IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Refusals to deal, Price Discrimination and Independent Service Organizations



A number of recent Canadian and U.S. antitrust cases have involved allegations that manufacturers of durable products have refused to supply parts to independent service organization, apparently to monopolize the market for repairs of their products. This paper provides a theory of these strategies and considers the welfare implications of judicial orders to supply. The refusals here are seen as necessary to protect manufacturers' programs of price discrimination: Expensive repairs represent a way to select high-intensity, high-value users and charge them more. In addition to the usual ambiguity associated with the welfare effects of prohibitions of price discrimination, forcing competition in repairs can have the further damaging effect of reducing social welfare by inducing manufacturers to lower product quality. Copyright 1993 by MIT Press.
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)

Suggested Citation

  • Zhiqi Chen & Tom Ross, 1993. "Refusals to deal, Price Discrimination and Independent Service Organizations," Carleton Industrial Organization Research Unit (CIORU) 93-01, Carleton University, Department of Economics.
  • Handle: RePEc:car:ciorup:93-01

    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 search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Schankerman, Mark & Nadiri, M. Ishaq, 1986. "A test of static equilibrium models and rates of return to quasi-fixed factors, with an application to the Bell system," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 33(1-2), pages 97-118.
    2. Zvi Griliches, 1998. "Issues in Assessing the Contribution of Research and Development to Productivity Growth," NBER Chapters,in: R&D and Productivity: The Econometric Evidence, pages 17-45 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    3. Jaffe, Adam B, 1986. "Technological Opportunity and Spillovers of R&D: Evidence from Firms' Patents, Profits, and Market Value," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 76(5), pages 984-1001, December.
    4. Richard Levin & Peter C. Reiss, 1984. "Tests of a Schumpeterian Model of R&D and Market Structure," NBER Chapters,in: R&D, Patents, and Productivity, pages 175-208 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    5. Spence, Michael, 1984. "Cost Reduction, Competition, and Industry Performance," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 52(1), pages 101-121, January.
    6. Evenson, Robert E & Kislev, Yoav, 1973. "Research and Productivity in Wheat and Maize," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 81(6), pages 1309-1329, Nov.-Dec..
    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. Rey, Patrick & Tirole, Jean, 2007. "A Primer on Foreclosure," Handbook of Industrial Organization, Elsevier.
    2. Dennis W. Carlton & Michael Waldman, 2014. "Robert Bork's Contributions to Antitrust Perspectives on Tying Behavior," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 57(S3), pages 121-144.
    3. Lee, Jinhyuk & Park, Jaeok, 2014. "Pricing Of Complementary Goods As An Implicit Financial Arrangement," Hitotsubashi Journal of Economics, Hitotsubashi University, vol. 55(2), pages 207-228, December.
    4. Cabral, Luís, 2014. "Aftermarket power and foremarket competition," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 60-69.
    5. Chen, Zhiqi & Ross, Thomas W., 1999. "Refusals to deal and orders to supply in competitive markets," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 17(3), pages 399-417, April.
    6. Jota Ishikawa & Hodaka Morita & Hiroshi Mukunoki, 2016. "Trade liberalization and aftermarket services for imports," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 62(4), pages 719-764, October.
    7. Baake, Pio, 2010. "Accidents, Liability Obligations and Monopolized Markets for Spare Parts," EconStor Open Access Articles, ZBW - German National Library of Economics, pages 1-24.
    8. Laussel, Didier & Resende, Joana, 2014. "Dynamic price competition in aftermarkets with network effects," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 106-118.
    9. Hodaka Morita & Michael Waldman, 2010. "Competition, Monopoly Maintenance, and Consumer Switching Costs," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 2(1), pages 230-255, February.
    10. Luis Cabral, 2008. "Aftermarket Power and Basic Market Competition," Working Papers 08-20, New York University, Leonard N. Stern School of Business, Department of Economics.
    11. Baake Pio, 2010. "Accidents, Liability Obligations and Monopolized Markets for Spare Parts," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 10(1), pages 1-26, May.
    12. Michael Waldman, 2010. "Competition, Monopoly, and Aftermarkets," Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 26(1), pages 54-91, April.
    13. Michael Waldman, 2003. "Durable Goods Theory for Real World Markets," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 17(1), pages 131-154, Winter.
    14. David L. Kaserman, 2007. "Efficient Durable Good Pricing And Aftermarket Tie-In Sales," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 45(3), pages 533-537, July.

    More about this item


    competition ; law;


    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:car:ciorup:93-01. 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: (Sabrina Robineau). 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.