IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ormnsc/v66y2020i6p2653-2676.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

On Optimal Auctions for Mixing Exclusive and Shared Matching in Platforms

Author

Listed:
  • Hemant K. Bhargava

    (Graduate School of Management, University of California Davis, Davis, California 95616)

  • Gergely Csapó

    (School of Business and Economics, Maastricht University, Maastricht, Limburg 6200 MD, Netherlands)

  • Rudolf Müller

    (School of Business and Economics, Maastricht University, Maastricht, Limburg 6200 MD, Netherlands)

Abstract

Platforms create value by matching participants on alternate sides of the marketplace. Although many platforms practice one-to-one matching (e.g., Uber), others can conduct and monetize one-to-many simultaneous matches (e.g., lead-marketing platforms). Both formats involve one dimension of private information, a participant’s valuation for exclusive or shared allocation, respectively. This paper studies the problem of designing an auction format for platforms that mix the modes rather than limit to one and, therefore, involve both dimensions of information. We focus on incentive-compatible auctions (i.e., where truthful bidding is optimal) because of ease of participation and implementation. We formulate the problem to find the revenue-maximizing incentive-compatible auction as a mathematical program. Although hard to solve, the mathematical program leads to heuristic auction designs that are simple to implement, provide good revenue, and have speedy performance, all critical in practice. It also enables creation of upper bounds on the (unknown) optimal auction revenue, which are useful benchmarks for our proposed auction designs. By demonstrating a tight gap for our proposed two-dimensional reserve-price-based mechanism, we prove that it has excellent revenue performance and places low information and computational burden on the platform and participants.

Suggested Citation

  • Hemant K. Bhargava & Gergely Csapó & Rudolf Müller, 2020. "On Optimal Auctions for Mixing Exclusive and Shared Matching in Platforms," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 66(6), pages 2653-2676, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:inm:ormnsc:v:66:y:2020:i:6:p:2653-2676
    DOI: 10.1287/mnsc.2019.3309
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2019.3309
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/mnsc.2019.3309?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jehiel, Philippe & Moldovanu, Benny & Stacchetti, Ennio, 1996. "How (Not) to Sell Nuclear Weapons," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 86(4), pages 814-829, September.
    2. Jorge Aseff & Hector Chade, 2008. "An optimal auction with identity‐dependent externalities," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 39(3), pages 731-746, September.
    3. Edward Clarke, 1971. "Multipart pricing of public goods," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 11(1), pages 17-33, September.
    4. Milgrom,Paul, 2004. "Putting Auction Theory to Work," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521536721.
    5. William Vickrey, 1961. "Counterspeculation, Auctions, And Competitive Sealed Tenders," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 16(1), pages 8-37, March.
    6. Ilya Segal, 1999. "Contracting with Externalities," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 114(2), pages 337-388.
    7. Jason D. Hartline, 2012. "Approximation in Mechanism Design," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 102(3), pages 330-336, May.
    8. Nicolás Figueroa & Vasiliki Skreta, 2011. "Optimal allocation mechanisms with single-dimensional private information," Review of Economic Design, Springer;Society for Economic Design, vol. 15(3), pages 213-243, September.
    9. Dhangwatnotai, Peerapong & Roughgarden, Tim & Yan, Qiqi, 2015. "Revenue maximization with a single sample," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 318-333.
    10. Hal R. Varian, 2009. "Online Ad Auctions," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 99(2), pages 430-434, May.
    11. Roger B. Myerson, 1981. "Optimal Auction Design," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 6(1), pages 58-73, February.
    12. Groves, Theodore, 1973. "Incentives in Teams," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 41(4), pages 617-631, July.
    13. Amin Sayedi & Kinshuk Jerath & Marjan Baghaie, 2018. "Exclusive Placement in Online Advertising," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 37(6), pages 970-986, November.
    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. Sameer Mehta & Milind Dawande & Ganesh Janakiraman & Vijay Mookerjee, 2022. "An Approximation Scheme for Data Monetization," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 31(6), pages 2412-2428, June.
    2. Sameer Mehta & Milind Dawande & Ganesh Janakiraman & Vijay Mookerjee, 2021. "How to Sell a Data Set? Pricing Policies for Data Monetization," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 32(4), pages 1281-1297, December.

