The Manufacturers’ Choice of Brand Policy under Successive Duopoly
We propose a non-cooperative game in order to emphasize the srategic rationale in shaping the distribution system. Compared with the received literature, we let manufacturers select which retailer(s) will market their respective brand. This, together with retailers possibly being multi-product dealers, enlarges the set of distribution systems. Whether manufacturers employ two retailers rather than one reflects the tradeoff between two conflicting efects, there is an output incease but more competition is established. High levels of product differentiation and not too large brand asymmetry are enough to incentive manufacturers introduce intra-band competition. However, the well-known exclusive dealing system shows up for little product differentiation and low brand asymmetry. It is worth emphasizing that, if any type of exclusivity relationship ever occurs, it is the equiibrium outcome of a non-cooperative game in which neither manufacturers nor retailers may impose any vertical clauses.
|Date of creation:||01 Jan 2002|
|Date of revision:|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: |
Fax: +32 10473945
Web page: http://www.uclouvain.be/ires
More information through EDIRC
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.:
- Bernheim, B.D., 1992.
Harvard Institute of Economic Research Working Papers
1622, Harvard - Institute of Economic Research.
- Besanko, David & Perry, Martin K., 1994. "Exclusive dealing in a spatial model of retail competition," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 12(3), pages 297-329, September.
- Lin, Y Joseph, 1990. "The Dampening-of-Competition Effect of Exclusive Dealing," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(2), pages 209-23, December.
- Saggi, Kamal & Vettas, Nikolaos, 1999.
"On Intrabrand and Interbrand Competition: The Strategic Role of Fees and Royalties,"
99-06, Duke University, Department of Economics.
- Saggi, Kamal & Vettas, Nikolaos, 2002. "On intrabrand and interbrand competition: The strategic role of fees and royalties," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 46(1), pages 189-200, January.
- Saggi, Kamal & Vettas, Nikolaos, 1999. "On Intrabrand and Interbrand Competition: The Strategic Role of Fees and Royalties," CEPR Discussion Papers 2110, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
- Daniel P. O'Brien & Greg Shaffer, 1997. "Nonlinear Supply Contracts, Exclusive Dealing, and Equilibrium Market Foreclosure," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 6(4), pages 755-785, December.
- Bonanno, Giacomo & Vickers, John, 1988. "Vertical Separation," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(3), pages 257-65, March.
- Tommy Staahl Gabrielsen & Lars Sørgard, 1999.
"Exclusive versus Common Dealership,"
Southern Economic Journal,
Southern Economic Association, vol. 66(2), pages 353-366, October.
- Gabrielsen, T. & Sorgard, L., 1999. "Exclusive Versus Common Dealership," Norway; Department of Economics, University of Bergen 200, Department of Economics, University of Bergen.
- Rysman, Marc, 2001. "How many franchises in a market?," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 19(3-4), pages 519-542, March.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ctl:louvir:2002003. 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: (Anne DAVISTER-LOGIST)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.