Equilibrium Distribution Systems Under Retailers' Strategic Behavior
This paper investigates what are the equilibrium distribution systems in a successive duopoly when retailers hold the power to choose the number of products they wish to market. Since they both can be multi-product sellers, the number of possible channel structures considered is larger than in previous work. Then, we study whether the resulting distribution systems obtained in earlier papers still remain. In particular, whether there are incentives to adopt exclusive distribution agreements, whether a manufacturer is foreclosed from the market and, essentially, whether there exists, at equilibrium, enough inter and intra-brand competition. The analysis shows that provided low brand asymmetry, it is sufficient that retailers hold the power to choose the number of products they wish to distribute to obtain endogenously both inter and intra-brand competition; both retailers become multi-product sellers. However, as the profitability of brands diverges sufficiently, only the most profitable brand will be distributed by both retailers thus only arising intra-brand competition at equilibrium. Neither the exclusive distribution system nor a common distribution system analized in the previous literature appears at equilibrium.
|Date of creation:||Jan 2001|
|Date of revision:|
|Publication status:||Published by Ivie|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: C/ Guardia Civil, 22, Esc 2a, 1o, E-46020 VALENCIA|
Phone: +34 96 319 00 50
Fax: +34 96 319 00 55
Web page: http://www.ivie.es/
More information through EDIRC
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.:
- Tommy Staahl Gabrielsen & Lars Sørgard, 1999.
"Exclusive versus Common Dealership,"
Southern Economic Journal,
Southern Economic Association, vol. 66(2), pages 353-366, October.
- Gabrielsen, T. & Sorgard, L., 1999. "Exclusive Versus Common Dealership," Norway; Department of Economics, University of Bergen 200, Department of Economics, University of Bergen.
- Besanko, David & Perry, Martin K., 1994. "Exclusive dealing in a spatial model of retail competition," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 12(3), pages 297-329, September.
- Bonanno, Giacomo & Vickers, John, 1988. "Vertical Separation," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(3), pages 257-65, March.
- B. Douglas Bernheim & Michael D. Whinston, 1996.
NBER Working Papers
5666, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Bernheim, B.D., 1992. "Exclusive Dealing," Harvard Institute of Economic Research Working Papers 1622, Harvard - Institute of Economic Research.
- B. Douglas Bernheim & Michael D. Whinston, . "Exclusive Dealing," Working Papers 96008, Stanford University, Department of Economics.
- B. Douglas Bernheim & Michael D. Whinston, 1985. "Common Marketing Agency as a Device for Facilitating Collusion," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 16(2), pages 269-281, Summer.
- Lin, Y Joseph, 1990. "The Dampening-of-Competition Effect of Exclusive Dealing," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(2), pages 209-23, December.
- Shaffer, Greg, 1991. "Capturing Strategic Rent: Full-Line Forcing, Brand Discounts, Aggregate Rebates, and Maximum Resale Price Maintenance," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(5), pages 557-75, September.
- Tommy Gabrielsen, 1996. "The foreclosure argument for exclusive dealing: The case of differentiated retailers," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 63(1), pages 25-40, February.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ivi:wpasad:2001-01. 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: (Departamento de Edición)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.