IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/hal-04198736.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Bid coordination in sponsored search auctions: detection methodology and empirical analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Francesco Decarolis

    (Bocconi University [Milan, Italy])

  • Maris Goldmanis

    (RHUL - Royal Holloway [University of London])

  • Antonio Penta

    (TSE-R - Toulouse School of Economics - UT Capitole - Université Toulouse Capitole - UT - Université de Toulouse - EHESS - École des hautes études en sciences sociales - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique - INRAE - Institut National de Recherche pour l’Agriculture, l’Alimentation et l’Environnement, Barcelona School of Economics, University Pompeu Fabra)

  • Ksenia Shakhgildyan

    (Bocconi University [Milan, Italy])

Abstract

Bid delegation to specialized intermediaries is common in internet ad auctions. When the same intermediary bids for competing advertisers, its incentive to coordinate client bids might alter the functioning of the auctions. This study develops a methodology to detect bid coordination and presents a strategy to estimate a bound on the search engine revenue losses imposed by bid coordination. When the method is applied to data from auctions held on a major search engine, coordination is detected in 55% of the cases of delegated bidding and the search engine's revenue loss ranges between 5.3% and 10.4%.

Suggested Citation

  • Francesco Decarolis & Maris Goldmanis & Antonio Penta & Ksenia Shakhgildyan, 2023. "Bid coordination in sponsored search auctions: detection methodology and empirical analysis," Post-Print hal-04198736, HAL.
    • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-04198736
    DOI: 10.1111/joie.12331
    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 search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Francesco Decarolis & Gabriele Rovigatti, 2021. "From Mad Men to Maths Men: Concentration and Buyer Power in Online Advertising," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 111(10), pages 3299-3327, October.
    2. Abou Nabout, Nadia & Skiera, Bernd, 2012. "Return on Quality Improvements in Search Engine Marketing," Journal of Interactive Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 26(3), pages 141-154.
    3. Tilman B?rgers & Ingemar Cox & Martin Pesendorfer & Vaclav Petricek, 2013. "Equilibrium Bids in Sponsored Search Auctions: Theory and Evidence," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 5(4), pages 163-187, November.
    4. Benjamin Edelman & Michael Ostrovsky & Michael Schwarz, 2007. "Internet Advertising and the Generalized Second-Price Auction: Selling Billions of Dollars Worth of Keywords," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 97(1), pages 242-259, March.
    5. Kalai, Adam Tauman & Kalai, Ehud & Lehrer, Ehud & Samet, Dov, 2010. "A commitment folk theorem," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 69(1), pages 127-137, May.
    6. Hyunyoung Choi & Hal Varian, 2012. "Predicting the Present with Google Trends," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 88(s1), pages 2-9, June.
    7. Ashlagi, Itai & Monderer, Dov & Tennenholtz, Moshe, 2009. "Mediators in position auctions," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 67(1), pages 2-21, September.
    8. Jakub Kastl, 2011. "Discrete Bids and Empirical Inference in Divisible Good Auctions," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 78(3), pages 974-1014.
    9. Che, Yeon-Koo & Choi, Syngjoo & Kim, Jinwoo, 2017. "An experimental study of sponsored-search auctions," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 20-43.
    10. Przemyslaw Jeziorski & Ilya Segal, 2015. "What Makes Them Click: Empirical Analysis of Consumer Demand for Search Advertising," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 7(3), pages 24-53, August.
    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. Francesco Decarolis & Maris Goldmanis & Antonio Penta, 2020. "Marketing Agencies and Collusive Bidding in Online Ad Auctions," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 66(10), pages 4433-4454, October.
    2. Francesco Decarolis & Gabriele Rovigatti, 2021. "From Mad Men to Maths Men: Concentration and Buyer Power in Online Advertising," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 111(10), pages 3299-3327, October.
    3. Shijie Lu & Yi Zhu & Anthony Dukes, 2015. "Position Auctions with Budget Constraints: Implications for Advertisers and Publishers," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 34(6), pages 897-905, November.
    4. Davydov, D. & Izmalkov, S. & Smirnov, A., 2015. "Sponsored-Search Auctions: Empirical and Experimental Works," Journal of the New Economic Association, New Economic Association, vol. 28(4), pages 56-73.
    5. Patrick Hummel, 2018. "Hybrid mechanisms for Vickrey–Clarke–Groves and generalized second-price bids," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 47(1), pages 331-350, March.
    6. Bae, Jinsoo & Kagel, John H., 2019. "An experimental study of the generalized second price auction," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 44-68.
    7. Kaplan, Todd R. & Zamir, Shmuel, 2015. "Advances in Auctions," Handbook of Game Theory with Economic Applications,, Elsevier.
    8. Pengfei Liu, 2021. "Balancing Cost Effectiveness and Incentive Properties in Conservation Auctions: Experimental Evidence from Three Multi-award Reverse Auction Mechanisms," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 78(3), pages 417-451, March.
    9. Emmanuel LORENZON, 2016. "Collusion with a Greedy Center in Position Auctions," Cahiers du GREThA (2007-2019) 2016-08, Groupe de Recherche en Economie Théorique et Appliquée (GREThA).
    10. Joseph Golden & John Joseph Horton, 2021. "The Effects of Search Advertising on Competitors: An Experiment Before a Merger," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(1), pages 342-362, January.
    11. Che, Yeon-Koo & Choi, Syngjoo & Kim, Jinwoo, 2017. "An experimental study of sponsored-search auctions," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 20-43.
    12. Francesco Decarolis & Gabriele Rovigatti, 2017. "Online Auctions and Digital Marketing Agencies," Working Papers 17-08, NET Institute.
    13. Pallavi Pal, 2023. "Sponsored Search Auction and the Revenue- Maximizing Number of Ads per Page," CESifo Working Paper Series 10299, CESifo.
    14. Forges, Françoise, 2013. "A folk theorem for Bayesian games with commitment," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 64-71.
    15. Bernd Skiera & Nadia Abou Nabout, 2013. "Practice Prize Paper ---PROSAD: A Bidding Decision Support System for Profit Optimizing Search Engine Advertising," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(2), pages 213-220, March.
    16. Cumpston, Anne & Khezr, Peyman, 2020. "Multi-Unit Auctions: A Survey of Theoretical Literature," MPRA Paper 101336, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    17. Massimo Motta & Antonio Penta, 2022. "Market effects of sponsored search auctions," Economics Working Papers 1844, Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra.
    18. Yi Zhu & Kenneth C. Wilbur, 2008. "Strategic Bidding in Hybrid CPC/CPM Auctions," Working Papers 08-25, NET Institute, revised Oct 2008.
    19. Committee, Nobel Prize, 2020. "Improvements to auction theory and inventions of new auction formats," Nobel Prize in Economics documents 2020-2, Nobel Prize Committee.
    20. McLaughlin, Kevin & Friedman, Daniel, 2016. "Online ad auctions: An experiment," Discussion Papers, Research Professorship Market Design: Theory and Pragmatics SP II 2016-501, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • C72 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Noncooperative Games
    • D44 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design - - - Auctions
    • L81 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Services - - - Retail and Wholesale Trade; e-Commerce

    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:hal:journl:hal-04198736. 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.

    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: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    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.