IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/nbr/nberwo/5085.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Settling for Coupons: Discount Contracts as Compensation and Punishment in Antitrust Lawsuits

Author

Listed:
  • Severin Borenstein

Abstract

A number of recent antitrust lawsuits have been settled with discount contracts in which the defendants agree in the future to sell to the plaintiffs at a discount off of the price they offer to other buyers. Economists often object to such settlements, arguing that the sellers will partially or fully offset these discounts by increasing the baseline price from which the discount is calculated. This paper shows that poorly structured discount contracts will indeed result in price increases for other buyers and that other buyers, not the sellers, are likely to bear most of the cost imposed by the settlement. Carefully formulated discount settlements, however, can avoid giving the sellers an incentive to raise prices to buyers not covered by the settlement. In such cases, the defendant bears the full cost of the settlement. I suggest that poorly structured settlements still take place because their costs are borne primarily by consumers who are not parties to these cases.

Suggested Citation

  • Severin Borenstein, 1995. "Settling for Coupons: Discount Contracts as Compensation and Punishment in Antitrust Lawsuits," NBER Working Papers 5085, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  • Handle: RePEc:nbr:nberwo:5085
    Note: IO
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.nber.org/papers/w5085.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Judith R. Gelman & Steven C. Salop, 1983. "Judo Economics: Capacity Limitation and Coupon Competition," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 14(2), pages 315-325, Autumn.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. A. Mitchell Polinsky & Daniel Rubinfeld, "undated". "Remedies for Price Overcharges: The Deadweight Loss of Coupons and Discounts," American Law & Economics Association Annual Meetings 1060, American Law & Economics Association.
    2. Liberty Mncube, 2014. "Settling for a discount: A review of the pioneer foods price reduction remedy," Agrekon, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 53(1), pages 26-45, March.
    3. A. Mitchell Polinsky & Daniel L. Rubinfeld, 2005. "A Damage-Revelation Rationale for Coupon Remedies," NBER Working Papers 11227, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. Giorgio Rampa & Margherita Saraceno, 2018. "Accuracy and Costs of Dispute Resolution with Heterogeneous Consumers. A Conjectural Approach to Mass Litigation," DEM Working Papers Series 155, University of Pavia, Department of Economics and Management.
    5. Tim Baldenius & Stefan Reichelstein, 2006. "External and Internal Pricing in Multidivisional Firms," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 44(1), pages 1-28, March.
    6. A. Mitchell Polinsky & Daniel L. Rubinfeld, 2008. "The Deadweight Loss Of Coupon Remedies For Price Overcharges," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 56(2), pages 402-417, June.
    7. de Frutos, María-Ángeles & Fabra, Natalia, 2012. "How to allocate forward contracts: The case of electricity markets," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 56(3), pages 451-469.
    8. Giorgio Rampa & Margherita Saraceno, 2023. "Conjectures and underpricing in repeated mass disputes with heterogeneous plaintiffs," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 139(1), pages 1-32, June.
    9. Baldenius, Tim & Reichelstein, Stefan J., 2004. "External and Internal Pricing in Multidivisional Firms," Research Papers 1825r, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
    10. Mncube, Liberty, 2014. "Settling for a discount: A review of the pioneer foods price reduction remedy," International Journal of Agricultural Sciences and Technology (IJAGST), SvedbergOpen, vol. 53(1), February.

    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. Raymond J. Deneckere & Dan Kovenock, 1988. "Capacity-Constrained Price Competition When Unit Costs Differ," Discussion Papers 861, Northwestern University, Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science.
    2. Choi, Jay Pil & Gerlach, Heiko, 2019. "Optimal cross-licensing arrangements: Collusion versus entry deterrence," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).
    3. Mark Bergen & Margaret A. Peteraf, 2002. "Competitor identification and competitor analysis: a broad-based managerial approach," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 23(4-5), pages 157-169.
    4. Boyer, Marcel & Moreaux, Michel, 1989. "Rationnement endogène et structure de marché," L'Actualité Economique, Société Canadienne de Science Economique, vol. 65(1), pages 119-145, mars.
    5. Daniel Ferreira & Thomas Kittsteiner, 2016. "When Does Competition Foster Commitment?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 62(11), pages 3199-3212, November.
    6. Dasci, A. & Karakul, M., 2009. "Two-period dynamic versus fixed-ratio pricing in a capacity constrained duopoly," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 197(3), pages 945-968, September.
    7. Fleckinger, Pierre & Lafay, Thierry, 2010. "Product flexibility and price competition in Hotelling's duopoly," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 60(1), pages 61-68, July.
    8. Matthew Selove, 2014. "A Dynamic Model of Competitive Entry Response," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 33(3), pages 353-363, May.
    9. Rui Baptista & Murat Karaöz & João Correia Leitão, 2020. "Diversification by young, small firms: the role of pre-entry resources and entry mistakes," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 55(1), pages 103-122, June.
    10. Michael Salinger, 1990. "The Concentration-Margins Relationship Reconsidered," Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Economic Studies Program, The Brookings Institution, vol. 21(1990 Micr), pages 287-335.
    11. Grzegorz Pawlina & Peter M. Kort, 2006. "Real Options in an Asymmetric Duopoly: Who Benefits from Your Competitive Disadvantage?," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 15(1), pages 1-35, March.
    12. Ayd{i}n Alptekinou{g}lu & Charles J. Corbett, 2008. "Mass Customization vs. Mass Production: Variety and Price Competition," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 10(2), pages 204-217, August.
    13. Xavier Mancero & Eduardo Saavedra, 2006. "Un modelo de entrada y competencia en telecomunicaciones," Revista de Analisis Economico – Economic Analysis Review, Universidad Alberto Hurtado/School of Economics and Business, vol. 21(1), pages 29-57, July.
    14. Galera, Francisco & Zaratiegui, Jesus M., 2006. "Welfare and output in third-degree price discrimination: A note," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 24(3), pages 605-611, May.
    15. Ruqu Wang & Quan Wen, 1998. "Strategic Invasion in Markets with Switching Costs," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 7(4), pages 521-549, December.
    16. Fiona Scott Morton, 1997. "Entry and Predation: British Shipping Cartels 1879–1929," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 6(4), pages 679-724, December.
    17. George Norman & Jacques‐François Thisse, 1999. "Technology Choice and Market Structure: strategic aspects of flexible manufacturing," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 47(3), pages 345-372, September.
    18. David P. Brown & David E. M. Sappington, 2021. "On the profitability of self‐sabotage," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 54(1), pages 68-91, February.
    19. Ikuo Ishibashi & Noriaki Matsushima, 2006. "Inviting entrants may help incumbent firms," Discussion Papers 2006-46, Kobe University, Graduate School of Business Administration.
    20. Steven C. Salop, 2024. "The 2023 Merger Guidelines: A Post-Chicago and Neo-Brandeisian Integration," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 65(1), pages 79-128, August.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • L40 - Industrial Organization - - Antitrust Issues and Policies - - - General
    • K41 - Law and Economics - - Legal Procedure, the Legal System, and Illegal Behavior - - - Litigation Process

    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:nbr:nberwo:5085. 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/nberrus.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.