IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this article

On durable goods monopolies and the Coase-Conjecture


  • Klaus Ritzberger

    () (Institute for Advanced Studies, Department of Economics, Stumpergasse 56, A-1060 Vienna, Austria)

  • Werner Güth

    (Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Institut für Wirtschaftstheorie III, Spandauer Strasse 1, D-10178 Berlin, Germany)


Consider the durable goods monopoly game with uniformly distributed consumers' valuations. To establish the Coase-Conjecture in this context takes an infinite time horizon and a negligible delay between market rounds. An infinite time horizon or patience of market participants alone are not sufficient for the Coase-Conjecture, nor is an arbitrarily small delay between price offers within a finite time horizon.

Suggested Citation

  • Klaus Ritzberger & Werner Güth, 1998. "On durable goods monopolies and the Coase-Conjecture," Review of Economic Design, Springer;Society for Economic Design, vol. 3(3), pages 215-236.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:reecde:v:3:y:1998:i:3:p:215-236 Note: Received: 20 March 1996 / Accepted: 15 December 1997

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted

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

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Warr, Peter G., 1983. "The private provision of a public good is independent of the distribution of income," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 13(2-3), pages 207-211.
    2. Warr, Peter G., 1982. "Pareto optimal redistribution and private charity," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 19(1), pages 131-138, October.
    3. Bergstrom, Theodore & Blume, Lawrence & Varian, Hal, 1986. "On the private provision of public goods," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 29(1), pages 25-49, February.
    4. Bernheim, B Douglas, 1986. "On the Voluntary and Involuntary Provision of Public Goods," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 76(4), pages 789-793, September.
    5. Sugden, Robert, 1985. "Consistent conjectures and voluntary contributions to public goods: why the conventional theory does not work," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 27(1), pages 117-124, June.
    6. Cornes, Richard & Sandler, Todd, 1984. "The theory of public goods: non-nash behaviour," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 23(3), pages 367-379, April.
    7. Saijo, Tatsuyoshi, 1991. "Incentive compatibility and individual rationality in public good economies," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 55(1), pages 203-212, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)


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

    Cited by:

    1. Sjaak Hurtens, 2003. "Book Review," Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics (JITE), Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 159(3), pages 601-602, September.
    2. William Fuchs & Andrzej Skrzypacz, 2013. "Bargaining with Deadlines and Private Information," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 5(4), pages 219-243, November.
    3. Sanjiv Erat & Stylianos Kavadias, 2006. "Introduction of New Technologies to Competing Industrial Customers," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(11), pages 1675-1688, November.
    4. Werner Güth & Kerstin Pull & Manfred Stadler, 2009. "Intra-firm Conflicts and Interfirm Competition," Jena Economic Research Papers 2009-007, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena.
    5. Geoffrey Brennan & Werner Güth & Hartmut Kliemt, 2004. "Approximate Truth in Economic Modelling," Papers on Strategic Interaction 2004-38, Max Planck Institute of Economics, Strategic Interaction Group.
    6. Di Maria, Corrado & Köttl, Johannes, 2002. "Lagged Network Externalities and Rationing in a Software Monopoly," Economics Series 120, Institute for Advanced Studies.
    7. Xuanming Su, 2007. "Intertemporal Pricing with Strategic Customer Behavior," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 53(5), pages 726-741, May.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • C72 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Noncooperative Games
    • D42 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design - - - Monopoly
    • L12 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Monopoly; Monopolization Strategies
    • L13 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Oligopoly and Other Imperfect Markets


    Access and download statistics


    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:spr:reecde:v:3:y:1998:i:3:p:215-236. 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: (Sonal Shukla) or (Rebekah McClure). General contact details of provider: .

    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.