IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cer/papers/wp266.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Tying and entry deterrence in vertically differentiated markets

Author

Listed:
  • Eugen Kovac

Abstract

This paper analyzes tying and bundling as an entry deterrence tool. It shows that a multi-product firm can defend its monopoly position in one market via tying even when it does not have market power in another market. This is shown on a model with two complementary goods, each of which is vertically differentiated and in which consumers’ preferences for the goods are positively correlated. Some possible ways of defending against entry deterrence, and implications for competition policy, are discussed.

Suggested Citation

  • Eugen Kovac, 2005. "Tying and entry deterrence in vertically differentiated markets," CERGE-EI Working Papers wp266, The Center for Economic Research and Graduate Education - Economics Institute, Prague.
    • Handle: RePEc:cer:papers:wp266
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.cerge-ei.cz/pdf/wp/Wp266.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Choi, Jay Pil & Stefanadis, Christodoulos, 2001. "Tying, Investment, and the Dynamic Leverage Theory," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 32(1), pages 52-71, Spring.
    2. Dennis W. Carlton & Michael Waldman, 2002. "The Strategic Use of Tying to Preserve and Create Market Power in Evolving Industries," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 33(2), pages 194-220, Summer.
    3. Rey, Patrick & Tirole, Jean, 2007. "A Primer on Foreclosure," Handbook of Industrial Organization, in: Mark Armstrong & Robert Porter (ed.), Handbook of Industrial Organization, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 33, pages 2145-2220, Elsevier.
    4. Matutes, Carmen & Regibeau, Pierre, 1992. "Compatibility and Bundling of Complementary Goods in a Duopoly," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 40(1), pages 37-54, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Chung, Hui-Ling & Chen, Hung-Yi & Hu, Jin-Li & Lin, Yan-Shu, 2014. "Bundling With Quality Choice," Hitotsubashi Journal of Economics, Hitotsubashi University, vol. 55(2), pages 147-165, December.

    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. Belleflamme,Paul & Peitz,Martin, 2015. "Industrial Organization," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9781107687899.
    2. Stole, Lars A., 2007. "Price Discrimination and Competition," Handbook of Industrial Organization, in: Mark Armstrong & Robert Porter (ed.), Handbook of Industrial Organization, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 34, pages 2221-2299, Elsevier.
    3. Zhou, Jidong, 2021. "Mixed bundling in oligopoly markets," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 194(C).
    4. Halmenschlager, Christine & Mantovani, Andrea, 2017. "On the private and social desirability of mixed bundling in complementary markets with cost savings," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(C), pages 45-59.
    5. Sang‐Hyun Kim & Jong‐Hee Hahn, 2022. "On the profitability of interfirm bundling in oligopolies," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(3), pages 657-673, August.
    6. Akifumi Ishihara & Noriyuki Yanagawa, 2013. "Dark Sides of Patent Pools with Compulsory Independent Licensing," CARF F-Series CARF-F-318, Center for Advanced Research in Finance, Faculty of Economics, The University of Tokyo.
    7. Zhijun Chen & Patrick Rey, 2012. "Loss Leading as an Exploitative Practice," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 102(7), pages 3462-3482, December.
    8. Rey, Patrick & Jullien, Bruno & Saavedra, Claudia, 2014. "The Economics of Margin Squeeze," CEPR Discussion Papers 9905, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    9. Alessandro Avenali & Anna D’Annunzio & Pierfrancesco Reverberi, 2013. "Bundling, Competition and Quality Investment: A Welfare Analysis," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 43(3), pages 221-241, November.
    10. John Vickers, 2007. "Some Economics of Abuse of Dominance," Economics Series Working Papers 376, University of Oxford, Department of Economics.
    11. Nakamura, A., 2011. "Estimating switching costs after introducing Fixed-Mobile Convergence in Japan," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 23(1), pages 59-71, March.
    12. Jidong Zhou, 2017. "Competitive Bundling," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 85, pages 145-172, January.
    13. Etro, Federico, 2016. "Research in economics and industrial organization," Research in Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(4), pages 511-517.
    14. Gayer, Amit & Shy, Oz, 2016. "A welfare evaluation of tying strategies," Research in Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(4), pages 623-637.
    15. Jong-Hee Hahn & Sang-Hyun Kim, 2016. "Interfirm Bundled Discounts as a Collusive Device," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 64(2), pages 255-276, June.
    16. Andrea Mantovani, 2013. "The Strategic Effect of Bundling: A New Perspective," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 42(1), pages 25-43, February.
    17. John Thanassoulis, 2007. "Competitive Mixed Bundling and Consumer Surplus," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 16(2), pages 437-467, June.
    18. Andrea Mantovani & Jan Vandekerckhove, 2016. "The Strategic Interplay Between Bundling and Merging in Complementary Markets," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 37(1), pages 19-36, January.
    19. Sue H. Mialon, 2014. "Product Bundling And Incentives For Mergers And Strategic Alliances," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 52(2), pages 562-575, April.
    20. Zhou, Shu & Song, Boqian & Gavirneni, Srinagesh, 2020. "Bundling decisions in a two-product duopoly – Lead or follow?," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 284(3), pages 980-989.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Industrial organization; vertical differentiation; anti-trust policy; entry deterrence; foreclosure; tying; bundling.;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • L11 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Production, Pricing, and Market Structure; Size Distribution of Firms
    • 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
    • L41 - Industrial Organization - - Antitrust Issues and Policies - - - Monopolization; Horizontal Anticompetitive Practices

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:cer:papers:wp266. 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: Lucie Vasiljevova (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/eiacacz.html .

    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.