Incentives for Overbidding in Minimum-Revenue Core-Selecting Auctions
We find new equilibria of minimum-revenue core-selecting (MRCS) auctions that, in contrast to previously identified equilibria, involve overbidding - bidding more than one's true value for some packages of goods. With full information, every MRCS auction in every possible setting has equilibria with overbidding and these equilibria have different properties than the previously known equilibria with bid shading. Namely, they can lead to strictly higher revenues for the seller and larger price differences among bidders. Previous studies of MRCS games with incomplete information assumed restricted strategy spaces that prevented overbidding. In this paper, we allow bidders access to their complete strategy sets and show that, in some settings, overbidding occurs in all Bayesian equilibria in undominated strategies. In a simple setting with independent private values, equilibrium strategies of a particular set of MRCS auctions employ a mixture of bid shading and overbidding. These new equilibria improve expected effi ciency relative to equilibria with restricted strategy spaces and lead to higher expected revenues than those from the Vickrey package auction. A second incomplete-information setting demonstrates that equilibria with overbidding can be in some sense unique. In this setting, every Bayesian equilibrium in undominated strategies of every MRCS auction has at least one bidder who overbids and there is no bid shading on winning packages. Overbidding eliminates the threshold problem, leading to an effi cient assignment and payoffs that are in the core with respect to the true values.
|Date of creation:||2013|
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.socialpolitik.org/|
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.:
- Aytek Erdil & Paul Klemperer, 2010.
"A New Payment Rule for Core-Selecting Package Auctions,"
Journal of the European Economic Association,
MIT Press, vol. 8(2-3), pages 537-547, 04-05.
- Aytek Erdil & Paul Klemperer, 2009. "A New Payment Rule for Core-Selecting Package Auctions," Economics Papers 2009-W11, Economics Group, Nuffield College, University of Oxford.
- Erdil, Aytek & Klemperer, Paul, 2009. "A New Payment Rule for Core-Selecting Package Auctions," CEPR Discussion Papers 7487, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
- Ausubel Lawrence M & Milgrom Paul R, 2002. "Ascending Auctions with Package Bidding," The B.E. Journal of Theoretical Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 1(1), pages 1-44, August.
- Lawrence M. Ausubel & Paul Milgrom, 2002. "Ascending Auctions with Package Bidding," Working Papers 02004, Stanford University, Department of Economics.
- Laurent Lamy, 2010. "Core-selecting package auctions: a comment on revenue-monotonicity," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 39(3), pages 503-510, July.
- Laurent Lamy, 2010. "Core-selecting package auctions: a comment on revenue-monotonicity," Post-Print halshs-00754436, HAL.
- Salonen, Hannu, 1996. "On the Existence of Undominated Nash Equilibria in Normal Form Games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 14(2), pages 208-219, June.
- Sano, Ryuji, 2011. "Incentives in core-selecting auctions with single-minded bidders," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 72(2), pages 602-606, June.
- Robert W. Day & S. Raghavan, 2007. "Fair Payments for Efficient Allocations in Public Sector Combinatorial Auctions," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 53(9), pages 1389-1406, September.
- Robert Day & Paul Milgrom, 2008. "Core-selecting package auctions," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 36(3), pages 393-407, March. Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)