Stability Of Collusion Research Articles

Collusive Stability with Relative Performance and Network Externalities

Collusive Stability with Relative Performance and Network Externalities

Network Externalities and Downstream Collusion under Asymmetric Costs: A Note

This paper considers the collusive stability of downstream competition in a vertical market with network externalities and cost asymmetry. A dynamic collusion game is constructed, and backward induction is employed to solve the subgame perfect Nash equilibrium. We show that larger network externalities lead to less collusive incentive for an inefficient firm, while for an efficient firm, this depends on the efficiency gap. An increase in network externalities will destabilize the downstream collusion when the cost asymmetry is large and network externalities are relatively weak.

Collusive stability of cross-holding with cost asymmetry

Collusive stability of cross-holding with cost asymmetry

Spatial pricing and collusion

AbstractThe stability of collusion is compared assuming quadratic transport costs under two spatial pricing schemes, uniform mill pricing and spatial price discrimination. This comparison uniquely allows fully endogenous location choice and examines when two firms collude, when two of three firms collude and when three firms collude. Spatial price discrimination facilitates collusion more than uniform pricing in the first two of the three examinations but not in the third. This heterogeneity argues that the presence of price discrimination by itself does not inform antitrust authorities about the likelihood of collusion.

Collusion with Network Externalities in Price vs. Quantity Competition

In the presence of network externalities, we compare the stability of collusion under Bertrand and Cournot duopoly with differentiated products. Contrast to previous studies, we show that (i) firms have stronger incentive to collude under Bertrand competition than under Cournot competition in the sense of wide range of network externalities; (ii) collusion in prices (quantities) is more stable than in quantities (prices) if network externalities is strong (weak).

Collusion and Customization

We analyze the effect of customizing a product on the ability of firms to tacitly collude on prices. Following [Bar-Isaac et al. [2014] Targeted product design: Locating inside the Salop circle, Mimeo], we allow firms to be located inside the circle in the Salop model [Salop, S. [1979] Monopolistic competition with outside goods, Bell J. Econ., 10(1), 141–156]. Our analysis shows that the effect of product customization on the stability of collusion depends on the sensitivity of consumers’ utility to the degree of customization. In particular, if that sensitivity is low enough, then greater customization facilitates collusion. Otherwise, greater customization hinders collusion if consumers value the product little.

Does price discrimination make collusion less likely? a delivered pricing model

This paper compares the stability of collusion under delivered spatial price discrimination and under uniform pricing. Uniquely using a model of elastic demand, we show that collusion under price discrimination can be more stable thus facilitating collusion and making it more likely. This result holds only when the entire market is competitive. Whenever there exist natural monopoly portions of the spatial market, collusion on the remaining market is less stable with spatial price discrimination making such collusion less likely relative to uniform pricing.

Buffer joint ventures

While strategic alliances and joint ventures have become important organizational forms promising a variety of efficiency benefits for the economy, a body of research has been building showing that alliances between competitors can have significant anticompetitive consequences. This paper explores a particular kind of arrangement, here called a “buffer joint venture”, in which parent firms create an entity selling products located between their own locations in product or geographic space. Depending upon the governance structure of the joint venture and the timing of price-setting by the joint venture and its parents, the buffer joint venture may reduce competition between the parents leading to higher prices and profits and lower social welfare. By altering the per-period profits from collusion and deviation payoffs, a buffer joint venture can also affect the stability of collusion between parents in a repeated game context.

Stability of Collusion and Quality Differentiation: A Nash Bargaining Approach

How do incentives to collude depend on how asymmetric firms are? In digital and technology markets product quality is an important parameter that determines firms' market strategies. We study collusion in a quality differentiated duopoly and we adopt a Nash bargaining approach to compute the collusive equilibrium and assess its stability. We derive collusive and deviation strategies as continuous functions of quality asymmetry. We obtain novel and surprising results. Stability of collusion is associated with quality differentiation in a non-monotonic way. For low levels of differentiation, an increase in quality difference makes collusion less stable. The opposite holds for high levels of differentiation. Also, while the low quality firm is more likely to leave the cartel for small quality differences, the high quality firm determines cartel stability when the quality difference is sufficiently high. Our results have implications for empirical research, strategy theory, and antitrust enforcement.

Forward Trading and Collusion in Supply Functions

This paper studies the effect of forward contracts on the stability of collusion among firms, competing in supply functions on the spot market. A forward market can increase the range of discount factors which allow to sustain collusion. On the contrary, collusion is destabilised when a potential deviator sells a significant amount forward. Results do not depend on the type (financial or physical) of contract fulfilment and are robust to different levels of demand uncertainty. As a policy implication, the study finds that liquid and anonymous forward markets are incompatible with collusion.

The Analysis About Vertical Differentiation, Cost Structure and the Stability of Collusion

In order to analyze collusion stability in real economy under different cost structure, the fixed cost structure and variable cost structure is assumed under vertical differentiation and different competitive types (Cournot competition and Bertrand competition). By comparing the different competitive equilibrium, firm competes with each other under different cost structure and competitive types, which influences the stability of collusion in different ways. Under fixed cost and changeable cost structure, the high-quality firm is always more difficult to maintain collusion than the low-quality firm in vertical differentiation. With the increase of, the quality difference will get smaller and smaller, the high-quality becomes more and more difficult to maintain collusion. In equilibrium, price competition is fiercer, firms aim to release price competition under Bertrand competition, and so the quality difference will be bigger.

