IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/not/notecp/08-02.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Excessive entry in a bilateral oligopoly

Author

Listed:
  • Arijit Mukherjee

Abstract

In a bilateral oligopoly, Ghosh and Morita (‘Social desirability of free entry: a bilateral oligopoly analysis, 2007, IJIO) show that entry is always socially insufficient if the upstream agents have sufficiently strong bargaining power. We show that this conclusion is very much dependent on the use of “efficient bargaining” model in their analysis. Using a “right-to-manage” model, we show that, even if the upstream agents have full bargaining power, entry is excessive in a bilateral oligopoly if the cost of entry is not very high. Hence, whether the anti-competitive entry regulation is justified under bilateral oligopoly depends on the bargaining structure between the upstream and the downstream agents.

Suggested Citation

  • Arijit Mukherjee, "undated". "Excessive entry in a bilateral oligopoly," Discussion Papers 08/02, University of Nottingham, School of Economics.
  • Handle: RePEc:not:notecp:08/02
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.nottingham.ac.uk/economics/documents/discussion-papers/08-02.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Justus Haucap & Christian Wey, 2004. "Unionisation structures and innovation incentives," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 114(494), pages 149-165, March.
    2. Kjell Erik Lommerud & Frode Meland & Lars S¯rgard, 2003. "Unionised Oligopoly, Trade Liberalisation and Location Choice," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 113(490), pages 782-800, October.
    3. Lopez, Monica Correa & Naylor, Robin A., 2004. "The Cournot-Bertrand profit differential: A reversal result in a differentiated duopoly with wage bargaining," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 48(3), pages 681-696, June.
    4. Naylor, Robin A., 2002. "Industry profits and competition under bilateral oligopoly," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 77(2), pages 169-175, October.
    5. Arghya Ghosh & Hodaka Morita, 2007. "Free entry and social efficiency under vertical oligopoly," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 38(2), pages 541-554, June.
    6. Ghosh, Arghya & Morita, Hodaka, 2007. "Social desirability of free entry: A bilateral oligopoly analysis," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 25(5), pages 925-934, October.
    7. Bughin, Jacques & Vannini, Stefano, 1995. "Strategic direct investment under unionized oligopoly," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 13(1), pages 127-145, March.
    8. Cusumano, Michael A., 1954- & Takeishi, Akira, 1958-., 1991. "Supplier relations and management : a survey of Japanese, Japanese-transplant, and U.S. auto plants," Working papers 3256-91., Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Sloan School of Management.
    9. Corneo, Giacomo, 1995. "National wage bargaining in an internationally integrated product market," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 11(3), pages 503-520, September.
    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. Arijit Mukherjee, 2010. "External Economies of Scale and Insufficient Entry," Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, Springer, vol. 10(3), pages 365-371, September.
    2. Marjit, Sugata & Mukherjee, Arijit, 2013. "Foreign competition and social efficiency of entry," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 32(C), pages 108-112.
    3. Arijit Mukherjee & Udo Broll & Soma Mukherjee, 2009. "The welfare effects of entry: the role of the input market," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 98(3), pages 189-201, December.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Bilateral oligopoly; Excessive entry; Free entry; Insufficient entry;

    JEL classification:

    • L1 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance
    • L4 - Industrial Organization - - Antitrust Issues and Policies

    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:not:notecp:08/02. 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: http://edirc.repec.org/data/denotuk.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 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.

    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.