IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/edn/esedps/291.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Beating Coase at Monopoly

Author

Abstract

We study how a buyer unable to price discriminate should satisfy his demand in the presence of diseconomies of scale in production. Defying the Coase Conjecture, we show that auctioning contracts for lots (block sourcing) followed by setting a price to realize (part of) the residual gains from trade a ways leads to higher buyer surplus than simply setting a price.

Suggested Citation

  • Lluis Bru & Daniel Cardona & Jozef Sakovics, 2019. "Beating Coase at Monopoly," Edinburgh School of Economics Discussion Paper Series 291, Edinburgh School of Economics, University of Edinburgh.
  • Handle: RePEc:edn:esedps:291
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.econ.ed.ac.uk/papers/id291_esedps.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Burguet, Roberto & Sákovics, József, 2017. "Bertrand and the long run," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 39-55.
    2. Tunay I. Tunca & Qiong Wu, 2009. "Multiple Sourcing and Procurement Process Selection with Bidding Events," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 55(5), pages 763-780, May.
    3. Coase, Ronald H, 1972. "Durability and Monopoly," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 15(1), pages 143-149, April.
    4. James J. Anton & Dennis A. Yao, 1989. "Split Awards, Procurement, and Innovation," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 20(4), pages 538-552, Winter.
    5. Jozsef Sakovics & Lluis Bru & Daniel Cardona, 2018. "Block sourcing," Edinburgh School of Economics Discussion Paper Series 287, Edinburgh School of Economics, University of Edinburgh.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Jose Alcalde & Matthias Dahm, 2016. "Proportional payoffs in legislative bargaining with weighted voting: a characterization," Discussion Papers 2016-03, The Centre for Decision Research and Experimental Economics, School of Economics, University of Nottingham.
    2. Anton, James J. & Brusco, Sandro & Lopomo, Giuseppe, 2010. "Split-award procurement auctions with uncertain scale economies: Theory and data," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 69(1), pages 24-41, May.
    3. Alcalde, José & Dahm, Matthias, 2019. "Dual sourcing with price discovery," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 225-246.
    4. Jozsef Sakovics & Lluis Bru & Daniel Cardona, 2018. "Block sourcing," Edinburgh School of Economics Discussion Paper Series 287, Edinburgh School of Economics, University of Edinburgh.
    5. Lorentziadis, Panos L., 2016. "Optimal bidding in auctions from a game theory perspective," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 248(2), pages 347-371.
    6. Yim, Andrew, 2010. "Quality Cost and Failure Risk in the Choice of Single versus Multiple Sourcing," MPRA Paper 27858, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    7. Gong, Jiong & Li, Jianpei & McAfee, R. Preston, 2012. "Split-award contracts with investment," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 96(1), pages 188-197.
    8. Jianqiang Zhang & Weijun Zhong & Shue Mei, 2012. "Competitive effects of informative advertising in distribution channels," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 23(3), pages 561-584, September.
    9. Wu, Chien-Wei & Gong, Jyh-Chyi & Chiu, Hsien-Hung, 2016. "Duopoly competition with non-deceptive counterfeiters," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 33-40.
    10. Muermann, Alexander & Shore, Stephen H., 2005. "Spot market power and future market trading," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 24644, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    11. Kathryn E. Spier, 2003. "“Tied to the Mast”: Most-Favored-Nation Clauses in Settlement Contracts," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 32(1), pages 91-120, January.
    12. Hervouet, Adrien & Langinier, Corinne, 2018. "Plant Breeders’ Rights, Patents, and Incentives to Innovate," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 43(1), January.
    13. Victor F. Araman & Bassam Fayad, 2021. "Intertemporal Price Discrimination with Time-Varying Valuations," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 69(1), pages 245-265, January.
    14. Vincent Mak & Amnon Rapoport & Eyran J. Gisches & Jiaojie Han, 2014. "Purchasing Scarce Products Under Dynamic Pricing: An Experimental Investigation," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 16(3), pages 425-438, July.
    15. Dubey, Pradeep & Sondermann, Dieter, 2009. "Perfect competition in an oligopoly (including bilateral monopoly)," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 65(1), pages 124-141, January.
    16. Susanna Esteban & Matthew Shum, 2007. "Durable-goods oligopoly with secondary markets: the case of automobiles," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 38(2), pages 332-354, June.
    17. Liberali, Guilherme & Gruca, Thomas S. & Nique, Walter M., 2011. "The effects of sensitization and habituation in durable goods markets," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 212(2), pages 398-410, July.
    18. James J. Anton & Gary Biglaiser, 2010. "Quality, Upgrades, and Equilibrium in a Dynamic Monopoly Model," Working Papers 10-36, Duke University, Department of Economics.
    19. Steven F. Koch, 2005. "Love and Addiction: The Importance of Commitment," Working Papers 200516, University of Pretoria, Department of Economics.
    20. Galiani, Sebastian & Jaitman, Laura & Weinschelbaum, Federico, 2020. "Crime and durable goods," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 173(C), pages 146-163.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    block sourcing; lot auction; monopoly; procurement; residual market; split awards;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D42 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design - - - Monopoly
    • D44 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design - - - Auctions
    • L12 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Monopoly; Monopolization Strategies

    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:edn:esedps:291. 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: . General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/deediuk.html .

    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: Research Office (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/deediuk.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.