IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/atlecj/v37y2009i2p187-196.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Exchange Rates and Concurrent Leasing and Selling in Durable-Goods Monopoly

Author

Listed:
  • Gregory Goering
  • Michael Pippenger

Abstract

Theoretical durable-goods models suggest that a monopolist will prefer to lease rather than sell units of output due to the seller’s commitment problem with potential buyers. However, many monopolistic durable-goods manufactures are commonly observed simultaneously leasing and selling output. We provide a theoretical rationale for this observed behavior in firms engaged in trade with a foreign country. In a simple two-period setting we show that a foreign durable-goods monopolist will concurrently lease and sell output if the expected future exchange rate is lower than the current rate. With this concurrent strategy the firm earns higher profit than a pure rental or sales regime. Additionally, our model provides additional theoretical underpinnings for the empirical finding that increases in expected future exchange rates increase the current sales price of durable products. Finally, our analysis examines the role of product durability in determining exchange rate pass-though to domestic prices. Copyright International Atlantic Economic Society 2009

Suggested Citation

  • Gregory Goering & Michael Pippenger, 2009. "Exchange Rates and Concurrent Leasing and Selling in Durable-Goods Monopoly," Atlantic Economic Journal, Springer;International Atlantic Economic Society, vol. 37(2), pages 187-196, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:kap:atlecj:v:37:y:2009:i:2:p:187-196
    DOI: 10.1007/s11293-009-9170-1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s11293-009-9170-1
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11293-009-9170-1?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 search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. repec:bla:jemstr:v:4:y:1995:i:1:p:69-84:a is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Al-Abri, Almukhtar S. & Goodwin, Barry K., 2009. "Re-examining the exchange rate pass-through into import prices using non-linear estimation techniques: Threshold cointegration," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 18(1), pages 142-161, January.
    3. Brissimis, Sophocles N. & Kosma, Theodora S., 2007. "Market power and exchange rate pass-through," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 16(2), pages 202-222.
    4. Campa, Jose M. & Goldberg, Linda S., 2002. "Exchange rate pass-through into import prices: A macro or micro phenomenon?," IESE Research Papers D/475, IESE Business School.
    5. Pinelopi Koujianou Goldberg & Michael M. Knetter, 1997. "Goods Prices and Exchange Rates: What Have We Learned?," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 35(3), pages 1243-1272, September.
    6. Bulow, Jeremy I, 1982. "Durable-Goods Monopolists," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 90(2), pages 314-332, April.
    7. Coase, Ronald H, 1972. "Durability and Monopoly," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 15(1), pages 143-149, April.
    8. Driskill, Robert A. & Horowitz, Andrew W., 1996. "Durability and strategic trade Are there rents to be captured?," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(1-2), pages 179-194, August.
    9. Gul, Faruk & Sonnenschein, Hugo & Wilson, Robert, 1986. "Foundations of dynamic monopoly and the coase conjecture," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 155-190, June.
    10. repec:bla:econom:v:64:y:1997:i:253:p:137-54 is not listed on IDEAS
    11. Atish Ghosh & Holger Wolf, 2001. "Imperfect Exchange Rate Passthrough: Strategic Pricing and Menu Costs," CESifo Working Paper Series 436, CESifo.
    12. José Manuel Campa & Linda S. Goldberg, 2005. "Exchange Rate Pass-Through into Import Prices," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 87(4), pages 679-690, November.
    13. Taylor, John B., 2000. "Low inflation, pass-through, and the pricing power of firms," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 44(7), pages 1389-1408, June.
    14. Lee, Jaewoo, 1998. "Intertemporal substitution in imported durables," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 44(1), pages 113-133, February.
    15. Paul S. Calem, 1997. "Durable Goods Monopoly with Limited Choice of Commitment Strategy: When Should the Monopolist Precommit?," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 64(1), pages 104-117, July.
    16. Bagnoli, Mark & Salant, Stephen W & Swierzbinski, Joseph E, 1989. "Durable-Goods Monopoly with Discrete Demand," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 97(6), pages 1459-1478, December.
    17. Nancy L. Stokey, 1981. "Rational Expectations and Durable Goods Pricing," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 12(1), pages 112-128, Spring.
    18. Kahn, Charles M, 1986. "The Durable Goods Monopolist and Consistency with Increasing Costs," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 54(2), pages 275-294, March.
    19. Adolfson, Malin, 2001. "Export price responses to exogenous exchange rate movements," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 71(1), pages 91-96, April.
    20. Purohit, Devavrat, 1995. "Marketing Channels and the Durable Goods Monopolist: Renting versus Selling Reconsidered," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 4(1), pages 69-84, Spring.
    21. Bhatt, Swati, 1989. "Demand uncertainty in a durable goods monopoly," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 7(3), pages 341-355.
    22. Jeremy Bulow, 1986. "An Economic Theory of Planned Obsolescence," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 101(4), pages 729-749.
    23. Butz, David A, 1990. "Durable-Good Monopoly and Best-Price Provisions," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 80(5), pages 1062-1076, December.
    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. Gregory E. Goering, 2012. "Taxation and Durable-Goods Monopoly: Does a Current Tax Influence Firm Behavior?," Review of Economics & Finance, Better Advances Press, Canada, vol. 2, pages 20-28, August.