Cartel Size and Collusive Stability with Non-Capitalistic Players

A well established belief both in the game-theoretic IO and in policy debates is that market concentration facilitates collusion. We show that this piece of conventional wisdom relies upon the assumption of profit-seeking behaviour, for it may be reversed when firms pursue other plausible goals. To illustrate our intuition, we investigate the incentives to tacit collusion in an industry formed by labour-managed (LM) enterprises. We characterise the perfect equilibrium of a supergame in which LM firms play an infinitely repeated Cournot game under grim trigger strategies. We show that the critical threshold of the discount factor above which collusion is stable (i) is lower in the LM industry than in the capitalistic one; (ii) monotonically decreases with the number of firms.

Cartel size and collusive stability with non-capitalistic players

A well established belief both in the game-theoretic IO and in policy debates is that market concentration facilitates collusion. We show that this piece of conventional wisdom relies upon the assumption of profit-seeking behaviour, for it may be reversed when firms pursue other plausible goals. To illustrate our intuition, we investigate the incentives to tacit collusion in an industry formed by labour-managed (LM) enterprises. We characterise the perfect equilibrium of a supergame in which LM firms play an infinitely repeated Cournot game under grim trigger strategies. We show that the critical threshold of the discount factor above which collusion is stable (i) is lower in the LM industry than in the capitalistic one; (ii) monotonically decreases with the number of firms.

Product Differentiation and Cartel Stability With Costs of Collusion

The stability of collusion has been an interesting phenomena and problem, many of the existing literature focused on the analysis of the stability of collusion without collusion cost, while the real economy and a large number of studies have shown that the collusion cost in collusion between enterprises is very large, this paper analyzes the issue of ease of sustaining collusion with collusion cost under different competition intensity with product differentiation, and modifies the past knowledge about that the collusion is easier to maintain under Cournot competition than under Bertrand competition, and demonstrates that if the collusion cost is above some critical value, the reverse is true. This conclusion provides a more comprehensive perspective in the economic analysis for collusion participants and decision makers.

Economic Integration and the Sustainability of Multimarket Collusion

We examine the impact of (and links between) two types of economic integration on the stability of multimarket collusion when firms interact in quantities in segmented markets: (1) multilateral trade liberalization, captured by a reduction of trade costs across all markets; and (2) preferential trade liberalization, captured by an expansion in the size of individual markets while holding the level of external trade costs (tariffs). In general, collusive stability is non-monotonically related to economic integration. In the case of multilateral liberalization, the effect depends on the initial level of trade costs and the extent of liberalization. However, on the average, the complete elimination of trade costs is pro-competitive when these costs are sufficiently high initially. In the case of regional integration, the effect of liberalization is pro-competitive when external trade barriers are sufficiently high, but anti-competitive when these barriers are sufficiently low.

Economic integration and the sustainability of multimarket collusion

We examine the impact of (and links between) two types of economic integration on the stability of multimarket collusion when firms interact in quantities in segmented markets: (1) multilateral trade liberalization, captured by a reduction of trade costs across all markets; and (2) preferential trade liberalization, captured by an expansion in the size of individual markets while holding the level of external trade costs (tariffs) constant. In general, collusive stability is non-monotonically related to economic integration. In the case of multilateral liberalization, the effect depends on the initial level of trade costs and the extent of liberalization. However, on the average, the complete elimination of trade costs is pro-competitive when these costs are sufficiently high initially. In the case of regional integration, the effect of liberalization is pro-competitive when external trade barriers are sufficiently high, but anti-competitive when these barriers are sufficiently low.

On the stability of multimarket collusion in price-setting supergames

In this paper we examine how trade liberalization affects collusive stability in the context of multimarket interactions. The model we consider is a segmented-markets duopoly with differentiated goods in which price-setting firms pool their incentive constraints across markets to sustain their most collusive outcome. We find that, when goods are very close substitutes and trade costs are sufficiently high, a marginal reduction in trade costs facilitates collusion. Exactly the opposite is true if, for any given degree of product substitutability, trade costs are sufficiently low. We also study the dependence of multimarket collusion on product differentiation.

On the Stability of Multimarket Collusion in Price-Setting Supergames

In this paper we examine how trade liberalization affects collusive stability in the context of multimarket interactions. The model we consider is a segmented-markets duopoly in which price-setting firms pool their incentive constraints across markets to sustain their most collusive outcome. We find that, when goods are very close substitutes and trade costs are sufficiently high, trade liberalization facilitates collusion. Exactly the opposite is true if, for any given degree of product substitutability, trade costs are sufficiently low. We also study the dependence of multimarket collusion on product differentiation.

Three is still a Party: An Experiment on Collusion and Entry

This paper presents an experiment to test effects of sequential entry on stability of collusion in oligopoly markets. Previous research suggests that the larger the number of firms, the harder it is to sustain collusion. We find that when groups start off small and the entrant is informed about the history of her group, collusion is easier to sustain than in groups starting large. Implicit coordination problems may be easier resolved in smaller groups and coordination, once established, can be transferred to enlarged groups by means of common codes of conduct. The results also suggest that entrants emulate group behavior.

A note on the stability of collusion in differentiated oligopolies

Stability of collusion in differentiated oligopolies is studied without symmetry restrictions on the available strategies. It is demonstrated that if the number of firms is sufficiently large, two-phase stick-and-carrot punishment schemes apply at the highest possible discount rate with respect to collusion on the joint profit-maximizing output. If stick-and-carrot punishment schemes are used, collusive stability of the joint profit-maximizing output improves monotonically with the degree of product differentiation. The conclusions contrast with those obtained by Wernerfelt [Economics Lett. 29 (1989) 303].