Price-only Auctions Research Articles

Post-auction investment by financially constrained bidders

This study examines auctions in which the value of goods is endogenously determined by ex post investment while bidders face financial constraints. The main results are twofold. First, we characterize performance comparisons on revenue and investment between standard auctions. When the valuation is linear in investment, we have the equivalence theorem with respect to the seller's expected revenue and the winner's expected investment. When the valuation is concave in investment, the first-price auction yields higher expected revenue than the second-price auction. In addition, under additional conditions, the expected investment is larger in the second-price auction. Second, we analyze mechanisms other than simple auctions when sellers aim to promote investment. Scoring auctions increase the winner's investment at the expense of a decrease in revenue compared to price-only auctions.

Procurement with Unforeseen Contingencies

A buyer who wants to procure a complex good is often aware that there may be flaws in her initial design, but she does not know what they look like. Potential sellers who discover flaws have no incentive to reveal them early if the buyer uses a price-only auction. We derive an efficient mechanism that induces all sellers to report flaws early and that allocates the project to the seller with the lowest cost. We show that this can be implemented with a simple two-stage auction that does not require any prior knowledge of the set of possible flaws. This paper was accepted by Yan Chen, decision analysis.

Estimation of Beauty Contest Auctions

Beauty contests are auction mechanisms used to buy or sell differentiated products where the auctioneer does not specify a decision rule to pick the winning bidder. Beauty contests are widely used in procuring welfare-to-work projects, freelance services, selling online ads, real estate transactions, and hiring, dating/marriage decisions. Unlike price-only auctions, beauty contests have no closed-form bidding strategies and suffer from nonmultiplicatively separable unobserved auction heterogeneity, which makes their estimation challenging. To address these challenges, we formulate beauty contests as incomplete information games and present a two-step estimator. A key contribution of our method is its ability to account for common-knowledge auction-specific unobservables using finite unobserved types. We show that unobserved auction types and distributions of bids are nonparametrically identified and recoverable in the first step using a nonparametric Expectation-Maximization (EM)-like algorithm, and that these can then be used in the second step to recover cost distributions. We present an application of our method in the online freelancing context. We find that seller margins in this marketplace are around 15% of the bid, and that not accounting for unobserved heterogeneity can significantly bias cost estimates in this setting. Based on our estimates, we run counterfactual simulations and provide guidelines to managers of freelance firms.Data, as supplemental material, are available at http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mksc.2015.0929 .

Estimation of Beauty Contest Auctions

Beauty contests are auction mechanisms used to buy or sell differentiated products where the auctioneer does not specify a decision rule to pick the winning bidder. Beauty contests are widely used in procuring welfare-to-work projects, freelance services, selling online ads, real estate transactions, and hiring, dating/marriage decisions. Unlike price-only auctions, beauty contests have no closed-form bidding strategies and suffer from nonmultiplicatively separable unobserved auction heterogeneity, which makes their estimation challenging. To address these challenges, we formulate beauty contests as incomplete information games and present a two-step estimator. A key contribution of our method is its ability to account for common-knowledge auction-specific unobservables using finite unobserved types. We show that unobserved auction types and distributions of bids are nonparametrically identified and recoverable in the first step using a nonparametric Expectation-Maximization (EM)-like algorithm, and that ...

A Multiattribute Sealed-Bid Procurement Auction with Multiple Budgets for Government Vendor Selection

This paper offers a new approach to government vendor selection decisions in major public procurements. A key challenge is for government purchasing agents to select vendors that deliver the best combination of desired nonprice attributes at realistic funding levels. The mechanism proposed in this paper is a multiattribute first-price, sealed-bid procurement auction. It extends traditional price-only auctions to those in which competition takes place exclusively over attribute bundles. The model is a multiattribute auction in which a set of possible budget levels is specified. This model reveals the benefits of defining a procurement alternative in terms of its value to the buyer over a range of possible expenditures, rather than as a single point in budget-value space. This new approach leads to some interesting results. In particular, it suggests that in a fiscally constrained environment, the traditional approach of eliminating dominated alternatives could lead to suboptimal decisions. Finally, an extension of the model explicitly examines the buyer's decision problem under budget uncertainty by applying a utility function assessed over the value measure.

