Abstract
The existence of imperfect information is thought to provide firms with incentives to degrade contract quality by supplying terms that well-informed consumers would refuse. We show, in contrast, that these incentives are weaker than is commonly supposed; rather, when consumers gather relatively little information, the profit maximizing strategy for firms is likely to involve offering the contract terms that consumers prefer, but at supracompetitive prices. In consequence, a standard state response to imperfect information problems, regulating the substantive terms of transactions, is often misplaced. When imperfect information exists, the state instead should reduce the costs to consumers of comparison shopping for contract terms, because such shopping reduces prices and also reduces further the incentive of firms to degrade contract quality.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have