IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this paper

The Welfare Effects of Endogenous Quality Choice in Cable Television Markets

Listed author(s):
  • Crawford, Gregory S.
  • Shcherbakov, Oleksandr
  • Shum, Matthew

We measure the welfare consequences of endogenous quality choice in imperfectly competitive markets. We introduce the concept of a "quality markup" and measure the relative welfare consequences of market power over price and quality. For U.S. paid-television markets during 1997-2006, we find that not only are cable monopolists' prices 33% to 74% higher than marginal costs, but qualities are also 23% to 55% higher than socially optimal and the welfare costs of each are similar in magnitude. Such evidence for "quality inflation" by monopolists is at odds with classic results in the literature.

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: http://www.cepr.org/active/publications/discussion_papers/dp.php?dpno=10793
Download Restriction: CEPR Discussion Papers are free to download for our researchers, subscribers and members. If you fall into one of these categories but have trouble downloading our papers, please contact us at subscribers@cepr.org

As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

Paper provided by C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers in its series CEPR Discussion Papers with number 10793.

as
in new window

Length:
Date of creation: Aug 2015
Handle: RePEc:cpr:ceprdp:10793
Contact details of provider: Postal:
Centre for Economic Policy Research, 77 Bastwick Street, London EC1V 3PZ.

Phone: 44 - 20 - 7183 8801
Fax: 44 - 20 - 7183 8820

Order Information: Email:


References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

as
in new window


  1. Chenghuan Sean Chu, 2010. "The effect of satellite entry on cable television prices and product quality," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 41(4), pages 730-764.
  2. Robin Lee & Michael Whinston & Ali Yurukoglu & Gregory Crawford, 2013. "The Welfare Effects of Vertical Integration in Multichannel Television Markets," 2013 Meeting Papers 81, Society for Economic Dynamics.
  3. Clerides, Sofronis K., 2002. "Book value: intertemporal pricing and quality discrimination in the US market for books," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 20(10), pages 1385-1408, December.
  4. Crawford, Gregory S., 2012. "Endogenous product choice: A progress report," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 315-320.
  5. Ying Fan, 2013. "Ownership Consolidation and Product Characteristics: A Study of the US Daily Newspaper Market," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 103(5), pages 1598-1628, August.
  6. Nevo, Aviv, 2001. "Measuring Market Power in the Ready-to-Eat Cereal Industry," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 69(2), pages 307-342, March.
  7. Gregory S. Crawford & Ali Yurukoglu, 2012. "The Welfare Effects of Bundling in Multichannel Television Markets," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 102(2), pages 643-685, April.
  8. Brian McManus, 2007. "Nonlinear pricing in an oligopoly market: the case of specialty coffee," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 38(2), pages 512-532, 06.
  9. Gregory S. Crawford, 2000. "The Impact of the 1992 Cable Act on Household Demand and Welfare," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 31(3), pages 422-450, Autumn.
  10. Berry, Steven & Pakes, Ariel, 1993. "Some Applications and Limitations of Recent Advances in Empirical Industrial Organization: Merger Analysis," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 83(2), pages 247-252, May.
  11. Jean-Charles Rochet & Lars A. Stole, 2002. "Nonlinear Pricing with Random Participation," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 69(1), pages 277-311.
  12. Mussa, Michael & Rosen, Sherwin, 1978. "Monopoly and product quality," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 301-317, August.
  13. Andrew Sweeting, 2013. "Dynamic Product Positioning in Differentiated Product Markets: The Effect of Fees for Musical Performance Rights on the Commercial Radio Industry," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 81(5), pages 1763-1803, 09.
  14. Steven T. Berry, 1994. "Estimating Discrete-Choice Models of Product Differentiation," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 25(2), pages 242-262, Summer.
  15. Crawford, Gregory S & Shum, Matthew, 2007. "Monopoly Quality Degradation and Regulation in Cable Television," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 50(1), pages 181-219, February.
  16. Ackerberg, Daniel & Caves, Kevin & Frazer, Garth, 2006. "Structural identification of production functions," MPRA Paper 38349, University Library of Munich, Germany.
  17. Olley, G Steven & Pakes, Ariel, 1996. "The Dynamics of Productivity in the Telecommunications Equipment Industry," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 64(6), pages 1263-1297, November.
  18. Austan Goolsbee & Amil Petrin, 2004. "The Consumer Gains from Direct Broadcast Satellites and the Competition with Cable TV," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 72(2), pages 351-381, 03.
  19. Amil Petrin, 2002. "Quantifying the Benefits of New Products: The Case of the Minivan," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 110(4), pages 705-729, August.
  20. Michaela Draganska & Michael Mazzeo & Katja Seim, 2009. "Beyond plain vanilla: Modeling joint product assortment and pricing decisions," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 7(2), pages 105-146, June.
  21. David P.Byrne, 2011. "Consolidation and Price Discrimination in the Cable Television Industry," Department of Economics - Working Papers Series 1118, The University of Melbourne.
  22. A. Michael Spence, 1975. "Monopoly, Quality, and Regulation," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 6(2), pages 417-429, Autumn.
  23. Alon Eizenberg, 2014. "Upstream Innovation and Product Variety in the U.S. Home PC Market," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 81(3), pages 1003-1045.
  24. Steven T. Berry & Joel Waldfogel, 2001. "Do Mergers Increase Product Variety? Evidence from Radio Broadcasting," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 116(3), pages 1009-1025.
  25. Frank Verboven, 2002. "Quality-Based Price Discrimination and Tax Incidence: Evidence from Gasoline and Diesel Cars," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 33(2), pages 275-297, Summer.
  26. Andrew Sweeting, 2010. "The effects of mergers on product positioning: evidence from the music radio industry," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 41(2), pages 372-397.
  27. Thomas W. Hazlett & Matthew L. Spitzer, 1997. "Public Policy toward Cable Television," Books, American Enterprise Institute, number 53139.
  28. Gregory Crawford, 2008. "The discriminatory incentives to bundle in the cable television industry," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 6(1), pages 41-78, March.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cpr:ceprdp:10793. 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: ()

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 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.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.