IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/rje/randje/v36y20052p337-360.html

Optimal Second-Degree Price Discrimination and Arbitrage: On the Role of Asymmetric Information Among Buyers

Author

Listed:
  • Doh-Shin Jeon

    (Universitat Pompeu Fabra)

  • Domenico Menicucci

    (Universita` degli Studi di Firenze)

Abstract

The traditional theory of second-degree price discrimination tackles individual self-selection but does not address the possibility that buyers could form a coalition to conduct arbitrage. We study the optimal sale mechanism that takes into account both individual and coalition incentive compatibility. We show that the monopolist can achieve the same profit regardless of whether or not buyers can form a coalition. Although marginal rates of substitution are not equalized across buyers of different types in the optimal sale mechanism, they fail to realize the gains from arbitrage because of the transaction costs in coalition formation generated by asymmetric information.

Suggested Citation

  • Doh-Shin Jeon & Domenico Menicucci, 2005. "Optimal Second-Degree Price Discrimination and Arbitrage: On the Role of Asymmetric Information Among Buyers," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 36(2), pages 337-360, Summer.
    • Handle: RePEc:rje:randje:v:36:y:2005:2:p:337-360
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a
    for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Other versions of this item:

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Wang, Hong, 2017. "Information acquisition versus information manipulation in multi-period procurement markets," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 48-59.
    2. Jeon, Doh-Shin & Menicucci, Domenico, 2014. "Buyer Group and Buyer Power When Sellers Compete," TSE Working Papers 14-543, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE), revised Nov 2017.
    3. Meng, Dawen & Tian, Guoqiang, 2014. "Collusion-Proof Mechanism Design in Two-Agent Nonlinear Pricing Environments," MPRA Paper 57931, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    4. Che,Y.-K. & Kim,J., 2004. "Collusion-proof implementation of optimal mechanisms," Working papers 4, Wisconsin Madison - Social Systems.
    5. Dequiedt, Vianney, 2007. "Efficient collusion in optimal auctions," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 136(1), pages 302-323, September.
    6. Che, Yeon-Koo & Kim, Jinwoo, 2009. "Optimal collusion-proof auctions," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 144(2), pages 565-603, March.
    7. Meng, Dawen & Tian, Guoqiang, 2008. "Nonlinear Pricing with Arbitrage: On the Role of Correlation," MPRA Paper 41207, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    8. Hui Song & Hongkun Ma & Zimeng Ma, 2023. "Group‐buying with products of heterogeneous quality," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 44(4), pages 2408-2423, June.
    9. Doh-Shin Jeon & Domenico Menicucci, 2017. "The Benefits of Diverse Preferences in Library Consortia," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 65(1), pages 105-135, March.
    10. Wu, Chien-Wei & Chiu, Hsien-Hung, 2016. "Price Discrimination Through Group Buying," Hitotsubashi Journal of Economics, Hitotsubashi University, vol. 57(1), pages 27-52, June.
    11. Flavia Roldán, 2013. "The organization of expertise in the presence of communication," Review of Economic Design, Springer;Society for Economic Design, vol. 17(1), pages 63-81, March.
    12. Jansen, Jos & Jeon, Doh-Shin & Menicucci, Domenico, 2008. "The organization of regulated production: Complementarities, correlation and collusion," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 26(1), pages 327-353, January.
    13. Dawen Meng & Guoqiang Tian & Zhe Yang, 2017. "Two-agent collusion-proof implementation with correlation and arbitrage," Review of Economic Design, Springer;Society for Economic Design, vol. 21(3), pages 177-229, September.
    14. Ren Wang & Jie Hou & Hui Song, 2020. "Use prices as sales agents," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 41(7), pages 1349-1364, October.
    15. von Negenborn, Colin & Pollrich, Martin, 2020. "Sweet lemons: Mitigating collusion in organizations," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 189(C).
    16. Jeon, Doh-Shin & Menicucci, Domenico, 2013. "When Is Building a Library Consortium Beneficial?," IDEI Working Papers 791, Institut d'Économie Industrielle (IDEI), Toulouse, revised 07 Apr 2014.
    17. He, Qingxin & Lee, Jonathan M., 2016. "The effect of coal combustion byproducts on price discrimination by upstream industries," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 11-24.
    18. Hu, Audrey & Offerman, Theo & Onderstal, Sander, 2011. "Fighting collusion in auctions: An experimental investigation," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 29(1), pages 84-96, January.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • D42 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design - - - Monopoly
    • 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:rje:randje:v:36:y:2005:2:p:337-360. 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.rje.org .

    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.