Auctioning Incentive Contracts: An Experimental Study

In this note, we experimentally examine the relative performance of price-only auctions and multi-attribute auctions. We do so in procurement settings where the buyer can give the winning bidder incentives to exert effort on non-price dimensions after the auction. Both auctions theoretically implement the surplus maximizing mechanism. Our experiment confirms this result. Moreover, we observe that the pie is shared the same in both auctions between buyer and suppliers both in theory and in the lab (after accounting for learning effects). Key words: Procurement; Price-only auctions; Multi-attribute auctions; Incentive Contracts; Laboratory Experiment

Push or Pull? Auctioning Supply Contracts

Consider a buyer, facing uncertain demand, who sources from multiple suppliers via online procurement auctions (open descending price-only auctions). The suppliers have heterogeneous production costs, which are private information, and the winning supplier has to invest in production capacity before the demand uncertainty is resolved. The buyer chooses to offer a push or pull contract, for which the single price and winning supplier are determined via the auction. We show that with a pull contract, the buyer does not necessarily benefit from a larger number of suppliers participating in the auction, due to the negative effect of supplier competition on the incentive of supplier capacity investment. We thus propose an enhanced pull mechanism that mitigates this effect with a floor price. We then analyze and compare the outcomes of auctions for push and (enhanced) pull contracts, establishing when one form is preferred over the other based on the buyer's profits. We also compare our simple, price-only push and pull contract auctions to the optimal mechanisms, benchmarking the performance of the simple mechanisms as well as establishing the relative importance of auction design and contract design in procurement auctions.

Properties of scoring auctions

This article studies scoring auctions, a procedure commonly used to buy differentiated products: suppliers submit offers on all dimensions of the good (price, level of nonmonetary attributes), and these are evaluated using a scoring rule. We provide a systematic analysis of equilibrium behavior in scoring auctions when suppliers' private information is multidimensional (characterization of equilibrium behavior and expected utility equivalence). In addition, we show that scoring auctions dominate several other commonly used procedures for buying differentiated products, including menu auctions, beauty contests, and price-only auctions with minimum quality thresholds.

Properties of Scoring Auctions

This paper studies scoring auctions, a procedure commonly used to buy differentiated products: suppliers submit offers on all dimensions of the good (price, level of non monetary attributes), and these are evaluated using a scoring rule. We provide a systematic analysis of equilibrium behavior in scoring auctions when suppliers' private information is multidimensional (characterization of equilibrium behavior and expected utility equivalence). In addition, we show that scoring auctions dominate several other commonly used procedures for buying differentiated products, including menu auctions, beauty contests and price-only auctions with minimum quality thresholds.

Better, Faster, Cheaper: An Experimental Analysis of a Multiattribute Reverse Auction Mechanism with Restricted Information Feedback

The majority of reverse auctions for procurement use a single-attribute (price) format while providing constraints on nonprice attributes such as quality and lead time. Alternatively, a buyer could choose to conduct a multiattribute auction where bidders can specify both a price and levels of nonprice attributes. While such an auction may provide higher theoretical utility to the buyer, it is not clear that this theoretical improvement will be realized given the increased complexity of the auction. In this research, we present an ascending auction mechanism for a buyer whose utility function is known and dependent on three attributes. Motivated by a supply chain procurement problem setting, we consider quality and lead time for the two attributes in addition to price. The auction mechanism provides the bidders with restricted feedback regarding the buyer’s utility function. We explore, experimentally, the performance of this multiattribute auction mechanism as compared to a price-only auction mechanism. Compared with the price-only auction, we find that our mechanism design is effective in increasing both buyer utility and bidder (supplier) profits.