Auctions with Positive Synergies: Experimental Evidence
In a standard auction, bidders bid more aggressively when the number of bidders increases. However, Krishna and Rosenthal (1996, Games and Economic Behavior) show that when bidders have multiple-unit demand that generates positive synergies, bidders bid less aggressively as the number of bidders increases. The first objective of this paper is to offer experimental evidence on this seemingly counter-intuitive theoretical prediction. Following the model of Krishna and Rosenthal, we design a simultaneous second-price sealed-bid auction for two objects with two types of bidders: single-object and multiple-object demand bidders. Our results show that bidders bid less aggressively with increased competition. The second objective is to investigate the effect of offering global bidders the option of bidding for both objects as a package as well as submitting individual bids for each object. Controlling for bidders' valuations, we find that offering this option to global bidders increases allocative efficiency and sellers' revenue.
|Date of creation:||Dec 2008|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: Ludwigstraße 33, D-80539 Munich, Germany|
Web page: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de
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.:
- Brannman, Lance & Klein, J Douglass & Weiss, Leonard W, 1987. "The Price Effects of Increased Competition in Auction Markets," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 69(1), pages 24-32, February.
- Indranil Chakraborty, 1999. "Bundling decisions for selling multiple objects," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 13(3), pages 723-733.
- Alsemgeest, Paul & Noussair, Charles & Olson, Mark, 1998.
"Experimental Comparisons of Auctions under Single- and Multi-Unit Demand,"
Western Economic Association International, vol. 36(1), pages 87-97, January.
- Alsemgeest, P. & Noussair, C. & Olson, M., 1995. "Experimental Comparisons of Auctions Under Single and Multi Unit Demand," Purdue University Economics Working Papers 1078, Purdue University, Department of Economics.
- Chakraborty, Indranil, 2006. "Bundle and separate sales in auctions with entry," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 54(1), pages 31-46, January.
- Estelle Cantillon & Martin Pesendorfer, 2013.
"Combination bidding in multi-unit auctions,"
LSE Research Online Documents on Economics
54289, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
- Colwell, Peter F & Yavas, Abdullah, 1994. "The Demand for Agricultural Land and Strategic Bidding in Auctions," The Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics, Springer, vol. 8(2), pages 137-149, March.
- repec:ebl:ecbull:v:4:y:2004:i:8:p:1-14 is not listed on IDEAS
- Bykowsky, Mark M & Cull, Robert J & Ledyard, John O, 2000.
"Mutually Destructive Bidding: The FCC Auction Design Problem,"
Journal of Regulatory Economics,
Springer, vol. 17(3), pages 205-28, May.
- Bykowsky, Mark M. & Cull, Robert J. & Ledyard, John O., 1998. "Mutually Destructive Bidding: The FCC Auction Design Problem," Working Papers 916, California Institute of Technology, Division of the Humanities and Social Sciences.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:12669. 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: (Joachim Winter)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.