IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/pen/papers/13-053.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Role of Quality in Service Markets Organized as Multi-Attribute Auctions

Author

Listed:
  • Elena Krasnokutskaya

    (Department of Economics, Johns Hopkins University)

  • Kyungchul Song

    (Department of Economics, University of British Columbia)

  • Xun Tang

    (Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania)

Abstract

We develop an empirical methodology to study markets for services. These markets are typically organized as multi-attribute auctions in which buyers take into account seller's price as well as various characteristics, including quality. Our identification and estimation strategies exploit observed buyers' and sellers' decisions to recover the distribution of sellers' qualities, the distribution of seller's costs conditional on quality, and the distribution of buyers' tastes. Our empirical results from the on-line market for programming services confirm that quality plays an important role. We use our estimates to study the effect of licensing restrictions and to assess the loss of value from using standard rather than multi-attribute auctions as is common in public procurement.

Suggested Citation

  • Elena Krasnokutskaya & Kyungchul Song & Xun Tang, 2013. "The Role of Quality in Service Markets Organized as Multi-Attribute Auctions," PIER Working Paper Archive 13-053, Penn Institute for Economic Research, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania.
    • Handle: RePEc:pen:papers:13-053
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://economics.sas.upenn.edu/sites/default/files/filevault/13-053.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mireia Jofre-Bonet & Martin Pesendorfer, 2003. "Estimation of a Dynamic Auction Game," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 71(5), pages 1443-1489, September.
    2. Gregory Lewis, 2011. "Asymmetric Information, Adverse Selection and Online Disclosure: The Case of eBay Motors," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 101(4), pages 1535-1546, June.
    3. Lee, Sokbae & Song, Kyungchul & Whang, Yoon-Jae, 2013. "Testing functional inequalities," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 172(1), pages 14-32.
    4. McFadden, Daniel, 1989. "A Method of Simulated Moments for Estimation of Discrete Response Models without Numerical Integration," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 57(5), pages 995-1026, September.
    5. Li, Tong & Perrigne, Isabelle & Vuong, Quang, 2000. "Conditionally independent private information in OCS wildcat auctions," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 98(1), pages 129-161, September.
    6. Nevo, Aviv, 2001. "Measuring Market Power in the Ready-to-Eat Cereal Industry," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 69(2), pages 307-342, March.
    7. Elena Krasnokutskaya & Katja Seim, 2011. "Bid Preference Programs and Participation in Highway Procurement Auctions," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 101(6), pages 2653-2686, October.
    8. Keane, Michael P & Wolpin, Kenneth I, 1997. "The Career Decisions of Young Men," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 105(3), pages 473-522, June.
    9. Gregory S. Crawford & Matthew Shum, 2005. "Uncertainty and Learning in Pharmaceutical Demand," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 73(4), pages 1137-1173, July.
    10. Luís Cabral & Ali Hortaçsu, 2010. "The Dynamics Of Seller Reputation: Evidence From Ebay," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 58(1), pages 54-78, March.
    11. Heckman, James & Singer, Burton, 1984. "A Method for Minimizing the Impact of Distributional Assumptions in Econometric Models for Duration Data," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 52(2), pages 271-320, March.
    12. Pierre-Andre Chiappori & Bernard Salanie, 2000. "Testing for Asymmetric Information in Insurance Markets," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 108(1), pages 56-78, February.
    13. Berthold Herrendorf & Richard Rogerson & ?kos Valentinyi, 2013. "Two Perspectives on Preferences and Structural Transformation," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 103(7), pages 2752-2789, December.
    14. Marion, Justin, 2007. "Are bid preferences benign? The effect of small business subsidies in highway procurement auctions," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 91(7-8), pages 1591-1624, August.
    15. Berry, Steven & Levinsohn, James & Pakes, Ariel, 1995. "Automobile Prices in Market Equilibrium," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 63(4), pages 841-890, July.
    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. Lee, Sokbae & Song, Kyungchul & Whang, Yoon-Jae, 2018. "Testing For A General Class Of Functional Inequalities," Econometric Theory, Cambridge University Press, vol. 34(5), pages 1018-1064, October.
    2. Tunay I. Tunca & D. J. Wu & Fang (Vivian) Zhong, 2014. "An Empirical Analysis of Price, Quality, and Incumbency in Procurement Auctions," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 16(3), pages 346-364, July.
    3. Takahashi, Hidenori, 2015. "Strategic design under uncertain evaluations : structural analysis of design-build auctions," Working Papers 15-08, University of Mannheim, Department of Economics.
    4. NAKABAYASHI Jun & HIROSE Yohsuke, 2016. "Structural Estimation of the Scoring Auction Model," Discussion papers 16008, Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry (RIETI).

