Advertising and Welfare: Comment
In an earlier article Dixit and Norman studied the welfare effects of advertising. They came to the surprising conclusion that, even accepting postadvertising tastes as the welfare standard, monopoly advertising which raises price is excessive. The point of this comment is to show how and why their analysis fails to apply to the case where there is more than one consumer. Their analysis assumes that preadvertising consumption is distributed efficiently according to postadvertising tastes. Since this is not generally the case, there are gains to advertising ignored by Dixit and Norman.
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.
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.
Volume (Year): 11 (1980)
Issue (Month): 2 (Autumn)
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.rje.org|
|Order Information:||Web: https://editorialexpress.com/cgi-bin/rje_online.cgi|
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:rje:bellje:v:11:y:1980:i:autumn:p:749-752. 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: ()
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.