We provide a theoretical justification for bi-sourcing, which refers to the situation where a final goods producer buys an input from an outside supplier and also produces it in-house. Bi-sourcing occurs if the marginal cost of producing the input in-house is higher than the marginal cost of outside input supplier. In-house input production helps to reduce the input price charged by the outside supplier, and may make bi-sourcing as a profitable strategy. We show that bi-sourcing can be a profitable strategy under both monopoly and product market competition. The incentive for bi-sourcing depends on the product market and outside input market competition. Our result suggests that certain amount of input production with a relatively high-cost technology can make the consumers better off compared to the situation where the entire inputs are produced with a low-cost technology.
|Date of creation:|
|Date of revision:|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: |
Phone: (44) 0115 951 5620
Fax: (0115) 951 4159
Web page: http://www.nottingham.ac.uk/economics/
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.:
- Du, Julan & Lu, Yi & Tao, Zhigang, 2006. "Why do firms conduct bi-sourcing?," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 92(2), pages 245-249, August.
- Jay Pil Choi & Carl Davidson, 2004. "Strategic Second Sourcing by Multinationals," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 45(2), pages 579-600, 05.
- Bruce Kogut & Nalin Kulatilaka, 1994. "Operating Flexibility, Global Manufacturing, and the Option Value of a Multinational Network," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 40(1), pages 123-139, January.
- Arijit Mukherjee, 2008. "Unionised Labour Market and Strategic Production Decision of a Multinational," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 118(532), pages 1621-1639, October.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:not:notecp:08/06. 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: ()
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.