    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. Song, Yangwei, 2018. "Efficient Implementation with Interdependent Valuations and Maxmin Agents," Rationality and Competition Discussion Paper Series 92, CRC TRR 190 Rationality and Competition.
    2. Tim Roughgarden & Inbal Talgam-Cohen & Qiqi Yan, 2019. "Robust Auctions for Revenue via Enhanced Competition," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 68(4), pages 1074-1094, July.
    3. Song, Yangwei, 2018. "Efficient implementation with interdependent valuations and maxmin agents," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 176(C), pages 693-726.
    4. Loertscher, Simon & Mezzetti, Claudio, 2021. "A dominant strategy, double clock auction with estimation-based tatonnement," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 16(3), July.
    5. Philippe Jehiel & Laurent Lamy, 2018. "A Mechanism Design Approach to the Tiebout Hypothesis," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 126(2), pages 735-760.
    6. Bierbrauer, Felix & Netzer, Nick, 2016. "Mechanism design and intentions," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 163(C), pages 557-603.
    7. Committee, Nobel Prize, 2020. "Improvements to auction theory and inventions of new auction formats," Nobel Prize in Economics documents 2020-2, Nobel Prize Committee.
    8. Carbajal, Juan Carlos & Ely, Jeffrey C., 2013. "Mechanism design without revenue equivalence," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 148(1), pages 104-133.
    9. Ronald M. Harstad & Aleksandar Saša Pekeč, 2008. "Relevance to Practice and Auction Theory: A Memorial Essay for Michael Rothkopf," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 38(5), pages 367-380, October.
    10. Kenneth C. Wilbur & Linli Xu & David Kempe, 2013. "Correcting Audience Externalities in Television Advertising," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(6), pages 892-912, November.
    11. Devanur, Nikhil R. & Hartline, Jason D. & Yan, Qiqi, 2015. "Envy freedom and prior-free mechanism design," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 156(C), pages 103-143.
    12. Yan Chen & Peter Cramton & John A. List & Axel Ockenfels, 2021. "Market Design, Human Behavior, and Management," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(9), pages 5317-5348, September.
    13. Lu, Jingfeng & Ye, Lixin, 2013. "Efficient and optimal mechanisms with private information acquisition costs," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 148(1), pages 393-408.
    14. Sebastián D. Bauer, 2023. "Buyers’ welfare maximizing auction design," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 52(2), pages 555-567, June.
    15. Yi Zhu & Kenneth C. Wilbur, 2011. "Hybrid Advertising Auctions," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 30(2), pages 249-273, 03-04.
    16. Ragavendran Gopalakrishnan & Eric Bax & Krishna Prasad Chitrapura & Sachin Garg, 2015. "Portfolio Allocation for Sellers in Online Advertising," Papers 1506.02020, arXiv.org.
    17. Tim Roughgarden & Inbal Talgam-Cohen, 2018. "Approximately Optimal Mechanism Design," Papers 1812.11896, arXiv.org, revised Aug 2020.
    18. Nisan, Noam, 2015. "Algorithmic Mechanism Design," Handbook of Game Theory with Economic Applications,, Elsevier.
    19. Jing Chen & Silvio Micali, 2016. "Leveraging Possibilistic Beliefs in Unrestricted Combinatorial Auctions," Games, MDPI, vol. 7(4), pages 1-19, October.
    20. James Li & Eric Bax & Nilanjan Roy & Andrea Leistra, 2015. "VCG Payments for Portfolio Allocations in Online Advertising," Papers 1506.02013, arXiv.org.

    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:inm:ormnsc:v:66:y:2020:i:6:p:2653-2676. 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: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.html .

    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.