IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/jincot/v13y2013i4p563-597.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Capacity Constrained Firms and Expansion Subsidies: Should Governments Avoid Generous Subsidies?

Author

Listed:
  • Felix Munoz-Garcia
  • Gulnara Zaynutdinova

Abstract

This paper examines entry deterrence and signaling when an incumbent firm experiences capacity constraints. Our results show that if the costs that constrained and unconstrained incumbents incur when expanding their facilities are substantially different, separating equilibria can be supported under large parameter values whereby information is perfectly transmitted to the entrant. If, in contrast, both types of incumbent face similar expansion costs, subsidies that reduce expansion costs can help move the industry from a pooling to a separating equilibrium with associated efficient entry. Nonetheless, our results demonstrate that if subsidies are very generous entry patterns remain unaffected, suggesting a potential disadvantage of policies that significantly reduce firms’ expansion costs. Copyright Springer Science+Business Media New York 2013

Suggested Citation

  • Felix Munoz-Garcia & Gulnara Zaynutdinova, 2013. "Capacity Constrained Firms and Expansion Subsidies: Should Governments Avoid Generous Subsidies?," Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, Springer, vol. 13(4), pages 563-597, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:kap:jincot:v:13:y:2013:i:4:p:563-597
    DOI: 10.1007/s10842-012-0135-8
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s10842-012-0135-8
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10842-012-0135-8?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. Poitevin, Michel, 1990. "Strategic financial signalling," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 8(4), pages 499-518, December.
    2. Ware, Roger, 1984. "Sunk Costs and Strategic Commitment: A Proposed Three-Stage Equilibrium," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 94(374), pages 370-378, June.
    3. Dixit, Avinash, 1980. "The Role of Investment in Entry-Deterrence," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 90(357), pages 95-106, March.
    4. Avinash Dixit, 1979. "A Model of Duopoly Suggesting a Theory of Entry Barriers," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 10(1), pages 20-32, Spring.
    5. Matthews, Steven A & Mirman, Leonard J, 1983. "Equilibrium Limit Pricing: The Effects of Private Information and Stochastic Demand," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 51(4), pages 981-996, July.
    6. David B. Ridley, 2008. "Herding versus Hotelling: Market Entry with Costly Information," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 17(3), pages 607-631, September.
    7. Espínola-Arredondo, Ana & Gal-Or, Esther & Muñoz-García, Félix, 2011. "When should a firm expand its business?," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 29(6), pages 729-745.
    8. Albaek, Svend & Overgaard, Per Baltzer, 1994. "Advertising and pricing to deter or accommodate entry when demand is unknown: Comment," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 12(1), pages 83-87, March.
    9. Larry Arvan, 1986. "Sunk Capacity Costs, Long-Run Fixed Costs, and Entry Deterrence under Complete and Incomplete Information," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 17(1), pages 105-121, Spring.
    10. Bagwell, Kyle & Ramey, Garey, 1990. "Advertising and pricing to deter or accommodate entry when demand is unknown," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 8(1), pages 93-113.
    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. Espínola-Arredondo, Ana & Gal-Or, Esther & Muñoz-García, Félix, 2011. "When should a firm expand its business?," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 29(6), pages 729-745.
    2. Lamantia, Fabio & Pezzino, Mario & Tramontana, Fabio, 2018. "Dynamic analysis of discontinuous best response with innovation," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 120-133.
    3. Ohnishi, Kazuhiro, 2019. "Capacity choice in an international mixed triopoly," MPRA Paper 94051, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    4. Kyle Bagwell & Garey Ramey, 1991. "Oligopoly Limit Pricing," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 22(2), pages 155-172, Summer.
    5. Kazuhiro Ohnishi, 2022. "Lifetime Employment and Stackelberg Mixed Duopoly Games with a Foreign Labour-Managed Competitor," Arthaniti: Journal of Economic Theory and Practice, , vol. 21(1), pages 27-42, June.
    6. Alex Barrachina & Yair Tauman & Amparo Urbano Salvador, 2014. "Entry with Two Correlated Signals," Discussion Papers in Economic Behaviour 0714, University of Valencia, ERI-CES.
    7. Ana Espinola-Arredondo & Esther Gal-Or & Felix Munoz-Garcia, 2009. "When Should a Firm Expand Its Business? The Signaling Implications of Business Expansion," Working Papers 2008-16, School of Economic Sciences, Washington State University.
    8. Rupayan Pal & Bibhas Saha, 2008. "Union-oligopoly bargaining and entry deterrence: a reassessment of limit pricing," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 95(2), pages 121-147, November.
    9. Ana Espínola-Arredondo & Félix Muñoz-Garcia & Jude Bayham, 2014. "The Entry-Deterring Effects of Inflexible Regulation," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 47(1), pages 298-324, February.
    10. Michael Kopel & Clemens Löffler, 2008. "Commitment, first-mover-, and second-mover advantage," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 94(2), pages 143-166, July.
    11. Meunier, Guy, 2008. "Strategic commitment in a mixed oligopoly," Research in Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(2), pages 92-100, June.
    12. Kyle Bagwell & Garey Ramey, 1996. "Capacity, Entry, and Forward Induction," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 27(4), pages 660-680, Winter.
    13. Sorgard, Lars, 1997. "Judo economics reconsidered: Capacity limitation, entry and collusion," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 15(3), pages 349-368, May.
    14. Michael Waldman, 1988. "The Simple Case of Entry Deterrence Reconsidered," UCLA Economics Working Papers 517, UCLA Department of Economics.
    15. Muñoz-Garcia Félix & Espinola-Arredondo Ana, 2015. "The Signaling Role of Subsidies," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 15(1), pages 1-22, January.
    16. Xavier Martinez-Giralt & Barros Pedro Pita, 2005. "Bargaining and idle public sector capacity in health care," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 9(5), pages 1-8.
    17. Buchheit, Steve, 2003. "Reporting the cost of capacity," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 28(6), pages 549-565, August.
    18. Iñaki Aguirre, 1999. "Information transmission and incentives not to price discriminate," Spanish Economic Review, Springer;Spanish Economic Association, vol. 1(3), pages 283-299.
    19. Dennis W. Carlton & Michael Waldman, 2002. "The Strategic Use of Tying to Preserve and Create Market Power in Evolving Industries," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 33(2), pages 194-220, Summer.
    20. Kreps, David M. & Wilson, Robert, 1982. "Reputation and imperfect information," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 27(2), pages 253-279, August.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    capacity constraints; business expansions; signaling; entry deterrence; subsidies; L12; D82;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

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

    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:jincot:v:13:y:2013:i:4:p:563-597. 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://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.