IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login

Citations for "Do Meetings in Smoke-Filled Rooms Facilitate Collusion?"

by McCutcheon, Barbara

For a complete description of this item, click here. For a RSS feed for citations of this item, click here.
as in new window

  1. Embrey Matthew & Mengel Friederike & Peeters Ronald, 2012. "Strategic commitment and cooperation in experimental games of strategic complements and substitutes," Research Memorandum 052, Maastricht University, Maastricht Research School of Economics of Technology and Organization (METEOR).
  2. David Genesove & Wallace P. Mullin, 2001. "Rules, Communication, and Collusion: Narrative Evidence from the Sugar Institute Case," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 91(3), pages 379-398, June.
  3. Charness, Gary & Dufwenberg, Martin, 2003. "Promises & Partnership," Research Papers in Economics 2003:3, Stockholm University, Department of Economics.
  4. Maarten Pieter Schinkel & Jan Tuinstra & Jakob Rüggeberg, 2008. "Illinois Walls: how barring indirect purchaser suits facilitates collusion," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 39(3), pages 683-698.
  5. Lefouili, Yassine & Roux, Catherine, 2012. "Leniency programs for multimarket firms: The effect of Amnesty Plus on cartel formation," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 30(6), pages 624-640.
  6. Bos Iwan & Peeters Ronald & Pot Erik, 2010. "Do Antitrust Agencies Facilitate Meetings in Smoke-Filled Rooms?," Research Memorandum 030, Maastricht University, Maastricht Research School of Economics of Technology and Organization (METEOR).
  7. Andersson, Ola & Wengstrom, Erik, 2007. "A note on renegotiation in repeated Bertrand duopolies," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 95(3), pages 398-401, June.
  8. Andersson, Ola & Wengström, Erik, 2010. "Costly Renegotiation in Repeated Bertrand Games," SSE/EFI Working Paper Series in Economics and Finance 725, Stockholm School of Economics.
  9. Mokinski, Frieder & Wölfing, Nikolas, 2013. "The effect of regulatory scrutiny asymmetric cost pass-through in power wholesale and its end," ZEW Discussion Papers 13-055, ZEW - Zentrum für Europäische Wirtschaftsforschung / Center for European Economic Research.
  10. Kranz, Sebastian & Ohlendorf, Susanne, 2009. "Renegotiation-Proof Relational Contracts with Side Payments," Discussion Paper Series of SFB/TR 15 Governance and the Efficiency of Economic Systems 259, Free University of Berlin, Humboldt University of Berlin, University of Bonn, University of Mannheim, University of Munich.
  11. Spagnolo, Giancarlo, 1999. "On Interdependent Supergames: Multimarket Contact, Concavity, and Collusion," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 89(1), pages 127-139, November.
  12. Gary Charness & Martin Dufwenberg, 2006. "Promises and Partnership," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 74(6), pages 1579-1601, November.
  13. Kaplow, Louis & Shapiro, Carl, 2007. "Antitrust," Handbook of Law and Economics, Elsevier.
  14. Shakill Hassan, 2005. "Optimal timing of defections from price-setting cartels in volatile markets," Working Papers 03, Economic Research Southern Africa.
  15. Igor Mouraviev, 2013. "Explicit Collusion under Antitrust Enforcement," Working Papers 494, Bielefeld University, Center for Mathematical Economics.
  16. Garey Ramey & Joel Watson, 2002. "Contractual Intermediaries," Journal of Law, Economics and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 18(2), pages 362-384, October.
  17. José Apesteguia & Martin Dufwenberg & Reinhard Selten, 2003. "Blowing the Whistle," Bonn Econ Discussion Papers bgse9_2003, University of Bonn, Germany.
  18. repec:dgr:uvatin:20060067 is not listed on IDEAS
  19. Spagnolo, Giancarlo, 2005. "Managerial incentives and collusive behavior," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 49(6), pages 1501-1523, August.
  20. Joseph E Harrington, 2001. "Optimal Cartel Pricing in the Presence of an Antitrust Authority," Economics Working Paper Archive 460, The Johns Hopkins University,Department of Economics, revised Jul 2002.
  21. Spagnolo, Giancarlo, 2002. "Globalization and Cooperative Relations," CEPR Discussion Papers 3522, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
  22. Joseph E Harrington Jr, 2002. "Cartel Pricing Dynamics in the Presence of an Antitrust Authority," Economics Working Paper Archive 487, The Johns Hopkins University,Department of Economics, revised May 2003.
  23. Joseph E. Harrington, Jr, 2005. "Detecting Cartels," Economics Working Paper Archive 526, The Johns Hopkins University,Department of Economics.
  24. Zissimos, Ben, 2007. "The GATT and gradualism," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(2), pages 410-433, April.
  25. Goldlücke, Susanne & Kranz, Sebastian, 2013. "Renegotiation-proof relational contracts," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 157-178.
  26. Leibbrandt, Andreas & Sääksvuori, Lauri, 2012. "Communication in intergroup conflicts," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 56(6), pages 1136-1147.
  27. Clemens, Georg & Rau, Holger A., 2014. "Do leniency policies facilitate collusion? Experimental evidence," DICE Discussion Papers 130, Heinrich‐Heine‐Universität Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf Institute for Competition Economics (DICE).
  28. repec:dgr:uvatin:2006067 is not listed on IDEAS
  29. repec:dgr:uvatin:2005049 is not listed on IDEAS
  30. Bos Iwan & Peeters Ronald & Pot Erik, 2012. "Competition versus Collusion: The Impact of Consumer Inertia," Research Memorandum 047, Maastricht University, Maastricht Research School of Economics of Technology and Organization (METEOR).
  31. Aubert, Cécile & Rey, Patrick & Kovacic, William E., 2006. "The impact of leniency and whistle-blowing programs on cartels," Economics Papers from University Paris Dauphine 123456789/13637, Paris Dauphine University.
  32. Dye, Alan & Sicotte, Richard, 2006. "How brinkmanship saved Chadbourne: Credibility and the International Sugar Agreement of 1931," Explorations in Economic History, Elsevier, vol. 43(2), pages 223-256, April.
  33. Pecorino, Paul, 1999. "The effect of group size on public good provision in a repeated game setting," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 72(1), pages 121-134, April.
This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.