IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2506.01650.html

Pricing the Right to Renege in Search Markets: Evidence from Trucking

Author

Listed:
  • Richard Faltings

Abstract

In many search markets, advance interim contracts include an explicit right to renege, granting one party the option to switch to more attractive matches that emerge later in the search process. This paper studies the design and welfare implications of such interim contracts, leveraging novel data from a brokerage firm in the trucking industry. The broker allocates advance shipment contracts to carriers through a dynamic auction mechanism and penalizes cancellations through a reputational mechanism. I develop a theoretical model linking the carrier's bidding problem to the firm's cancellation penalties through a dynamic job-search problem and structurally estimate the model from rich data on bids and cancellations. In counterfactual simulations, I show that the firm is incentivized to lower cancellation penalties as the option value of the right to renege is priced into carrier bids. The results rationalize the large degree of contractual flexibility observed in the trucking industry as an efficient market outcome rather than one constrained by limited enforcement.

Suggested Citation

  • Richard Faltings, 2025. "Pricing the Right to Renege in Search Markets: Evidence from Trucking," Papers 2506.01650, arXiv.org, revised Mar 2026.
  • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2506.01650
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://arxiv.org/pdf/2506.01650
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Christopher A. Pissarides, 2000. "Equilibrium Unemployment Theory, 2nd Edition," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262161877, December.
    2. Muriel Niederle & Alvin E. Roth, 2009. "Market Culture: How Rules Governing Exploding Offers Affect Market Performance," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 1(2), pages 199-219, August.
    3. Zhenyu Hu & Wenjie Tang, 2021. "Size Matters, So Does Duration: The Interplay Between Offer Size and Offer Deadline," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(8), pages 4935-4960, August.
    4. John H. Kagel & Alvin E. Roth, 2000. "The Dynamics of Reorganization in Matching Markets: A Laboratory Experiment Motivated by a Natural Experiment," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 115(1), pages 201-235.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Alvin E. Roth, 2010. "Marketplace Institutions Related to the Timing of Transactions," NBER Working Papers 16556, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. Eric Budish & Judd B. Kessler, 2022. "Can Market Participants Report Their Preferences Accurately (Enough)?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(2), pages 1107-1130, February.
    3. Yann Bramoullé & Brian W. Rogers & Erdem Yenerdag, 2022. "Matching with Recall," AMSE Working Papers 2203, Aix-Marseille School of Economics, France.
    4. Charness, Gary & Kuhn, Peter, 2011. "Lab Labor: What Can Labor Economists Learn from the Lab?," Handbook of Labor Economics, in: O. Ashenfelter & D. Card (ed.), Handbook of Labor Economics, edition 1, volume 4, chapter 3, pages 229-330, Elsevier.
    5. Joana Pais & Ágnes Pintér & Róbert F. Veszteg, 2020. "Decentralized matching markets with(out) frictions: a laboratory experiment," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 23(1), pages 212-239, March.
    6. Agranov, M. & Elliott, M., 2017. "Commitment and (In)Efficiency: A Bargaining Experiment," Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 1743, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.
    7. Gary Bolton & Ben Greiner & Axel Ockenfels, 2013. "Engineering Trust: Reciprocity in the Production of Reputation Information," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 59(2), pages 265-285, January.
    8. Chen, Wei-Cheng & Chen, Yi-Yi & Kao, Yi-Cheng, 2018. "Limited choice in college admissions: An experimental study," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 295-316.
    9. Hakimov, Rustamdjan & Kübler, Dorothea, 2019. "Experiments On Matching Markets: A Survey," Rationality and Competition Discussion Paper Series 153, CRC TRR 190 Rationality and Competition.
    10. Muriel Niederle & Alvin E. Roth & M. Utku Ünver, 2013. "Unraveling Results from Comparable Demand and Supply: An Experimental Investigation," Games, MDPI, vol. 4(2), pages 1-40, June.
    11. Siqi Pan, 2018. "Exploding offers and unraveling in two-sided matching markets," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 47(1), pages 351-373, March.
    12. Fainmesser, Itay P., 2013. "Social networks and unraveling in labor markets," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 148(1), pages 64-103.
    13. Chen, Yan & Fehr, Ernst & Fischbacher, Urs & Morgan, Peter, 2015. "Decentralized matching and social segregation," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 17-43.
    14. Siqi Pan & Xin Zhao, 2023. "Commitment and cheap talk in search deterrence," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 54(2), pages 325-359, June.
    15. Federico Echenique & Alejandro Robinson‐Cortés & Leeat Yariv, 2025. "An experimental study of decentralized matching," Quantitative Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 16(2), pages 497-533, May.
    16. Adina D. Sterling, 2014. "Friendships and Search Behavior in Labor Markets," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 60(9), pages 2341-2354, September.
    17. Comola, Margherita & Fafchamps, Marcel, 2018. "An experimental study on decentralized networked markets," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 567-591.
    18. Alvin E. Roth & Robert B. Wilson, 2019. "How Market Design Emerged from Game Theory: A Mutual Interview," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 33(3), pages 118-143, Summer.
    19. Casella, Alessandra & Palfrey, Thomas R., 2021. "Trading votes for votes: A laboratory study," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 1-26.
    20. Jochen Mankart & Rigas Oikonomou, 2017. "Household Search and the Aggregate Labour Market," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 84(4), pages 1735-1788.

    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:arx:papers:2506.01650. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: arXiv administrators (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://arxiv.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.