IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/scp/wpaper/05-15.html

Ratifiability of Efficient Collusive Mechanisms in Second-Price Auctions with Participation Costs

Author

Listed:
  • Guofu Tan
  • Okan Yilankaya

Abstract

We investigate whether efficient collusive bidding mechanisms are affected by potential information leakage from bidders’ decisions to participate in them within the independent private values setting. We apply the concept of ratifiability introduced by Cramton and Palfrey (1995) and show that when the seller uses a second-price auction with participation costs, the standard efficient cartel mechanisms such as preauction knockouts analyzed in the literature will not be ratified by cartel members. A high-value bidder benefits from vetoing the cartel mechanism since doing so sends a credible signal that she has high value, which in turn discourages other bidders from participating in the seller’s auction.

Suggested Citation

  • Guofu Tan & Okan Yilankaya, 2005. "Ratifiability of Efficient Collusive Mechanisms in Second-Price Auctions with Participation Costs," IEPR Working Papers 05.15, Institute of Economic Policy Research (IEPR).
    • Handle: RePEc:scp:wpaper:05-15
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a
    for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Other versions of this item:

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Ken Hendricks & Robert Porter & Guofu Tan, 2008. "Bidding rings and the winner's curse," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 39(4), pages 1018-1041, December.
    3. Hsueh, Shao-Chieh & Tian, Guoqiang, 2009. "Nonratifiability of the Cartel Mechanism in First-Price Sealed-Bid Auction with Participation Costs," MPRA Paper 41202, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised Oct 2010.
    4. Celik, Gorkem & Peters, Michael, 2011. "Equilibrium rejection of a mechanism," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 73(2), pages 375-387.
    5. Gorkem Celik & Michael Peters, 2016. "Reciprocal relationships and mechanism design," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 49(1), pages 374-411, February.
    6. Correia-da-Silva, João, 2020. "Self-rejecting mechanisms," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 434-457.
    7. Kim, Jin Yeub & Lee, Jong Jae, 2025. "Biased mediation: Selection and effectiveness," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 229(C).
    8. Balzer, Benjamin & Schneider, Johannes, 2023. "Mechanism design with informational punishment," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 197-209.
    9. Cao, Xiaoyong & Hsueh, Shao-Chieh & Wang, Wei, 2020. "On stability of efficient cartel mechanisms in first-price auctions with uninformed bidders," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 187(C).
    10. Celik, Gorkem & Yilankaya, Okan, 2017. "Resale in second-price auctions with costly participation," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 148-174.
    11. Marco Pagnozzi, 2011. "Bids as a Vehicle of (Mis)Information: Collusion in English Auctions with Affiliated Values," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 20(4), pages 1171-1196, December.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • C72 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Noncooperative Games
    • D44 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design - - - Auctions
    • D82 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Asymmetric and Private Information; Mechanism Design

    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:scp:wpaper:05-15. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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/ieuscus.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.