    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. Hu, Yingyao, 2017. "The Econometrics of Unobservables -- Latent Variable and Measurement Error Models and Their Applications in Empirical Industrial Organization and Labor Economics [The Econometrics of Unobservables]," Economics Working Paper Archive 64578, The Johns Hopkins University,Department of Economics, revised 2021.
    2. Daniel Ackerberg, 2009. "A new use of importance sampling to reduce computational burden in simulation estimation," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 7(4), pages 343-376, December.
    3. Browning, Martin & Carro, Jesus M., 2014. "Dynamic binary outcome models with maximal heterogeneity," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 178(2), pages 805-823.
    4. Hickman Brent R. & Hubbard Timothy P. & Sağlam Yiğit, 2012. "Structural Econometric Methods in Auctions: A Guide to the Literature," Journal of Econometric Methods, De Gruyter, vol. 1(1), pages 67-106, August.
    5. Elena Krasnokutskaya & Christian Terwiesch & Lucia Tiererova, 2018. "Trading across Borders in Online Auctions," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 10(4), pages 27-66, November.
    6. Freyberger, Joachim, 2015. "Asymptotic theory for differentiated products demand models with many markets," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 185(1), pages 162-181.
    7. Hoffman, Mitchell & Burks, Stephen V., 2017. "Worker Overconfidence: Field Evidence and Implications for Employee Turnover and Returns from Training," IZA Discussion Papers 10794, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    8. Pradeep Chintagunta & Jean-Pierre Dubé & Vishal Singh, 2003. "Balancing Profitability and Customer Welfare in a Supermarket Chain," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 1(1), pages 111-147, March.
    9. Alcalde, Pilar & Vial, Bernardita, 2016. "Willingness to Pay for Firm Reputation: Paying for Risk Rating in the Annuity Market," MPRA Paper 68993, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    10. Patrick Bajari & C. Lanier Benkard & Jonathan Levin, 2007. "Estimating Dynamic Models of Imperfect Competition," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 75(5), pages 1331-1370, September.
    11. Michela M. Tincani, 2021. "Teacher labor markets, school vouchers, and student cognitive achievement: Evidence from Chile," Quantitative Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 12(1), pages 173-216, January.
    12. Andrew Ching & Susumu Imai & Masakazu Ishihara & Neelam Jain, 2012. "A practitioner’s guide to Bayesian estimation of discrete choice dynamic programming models," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 10(2), pages 151-196, June.
    13. Sharon Traiberman, 2017. "Occupations and Import Competition," 2017 Meeting Papers 1237, Society for Economic Dynamics.
    14. Elena Krasnokutskaya, 2012. "Identification And Estimation Of Auction Model With Two‐Dimensional Unobserved Heterogeneity," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 53(3), pages 659-692, August.
    15. Daniel Prudencio, 2023. "Productivity in Procurement Auctions of Pavement Contracts in Mexico," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 60(1), pages 63-85, August.
    16. Benjamin V Rosa, 2024. "Subcontracting requirements and the cost of government procurement," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 55(1), pages 3-32, March.
    17. Guofang Huang & Hong Luo & Jing Xia, 2019. "Invest in Information or Wing It? A Model of Dynamic Pricing with Seller Learning," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 65(12), pages 5556-5583, December.
    18. Aguirregabiria, Victor & Mira, Pedro, 2010. "Dynamic discrete choice structural models: A survey," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 156(1), pages 38-67, May.
    19. Victor Aguirregabiria & Margaret Slade, 2017. "Empirical models of firms and industries," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 50(5), pages 1445-1488, December.
    20. Philip A Haile & Yuichi Kitamura, 2019. "Unobserved heterogeneity in auctions," The Econometrics Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 22(1), pages 1-19.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    quality; services; licensing; procurement; multi-attribute auctions; identification; unobserved heterogeneity; unobserved buyers'tastes; participation in auctions;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C14 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods and Methodology: General - - - Semiparametric and Nonparametric Methods: General
    • C18 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods and Methodology: General - - - Methodolical Issues: General
    • D22 - Microeconomics - - Production and Organizations - - - Firm Behavior: Empirical Analysis
    • D44 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design - - - Auctions
    • D82 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Asymmetric and Private Information; Mechanism Design
    • L15 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Information and Product Quality
    • L86 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Services - - - Information and Internet Services; Computer Software

    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:pen:papers:13-053. 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: Administrator (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/deupaus.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.