IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/fth/pensta/10-93-2.html

What Do "Facilitating Practices" Facilitates? An Empirical Investigation of Most-Favored Nation Clauses in Natural Gas Contracts

Author

Listed:
  • Crocker, K.J.
  • Lyon, T.P.

Abstract

Long-term contracts often include most-favored-nation clauses (MFNs), which are nondiscrimination guarantees that obligate a buyer or seller to treat all trading partners symmetrically in pricing decisions. Recent theoretical work has shown that such clauses can facilitate tacit collusion by increasing the cost of selective price changes aimed at attracting new business. An alternative view is that MFNs serve to facilitate efficient price adjustment in extended exchange relationships. We test these competing hypotheses using data from long-term natural gas contracts, many of which employ MFNs. Our conclusion is that the pattern of MFN adoption, in conjunction with the structure of the nondiscrimination regions and the parallels with other nonstrategic price escalation provisions, lends strong support to the efficiency rationale. Copyright 1994 by the University of Chicago.
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)

Suggested Citation

  • Crocker, K.J. & Lyon, T.P., 1993. "What Do "Facilitating Practices" Facilitates? An Empirical Investigation of Most-Favored Nation Clauses in Natural Gas Contracts," Papers 10-93-2, Pennsylvania State - Department of Economics.
    • Handle: RePEc:fth:pensta:10-93-2
    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. Kazuhiro Ohnishi, 2010. "Most-Favoured-Customer Pricing and Labour-Managed Oligopoly," Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, Springer, vol. 10(1), pages 33-40, March.
    2. Fiona Scott Morton, 1996. "The Strategic Response by Pharmaceutical Firms to the Medicaid Most-Favored-Customer Rules," NBER Working Papers 5717, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    3. Guo, Di & Hua, Xinyu & Jiang, Kun, 2017. "Agency and strategic contracts: Theory and evidence from R&D agreements in the pharmaceutical industry," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 37-64.
    4. Maria Goddard & Russell Mannion, 1998. "From competition to co‐operation: new economic relationships in the National Health Service," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 7(2), pages 105-119, March.
    5. Felipe Avilés-Lucero & Andre Boik, 2018. "Wholesale most-favored-nation clauses and price discrimination with negative consumption externalities: equivalence results," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 54(3), pages 266-291, December.
    6. Helm, Roland & Kloyer, Martin, 2004. "Controlling contractual exchange risks in R&D interfirm cooperation: an empirical study," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(8), pages 1103-1122, October.
    7. Hamelmann, Lisa & Haucap, Justus & Wey, Christian, 2015. "Die wettbewerbsrechtliche Zulässigkeit von Meistbegünstigungsklauseln auf Buchungsplattformen am Beispiel von HRS," DICE Ordnungspolitische Perspektiven 72, Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf Institute for Competition Economics (DICE).
    8. Arbatskaya, Maria & Hviid, Morten & Shaffer, Greg, 2004. "On the Incidence and Variety of Low-Price Guarantees," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 47(1), pages 307-332, April.
    9. Gönenç Gürkaynak & Ayşe Güner & Sinan Diniz & Janelle Filson, 2016. "Most-favored-nation clauses in commercial contracts: legal and economic analysis and proposal for a guideline," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 42(1), pages 129-155, August.
    10. Spier, Kathryn E., 2001. "The Use of “Most-Favored-Nation” Clauses in Settlement of Litigation," Berkeley Olin Program in Law & Economics, Working Paper Series qt7hm4d39g, Berkeley Olin Program in Law & Economics.
    11. Stephan, Levy, 2004. "Best-price Guarantees as a Quality Signal," MPRA Paper 13466, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 02 Nov 2004.
    12. Jeffrey Church & Roger Ware, 1998. "Abuse of Dominance under the 1986 Canadian Competition Act," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 13(1), pages 85-129, April.
    13. Gaynor, Martin & Vogt, William B., 2000. "Antitrust and competition in health care markets," Handbook of Health Economics, in: A. J. Culyer & J. P. Newhouse (ed.), Handbook of Health Economics, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 27, pages 1405-1487, Elsevier.
    14. Martin Kloyer, 2004. "Opportunismus und Verhandlungsmacht in F&E-Lieferbeziehungen — Eine empirische Untersuchung," Schmalenbach Journal of Business Research, Springer, vol. 56(4), pages 333-364, June.
    15. Aaron S. Edlin and Eric R. Emch., 1997. "The Welfare Losses from Price Matching Policies," Economics Working Papers 97-257, University of California at Berkeley.
    16. Andrea Mantovani & Claudio Piga & Carlo Reggiani, 2019. "Much ado about nothing? Online platform price parity clauses and the EU Booking.com case," Economics Discussion Paper Series 1909, Economics, The University of Manchester.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;

    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:fth:pensta:10-93-2. 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: Thomas Krichel (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/depsuus.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.