    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. Gregory Goering & Michael Pippenger, 2003. "Dynamic consistency and monopoly," Atlantic Economic Journal, Springer;International Atlantic Economic Society, vol. 31(2), pages 188-194, June.
    2. Michael Waldman, 2004. "Antitrust Perspectives for Durable-Goods Markets," CESifo Working Paper Series 1306, CESifo.
    3. Francesco Nava & Pasquale Schiraldi, 2019. "Differentiated Durable Goods Monopoly: A Robust Coase Conjecture," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 109(5), pages 1930-1968, May.
    4. Usategui Díaz de Otalora, José María, 2001. "Commitment Power in a Non-Stationary Durable-Good Market," BILTOKI 1134-8984, Universidad del País Vasco - Departamento de Economía Aplicada III (Econometría y Estadística).
    5. Cerquera Dussán, Daniel, 2007. "Durable Goods, Innovation and Network Externalities," ZEW Discussion Papers 07-086, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    6. Gregory E. Goering, 2012. "Taxation and Durable-Goods Monopoly: Does a Current Tax Influence Firm Behavior?," Review of Economics & Finance, Better Advances Press, Canada, vol. 2, pages 20-28, August.
    7. Fethke, Gary & Jagannathan, Raj, 2000. "Why would a durable good monopolist also produce a cost-inefficient nondurable good?," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 18(5), pages 793-812, July.
    8. Paul S. Calem, 1997. "Durable Goods Monopoly with Limited Choice of Commitment Strategy: When Should the Monopolist Precommit?," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 64(1), pages 104-117, July.
    9. Edward Kutsoati & Jan Zabojnik, 2001. "Durable Goods Monopoly, Learning-by-doing and "Sleeping Patents"," Discussion Papers Series, Department of Economics, Tufts University 0105, Department of Economics, Tufts University.
    10. Tian Xia & Richard Sexton, 2010. "Brand or Variety Choices and Periodic Sales as Substitute Instruments for Monopoly Price Discrimination," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 36(4), pages 333-349, June.
    11. Gerstle, Ari D. & Waldman, Michael, 2016. "Mergers in durable-goods industries: A re-examination of market power and welfare effects," Research in Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(4), pages 677-692.
    12. Coury, Tarek & Petkov, Vladimir P., 2008. "Delegation and commitment in durable goods monopolies," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 63(1), pages 41-55, May.
    13. Jong‐Hee Hahn, 2006. "Damaged durable goods," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 37(1), pages 121-133, March.
    14. Kumar, Praveen, 2006. "Intertemporal price-quality discrimination and the Coase conjecture," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 42(7-8), pages 896-940, November.
    15. Saracho, Ana I., 2011. "Licensing information goods," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 187-199, March.
    16. Karp, Larry, 1996. "Depreciation erodes the Coase Conjecture," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 40(2), pages 473-490, February.
    17. Gregory Goering & Michael Pippenger, 2002. "Durable Goods Monopoly and Forward Markets," International Journal of the Economics of Business, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 9(2), pages 271-282.
    18. Waldman, Michael, 1997. "Eliminating the Market for Secondhand Goods: An Alternative Explanation for Leasing," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 40(1), pages 61-92, April.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Monopoly; Durable-goods; Exchange rates; D4; F1; L1;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D4 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design
    • F1 - International Economics - - Trade
    • L1 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance

    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:kap:atlecj:v:37:y:2009:i:2:p:187-196. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.