IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article or follow this journal

Acquisition vsus de novo entry: A theoretical appraisal

  • Tarola, Ornella

In this paper we generalize the approach developed in the context of banking competition by Gabszewicz et al. (2011). In an entry/acquisition game, we allow the potential entrant in a vertically differentiated market to offer a variant lying at any level of the quality ladder and playing a priori either the role of acquirer or acquired firm. This more general approach enables to give account of a wider set among the different types of acquisitions taking place worldwide. Not only does it constitute a natural toolbox for representing the choice between acquisition vsus greenfield considered in trade theory, but it also allows to capture the exchange of innovation's ownership via acquisition, as analyzed in the literature of innovation.

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.

File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1090944312000531
Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

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.

Article provided by Elsevier in its journal Research in Economics.

Volume (Year): 67 (2013)
Issue (Month): 2 ()
Pages: 179-188

as
in new window

Handle: RePEc:eee:reecon:v:67:y:2013:i:2:p:179-188
Contact details of provider: Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/inca/622941

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.:

as in new window
  1. Thomas Müller, 2007. "Analyzing Modes of Foreign Entry: Greenfield Investment versus Acquisition," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 15(1), pages 93-111, 02.
  2. Eicher, Theo & Kang, Jong Woo, 2005. "Trade, foreign direct investment or acquisition: Optimal entry modes for multinationals," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 77(1), pages 207-228, June.
  3. Norbäck, Pehr-Johan & Persson, Lars & Svensson, Roger, 2011. "Creative Destruction and Productive Preemption," CEPR Discussion Papers 8281, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
  4. Nocke, Volker & Yeaple, Stephen, 2007. "Cross-border mergers and acquisitions vs. greenfield foreign direct investment: The role of firm heterogeneity," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 72(2), pages 336-365, July.
  5. Wauthy, X., 1994. "Quality Choice in Models of Vertical Differentiation," Discussion Papers (IRES - Institut de Recherches Economiques et Sociales) 1994033, Université catholique de Louvain, Institut de Recherches Economiques et Sociales (IRES).
  6. Mussa, Michael & Rosen, Sherwin, 1978. "Monopoly and product quality," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 301-317, August.
  7. Shaked, Avner & Sutton, John, 1982. "Relaxing Price Competition through Product Differentiation," Review of Economic Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 49(1), pages 3-13, January.
  8. Horst Raff & Michael Ryan & Frank Stähler, 2006. "Asset Ownership and Foreign-Market Entry," CESifo Working Paper Series 1676, CESifo Group Munich.
  9. Joshua S. Gans & David H. Hsu & Scott Stern, 2002. "When Does Start-Up Innovation Spur the Gale of Creative Destruction?," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 33(4), pages 571-586, Winter.
  10. GABSZEWICZ, Jean J. & THISSE, Jacques-François, . "Price competition, quality and income disparities," CORE Discussion Papers RP -370, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
  11. Holger Görg, 2000. "Analysing foreign market entry – The choice between greenfield investment and acquisitions," Journal of Economic Studies, Emerald Group Publishing, vol. 27(3), pages 165-181, September.
  12. Joshua S. Cans & Scott Stern, 2000. "Incumbency and R&D Incentives: Licensing the Gale of Creative Destruction," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 9(4), pages 485-511, December.
  13. Ralph Siebert, 2003. "The Introduction of New Product Qualities by Incumbent Firms: Market Proliferation versus Cannibalization," CIG Working Papers SP II 2003-11, Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin (WZB), Research Unit: Competition and Innovation (CIG).
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:reecon:v:67:y:2013:i:2:p:179-188. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Zhang, Lei)

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.