IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/rje/randje/v18y1987isummerp255-274.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

One is Almost Enough for Monopoly

Author

Listed:
  • Lawrence M. Ausubel
  • Raymond J. Deneckere

Abstract

It has been argued that two factors -- product durability and (potential) entry -- may force a monopolist to price at marginal cost. This article shows that when these two forces coexist, the tendency toward competition may be negated. First, we prove that durable goods oligopolists without commitment powers may attain joint profits arbitrarily close to those of a monopolist with perfect commitment power. Second, we demonstrate that the presence of a potential entrant may enable a durable goods monopolist to act as if he had commitment power. Thus, potential as well as actual entry may restore monopoly power.

Suggested Citation

  • Lawrence M. Ausubel & Raymond J. Deneckere, 1987. "One is Almost Enough for Monopoly," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 18(2), pages 255-274, Summer.
  • Handle: RePEc:rje:randje:v:18:y:1987:i:summer:p:255-274
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0741-6261%28198722%2918%3A2%3C255%3AOIAEFM%3E2.0.CO%3B2-L&origin=repec
    File Function: full text
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to JSTOR subscribers. See http://www.jstor.org for details.

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

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Francesco Nava & Pasquale Schiraldi, 2014. "Sales And Collusion In A Market With Storage," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 12(3), pages 791-832, June.
    2. Chisik, Richard, 2003. "Gradualism in free trade agreements: a theoretical justification," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 59(2), pages 367-397, March.
    3. Xu, Frances Zhiyun, 2011. "Optimal best-price policy," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 29(5), pages 628-643, September.
    4. Guth, Werner & Ockenfels, Peter & Ritzberger, Klaus, 1995. "On durable goods monopolies an experimental study of intrapersonal price competition and price discrimination over time," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 16(2), pages 247-274, July.
    5. Borenstein, Severin & Bushnell, James & Kahn, Edward & Stoft, Steven, 1995. "Market power in California electricity markets," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 5(3-4), pages 219-236.
    6. Prajit Dutta & Alexander Matros & Jörgen W. Weibull, 2007. "Long-run price competition," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 38(2), pages 291-313, June.
    7. Shimomura, Koji, 1998. "A dynamic equilibrium model of durable goods monopoly," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 33(3-4), pages 507-520, January.
    8. Wang, Ruqu, 2001. "Optimal pricing strategy for durable-goods monopoly," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 25(5), pages 789-804, May.
    9. Weibull, Jörgen & Dutta, Prajit & Matros, Alexander, 2002. "Dynamic Bertrand competition with intertemporal demand," SSE/EFI Working Paper Series in Economics and Finance 493, Stockholm School of Economics, revised 15 Feb 2005.
    10. Cabral, Luis M. B. & Salant, David J. & Woroch, Glenn A., 1999. "Monopoly pricing with network externalities," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 17(2), pages 199-214, February.
    11. Paulo Maçãs Nunes, 2015. "Pricing Strategy In The Context Of Durable Goods Monopoly With Discrete Demand," Economic Annals, Faculty of Economics, University of Belgrade, vol. 60(204), pages 61-74, January –.
    12. Hagem, Cathrine & Westskog, Hege, 1998. "The Design of a Dynamic Tradeable Quota System under Market Imperfections," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 36(1), pages 89-107, July.
    13. von der Fehr, Nils-Henrik Morch & Kuhn, Kai-Uwe, 1995. "Coase versus Pacman: Who Eats Whom in the Durable-Goods Monopoly?," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 103(4), pages 785-812, August.
    14. Driskill, Robert, 2001. "Durable goods oligopoly," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 19(3-4), pages 391-413, March.
    15. Pasquale Schiraldi, 2006. "Second-Hand Markets and Collusion by Manufacturers of Semidurable Goods," Boston University - Department of Economics - Working Papers Series WP2006-028, Boston University - Department of Economics.
    16. Luís M. B. Cabral & Miguel Villas-Boas, 2005. "Bertrand Supertraps," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 51(4), pages 599-613, April.
    17. Ngo Long, 2015. "Dynamic Games Between Firms and Infinitely Lived Consumers: A Review of the Literature," Dynamic Games and Applications, Springer, vol. 5(4), pages 467-492, December.
    18. Hoppe, Heidrun C. & Lee, In Ho, 2003. "Entry deterrence and innovation in durable-goods monopoly," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 47(6), pages 1011-1036, December.
    19. Lou, Weifang & Prentice, David & Yin, Xiangkang, 2012. "What difference does dynamics make? The case of digital cameras," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 30(1), pages 30-40.
    20. Simon Board & Marek Pycia, 2014. "Outside Options and the Failure of the Coase Conjecture," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 104(2), pages 656-671, February.
    21. Yuk-fai Fong & Peter Eso, 2008. "Wait and See," 2008 Meeting Papers 303, Society for Economic Dynamics.
    22. Marco Runkel, 2003. "Product Durability and Extended Producer Responsibility in Solid Waste Management," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 24(2), pages 161-182, February.
    23. Cerquera Dussán, Daniel, 2007. "Durable Goods, Innovation and Network Externalities," ZEW Discussion Papers 07-086, ZEW - Zentrum für Europäische Wirtschaftsforschung / Center for European Economic Research.
    24. Kumar, Vikram & Marshall, Robert C. & Marx, Leslie M. & Samkharadze, Lily, 2015. "Buyer resistance for cartel versus merger," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 39(C), pages 71-80.

    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:rje:randje:v:18:y:1987:i:summer:p:255-274. 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: (). General contact details of provider: https://www.rje.org .

    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 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.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.