Do followers really matter in Stackelberg competition?
In this note, we consider a generalized T−stage Stackelberg oligopoly. We provide a proof and an interpretation that under the two necessary and sufficient conditions of linear aggregate demand and identical constant marginal costs, followers do not matter for leaders. Leaders act as rational myopic agents, voluntarily ignoring the number of followers and remaining stages, thereby behaving as Cournotian oligopolists. Strategies of incumbent firms are invariant to entry of new cohorts. Their profits can be studied by the way of two discount factors: the first impacting markup and the second impacting output supply. Some implications in terms of welfare and convergence toward competitive equilibrium are derived.
|Date of creation:||2011|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: 200 Avenue de la République, Bât. G - 92001 Nanterre Cedex|
Web page: http://economix.fr
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.:
- Daughety, Andrew F, 1990. "Beneficial Concentration," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 80(5), pages 1231-1237, December.
- Ludovic A. Julien & Olivier Musy, 2011.
"A Generalized Oligopoly Model With Conjectural Variations,"
Wiley Blackwell, vol. 62(3), pages 411-433, 07.
- Ludovic Julien & Olivier Musy, 2011. "A generalized oligopoly model with conjectural variations," Post-Print halshs-01228015, HAL.
- Federico Etro, 2007.
"Stackelberg competition with endogenous entry,"
121, University of Milano-Bicocca, Department of Economics, revised 2007.
- Richard Watt, 2002. "A Generalized Oligopoly Model," Metroeconomica, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 53(1), pages 46-55, 02.
- Boyer, Marcel & Moreaux, Michel, 1986. "Perfect competition as the limit of a hierarchical market game," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 22(2-3), pages 115-118.
- Xavier Vives, 2001. "Oligopoly Pricing: Old Ideas and New Tools," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 026272040x.
- John S. Heywood & Matthew McGinty, 2007. "Mergers among leaders and mergers among followers," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 12(12), pages 1-7.
- AMIR, Rabah & GRILO, Isabel, "undated".
"Stackelberg versus Cournot equilibrium,"
CORE Discussion Papers RP
1368, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
- Pal, Debashis & Sarkar, Jyotirmoy, 2001. "A Stackelberg Oligopoly with Nonidentical Firms," Bulletin of Economic Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 53(2), pages 127-134, April.
- Ludovic A. Julien & Olivier Musy & Aurélien Saïdi, 2012.
"On hierarchical competition in oligopoly,"
- Ludovic Julien & Olivier Musy & Aurélien Saïdi, 2012. "On hierarchical competition in oligopoly," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 107(3), pages 217-237, November.
- Anderson, Simon P. & Engers, Maxim, 1992. "Stackelberg versus Cournot oligopoly equilibrium," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 10(1), pages 127-135, March.
- John S. Heywood & Matthew McGinty, 2008. "Leading and Merging: Convex Costs, Stackelberg, and the Merger Paradox," Southern Economic Journal, Southern Economic Association, vol. 74(3), pages 879-893, January.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:drm:wpaper:2011-10. 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: (Valérie Mignon)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.