IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/restud/v75y2008i1p165-199.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Vertical Contracts in the Video Rental Industry -super-1

Author

Listed:
  • Julie H. Mortimer

Abstract

A large body of theoretical work has explored the channels through which vertical contracts can induce efficiency improvements. However, it is also important to study vertical contracts empirically in order to gain insight into the relative size of different types of efficiency gains. In this paper, I empirically analyse a contractual innovation in the vertically separated video rental industry. Prior to 1998, video stores obtained inventory from movie distributors using simple linear-pricing contracts. In 1998, revenue-sharing contracts were widely adopted. I investigate the effect of the introduction of revenue-sharing contracts on firms' profits and consumer welfare. I analyse a new panel data set of home video retailers that includes information on individual retailers' contract and inventory choices, as well as rentals and contract terms for 246 movie titles and 6137 retailers in the U.S. during each week of 1998 and 1999 and the first half of 2000. A structural econometric model of firms' behaviour is developed that describes the nature of firms' contract choices. Estimates from this model indicate that both upstream and downstream profits increase by 10% under the revenue-sharing contract for popular titles. For less popular titles, the effects can be even larger. I also estimate that consumers benefit when revenue-sharing contracts are adopted. Copyright 2008, Wiley-Blackwell.

Suggested Citation

  • Julie H. Mortimer, 2008. "Vertical Contracts in the Video Rental Industry -super-1," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 75(1), pages 165-199.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:restud:v:75:y:2008:i:1:p:165-199
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1111/j.1467-937X.2007.00462.x
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    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:oup:restud:v:75:y:2008:i:1:p:165-199. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/restud .

    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.