IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/edj/ceauch/164.html

Vertical Integration and Sabotage in Regulated Industries

Author

Listed:
  • Alvaro Bustos
  • Alexander Galetovic

Abstract

An essential facility produces “access,” an essential input used by a competitive downstream industry. The access charge is regulated. The essential facility can vertically integrate into the downstream segment and sabotage rivals increasing their costs. We systematically study the vertical integration decision and the optimal level of sabotage. Contrary to most of the literature, we allow for free entry into the downstream segment, so that prices equal long-run average costs. We find the following: First, sabotage does not pay when diseconomies of scope are large, or the subsidiary’s market share is small. Second, when sabotage pays, and the subsidiary coexists with rivals in equilibrium, optimal sabotage increases with the subsidiary’s market share and scope economies. On the other hand, when the essential facility optimally sabotages to exclude rivals, the intensity of sabotage falls with economies of scope. Third, unless the subsidiary is implausibly more efficient than independent firms, vertical integration never benefits consumers.

Suggested Citation

  • Alvaro Bustos & Alexander Galetovic, 2003. "Vertical Integration and Sabotage in Regulated Industries," Documentos de Trabajo 164, Centro de Economía Aplicada, Universidad de Chile.
    • Handle: RePEc:edj:ceauch:164
    as

    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
    for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Other versions of this item:

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Bruce Owen, 2011. "Antitrust and Vertical Integration in “New Economy” Industries with Application to Broadband Access," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 38(4), pages 363-386, June.
    2. Mattos, César, 2009. "Open access policies, regulated charges and non-price discrimination in telecommunications," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 21(4), pages 253-260, November.
    3. David Sappington & Dennis Weisman, 2005. "Self-Sabotage," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 27(2), pages 155-175, November.
    4. Eduardo M. R. A. Engel & Ronald D. Fischer & Alexander Galetovic, 2004. "How to Auction a Bottleneck Monopoly When Underhand Vertical Agreements are Possible," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 52(3), pages 427-455, September.
    5. Karp Larry S. & Perloff Jeffrey M., 2013. "Vertical Contracts and Mandatory Universal Distribution," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 13(2), pages 595-626, October.
    6. Toshihiro Matsumura & Noriaki Matsushima, 2012. "Regulated Input Price, Vertical Separation, and Leadership in Free Entry Markets," ISER Discussion Paper 0853, Institute of Social and Economic Research, The University of Osaka.
    7. Palacios M., Sebastián & Saavedra P., Eduardo, 2017. "Alternative policies for the liberalization of retail electricity markets in Chile," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 72-92.
    8. Alexander Galetovic, 2003. "Integración Vertical en el Sector Eléctrico: Una guía para el usuario (Vertical integration in the electricity sector)," Documentos de Trabajo 158, Centro de Economía Aplicada, Universidad de Chile.
    9. Hervas-Drane, Andres, 2011. "Non-cost-raising discrimination: A rationale for functional separation in broadband open access," IESE Research Papers D/942, IESE Business School.
    10. David Sappington, 2005. "Regulating Service Quality: A Survey," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 27(2), pages 123-154, November.
    11. Alexandra Lai & Nikil Chande & Sean O'Connor, 2006. "Credit in a Tiered Payments System," Staff Working Papers 06-36, Bank of Canada.
    12. Bose, Arup & Pal, Debashis & Sappington, David E.M., 2017. "Pricing to preclude sabotage in regulated industries," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 162-184.
    13. Alexandra Lai & Nikil Chande & Sean O'Connor, 2006. "Credit in a Tiered Payments System," Staff Working Papers 06-36, Bank of Canada.
    14. David Mandy & David Sappington, 2007. "Incentives for sabotage in vertically related industries," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 31(3), pages 235-260, June.
    15. Mandy, David M. & Mayo, John W. & Sappington, David E.M., 2016. "Targeting efforts to raise rivals' costs: Moving from “Whether” to “Whom”," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 1-15.
    16. Karp, Larry & Perloff, Jeffrey, 2011. "The iPhone Goes Downstream: Mandatory Universal Distribution∗," Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley, Working Paper Series qt7vc007jh, Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley.
    17. Galetovic Alexander & Sanhueza Ricardo, 2009. "Vertical Mergers and Competition with a Regulated Bottleneck Monopoly," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 9(1), pages 1-20, October.
    18. Karp, Larry S. & Perloff, Jeffrey M., "undated". "The iPhone goes downstream: mandatory universal distribution," CUDARE Working Papers 123636, University of California, Berkeley, Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics.
    19. Armstrong, Mark & Sappington, David E.M., 2007. "Recent Developments in the Theory of Regulation," Handbook of Industrial Organization, in: Mark Armstrong & Robert Porter (ed.), Handbook of Industrial Organization, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 27, pages 1557-1700, Elsevier.
    20. Debashis Pal & David Sappington & Ying Tang, 2012. "Sabotaging cost containment," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 41(3), pages 293-314, June.

    More about this item

    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:edj:ceauch:164. 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.

    We have no bibliographic 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.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ceuclcl.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.