially from the equilibrium allocation in the market where only one side can post mechanisms, especially when trader heterogeneity is significant. This suggests that decentralized marketplaces should allow participating buyers and sellers to self-select into making or receiving offers. We also provide conditions under which posting decisions are monotone, so that more efficient types post with higher probabilities than less efficient types.

Suggested Citation

  • Severinov, Sergei & Virag, Gabor, 2024. "Who wants to be an auctioneer?," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 217(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:jetheo:v:217:y:2024:i:c:s0022053124000267
    DOI: 10.1016/j.jet.2024.105820
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022053124000267
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.jet.2024.105820?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. Attila Ambrus & Rossella Argenziano, 2009. "Asymmetric Networks in Two-Sided Markets," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 1(1), pages 17-52, February.
    2. Michael Peters & Sergei Severinov, 2008. "An ascending double auction," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 37(2), pages 281-306, November.
    3. Border, Kim C, 1991. "Implementation of Reduced Form Auctions: A Geometric Approach," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 59(4), pages 1175-1187, July.
    4. Peters, Michael & Severinov, Sergei, 2006. "Internet auctions with many traders," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 130(1), pages 220-245, September.
    5. Michael Peters, 1997. "A Competitive Distribution of Auctions," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 64(1), pages 97-123.
    6. repec:hrv:faseco:4589709 is not listed on IDEAS
    7. McAfee, R Preston, 1993. "Mechanism Design by Competing Sellers," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 61(6), pages 1281-1312, November.
    8. Burguet, Roberto & Sakovics, Jozsef, 1999. "Imperfect Competition in Auction Designs," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 40(1), pages 231-247, February.
    9. Neeman Zvika & Vulkan Nir, 2010. "Markets versus Negotiations: The Predominance of Centralized Markets," The B.E. Journal of Theoretical Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 10(1), pages 1-30, February.
    10. Derek Stacey, 2019. "Posted Prices, Search and Bargaining," Review of Economic Dynamics, Elsevier for the Society for Economic Dynamics, vol. 33, pages 85-104, July.
    11. Mark A. Satterthwaite & Steven R. Williams, 1989. "The Rate of Convergence to Efficiency in the Buyer's Bid Double Auction as the Market Becomes Large," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 56(4), pages 477-498.
    12. Shouyong Shi & Alain Delacroix, 2018. "Should Buyers or Sellers Organize Trade in a Frictional Market?," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 133(4), pages 2171-2214.
    13. Peters, Michael & Severinov, Sergei, 1997. "Competition among Sellers Who Offer Auctions Instead of Prices," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 75(1), pages 141-179, July.
    14. Peters, Michael, 1984. "Bertrand Equilibrium with Capacity Constraints and Restricted Mobility," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 52(5), pages 1117-1127, September.
    15. Michael Peters & Balázs Szentes, 2012. "Definable and Contractible Contracts," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 80(1), pages 363-411, January.
    16. Jed DeVaro & Oliver Gürtler, 2018. "Advertising and Labor Market Matching: A Tour through the Times," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 36(1), pages 253-307.
    17. James Albrecht & Pieter A. Gautier & Susan Vroman, 2014. "Efficient Entry in Competing Auctions," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 104(10), pages 3288-3296, October.
    18. Semyon Malamud & Marzena Rostek, 2017. "Decentralized Exchange," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 107(11), pages 3320-3362, November.
    19. 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.
    20. Coles, Melvyn G. & Eeckhout, Jan, 2003. "Indeterminacy and directed search," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 111(2), pages 265-276, August.
    21. Virág, Gábor, 2011. "High profit equilibria in directed search models," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 71(1), pages 224-234, January.
    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. Selcuk, Cemil, 2024. "All-pay vs. standard auctions when competing for budget-constrained buyers," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 242(C).
    2. Cemil Selcuk, 2024. "Competition for Budget-Constrained Buyers: Exploring All-Pay Auctions," Papers 2404.08762, arXiv.org.
    3. Burguet, Roberto & Sákovics, József, 2024. "Simultaneous bidding in competing auctions," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 237(C).

    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. Peck, James, 2018. "Competing mechanisms with multi-unit consumer demand," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 177(C), pages 126-161.
    2. Ángel Hernando Veciana, 2001. "Competition Among Auctioneers," Working Papers. Serie AD 2001-18, Instituto Valenciano de Investigaciones Económicas, S.A. (Ivie).
    3. Virág, Gábor, 2011. "High profit equilibria in directed search models," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 71(1), pages 224-234, January.
    4. Han, Seungjin, 2015. "Robust competitive auctions," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 207-210.
    5. Peters, Michael & Severinov, Sergei, 2006. "Internet auctions with many traders," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 130(1), pages 220-245, September.
    6. Kircher, Philipp & Wright, Randall & Julien, Benoit & Guerrieri, Veronica, 2017. "Directed Search: A Guided Tour," CEPR Discussion Papers 12315, Centre for Economic Policy Research.
    7. Roberto Burguet, 2000. "Auction theory: a guided tour," Investigaciones Economicas, Fundación SEPI, vol. 24(1), pages 3-50, January.
    8. Damian Damianov, 2012. "Seller competition by mechanism design," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 51(1), pages 105-137, September.
    9. Thomas Kittsteiner & Marion Ott & Richard Steinberg, 2022. "Competing Combinatorial Auctions," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 33(4), pages 1130-1137, December.
    10. Gabor Virag, 2008. "Buyer heterogeneity and competing mechanism," 2008 Meeting Papers 702, Society for Economic Dynamics.
    11. Feess, Eberhard & Grund, Christian & Walzl, Markus & Wohlschlegel, Ansgar, 2020. "Competing trade mechanisms and monotone mechanism choice," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 280(3), pages 1108-1121.
    12. Richard Dutu & Benoit Julien & Ian King, 2009. "Liquidity Constrained Competing Auctions," Department of Economics - Working Papers Series 1068, The University of Melbourne.
    13. Coles, Melvyn G. & Eeckhout, Jan, 2003. "Indeterminacy and directed search," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 111(2), pages 265-276, August.
    14. Philippe Jehiel & Laurent Lamy, 2011. "Absolute auctions and secret reserve prices: Why are they used?," Levine's Working Paper Archive 786969000000000316, David K. Levine.
    15. Auster, Sarah & Gottardi, Piero, 2019. "Competing mechanisms in markets for lemons," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 14(3), September.
    16. Burguet, Roberto & Sákovics, József, 2024. "Simultaneous bidding in competing auctions," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 237(C).
    17. Attar, Andrea & Campioni, Eloisa & Piaser, Gwenaël, 2018. "On competing mechanisms under exclusive competition," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 1-15.
    18. Cai, Xiaoming & Gautier, Pieter A. & Wolthoff, Ronald P., 2017. "Search frictions, competing mechanisms and optimal market segmentation," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 169(C), pages 453-473.
    19. Frédéric Gavrel, 2019. "Directed search, mismatch and efficiency," Working Papers halshs-02083453, HAL.
    20. Seungjin Han, 2020. "Quasi Ex-Post Equilibrium in Competing Mechanisms," Department of Economics Working Papers 2020-11, McMaster University.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • D43 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design - - - Oligopoly and Other Forms of Market Imperfection
    • D44 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design - - - Auctions
    • D47 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design - - - Market Design
    • D82 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Asymmetric and Private Information; Mechanism Design
    • D83 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Search; Learning; Information and Knowledge; Communication; Belief; Unawareness

    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:jetheo:v:217:y:2024:i:c:s0022053124000267. 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/622869 .

    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.