IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/randje/v39y2008i1p1-19.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Imperfect durability and the Coase conjecture

Author

Listed:
  • Raymond Deneckere
  • Meng‐Yu Liang

Abstract

This article considers a market served by a monopolist who sells a durable good that depreciates stochastically over time. We show that there exist three types of stationary equilibria: a Coase Conjecture equilibrium, a monopoly equilibrium, and a reputational equilibrium. When the depreciation rate is low, the Coase Conjecture equilibrium is the unique equilibrium. For intermediate values of the depreciation rate, all three equilibrium types coexist. When the depreciation rate is high, the monopoly equilibrium is the unique equilibrium. Consequently, when selling a good of sufficiently low durability, the monopolist does not lose any of her monopoly power. Furthermore, the steady‐state output in the reputational equilibrium falls below the monopoly quantity. Hence, in durable goods markets, welfare losses due to monopoly power may be larger than in markets for perishables.

Suggested Citation

  • Raymond Deneckere & Meng‐Yu Liang, 2008. "Imperfect durability and the Coase conjecture," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 39(1), pages 1-19, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:randje:v:39:y:2008:i:1:p:1-19
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1756-2171.2008.00001.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1756-2171.2008.00001.x
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1756-2171.2008.00001.x?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Maarten C. W. Janssen & Santanu Roy, 2002. "Dynamic Trading in a Durable Good Market with Asymmetric Information," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 43(1), pages 257-282, February.
    2. John C. Harsanyi & Reinhard Selten, 1988. "A General Theory of Equilibrium Selection in Games," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262582384, April.
    3. Ausubel, Lawrence M & Deneckere, Raymond J, 1993. "A Generalized Theorem of the Maximum," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 3(1), pages 99-107, January.
    4. Larry M. Ausubel & Raymond J. Deneckere, 1989. "Reputation in Bargaining and Durable Goods Monopoly," Levine's Working Paper Archive 201, David K. Levine.
    5. Christopher L. House & John V. Leahy, 2004. "An sS Model with Adverse Selection," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 112(3), pages 581-614, June.
    6. Raymond Deneckere & Meng-Yu Liang, 2006. "Bargaining with Interdependent Values," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 74(5), pages 1309-1364, September.
    7. Igal Hendel & Alessandro Lizzeri, 1999. "Interfering with Secondary Markets," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 30(1), pages 1-21, Spring.
    8. Konishi, Hideo & Sandfort, Michael T., 2002. "Existence of stationary equilibrium in the markets for new and used durable goods," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 26(6), pages 1029-1052, June.
    9. Judith Chevalier & Austan Goolsbee, 2009. "Are Durable Goods Consumers Forward-Looking? Evidence from College Textbooks," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 124(4), pages 1853-1884.
    10. Sobel, Joel, 1991. "Durable Goods Monopoly with Entry of New Consumers," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 59(5), pages 1455-1485, September.
    11. Michael Waldman, 2003. "Durable Goods Theory for Real World Markets," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 17(1), pages 131-154, Winter.
    12. Alessandro Lizzeri & Igal Hendel, 1999. "Adverse Selection in Durable Goods Markets," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 89(5), pages 1097-1115, December.
    13. Butz, David A, 1990. "Durable-Good Monopoly and Best-Price Provisions," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 80(5), pages 1062-1076, December.
    14. Eric W. Bond & Larry Samuelson, 1984. "Durable Good Monopolies with Rational Expectations and Replacement Sales," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 15(3), pages 336-345, Autumn.
    15. Rust, John, 1985. "Stationary Equilibrium in a Market for Durable Assets," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 53(4), pages 783-805, July.
    16. Ausubel, Lawrence M & Deneckere, Raymond J, 1989. "Reputation in Bargaining and Durable Goods Monopoly," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 57(3), pages 511-531, May.
    17. Gul, Faruk & Sonnenschein, Hugo & Wilson, Robert, 1986. "Foundations of dynamic monopoly and the coase conjecture," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 155-190, June.
    18. Karp, Larry, 1995. "Depreciation Erodes the Coase Conjecture," Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley, Working Paper Series qt1fs6j5nn, Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley.
    19. Igal Hendel & Alessandro Lizzeri & Marciano Siniscalchi, 2005. "Efficient Sorting in a Dynamic Adverse-Selection Model," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 72(2), pages 467-497.
    20. Dmitriy Stolyarov, 2002. "Turnover of Used Durables in a Stationary Equilibrium: Are Older Goods Traded More?," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 110(6), pages 1390-1413, December.
    21. Waldman, Michael, 1996. "Durable Goods Pricing When Quality Matters," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 69(4), pages 489-510, October.
    22. Bond, Eric W. & Samuelson, Larry, 1987. "The Coase conjecture need not hold for durable good monopolies with depreciation," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 24(1), pages 93-97.
    23. Joel Sobel & Takahashi, 1983. "A Multi-stage Model of Bargaining," Levine's Working Paper Archive 255, David K. Levine.
    24. Unknown, 2005. "Forward," 2005 Conference: Slovenia in the EU - Challenges for Agriculture, Food Science and Rural Affairs, November 10-11, 2005, Moravske Toplice, Slovenia 183804, Slovenian Association of Agricultural Economists (DAES).
    25. Karp, Larry, 1996. "Depreciation erodes the Coase Conjecture," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 40(2), pages 473-490, February.
    26. Nancy L. Stokey, 1981. "Rational Expectations and Durable Goods Pricing," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 12(1), pages 112-128, Spring.
    27. Jeremy Bulow, 1986. "An Economic Theory of Planned Obsolescence," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 101(4), pages 729-749.
    28. Coase, Ronald H, 1972. "Durability and Monopoly," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 15(1), pages 143-149, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. William Caylor, 2016. "Credible Signals Of The Release Of New Versions," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 54(2), pages 862-878, April.
    2. Tian Xia & Richard Sexton, 2010. "Brand or Variety Choices and Periodic Sales as Substitute Instruments for Monopoly Price Discrimination," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 36(4), pages 333-349, June.
    3. Basak Altan, 2020. "Dynamic Durable Goods Monopoly and Market Power," Games, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-14, May.
    4. Martín-Rodríguez, María, 2018. "A dynamic monopoly with risk-averse consumers," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 61-70.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Michael Waldman, 2004. "Antitrust Perspectives for Durable-Goods Markets," CESifo Working Paper Series 1306, CESifo.
    2. Susanna Esteban & Matthew Shum, 2007. "Durable-goods oligopoly with secondary markets: the case of automobiles," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 38(2), pages 332-354, June.
    3. Gerstle, Ari D. & Waldman, Michael, 2016. "Mergers in durable-goods industries: A re-examination of market power and welfare effects," Research in Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(4), pages 677-692.
    4. Chen, Jiawei & Esteban, Susanna & Shum, Matthew, 2008. "Demand and supply estimation biases due to omission of durability," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 147(2), pages 247-257, December.
    5. Pasquale Schiraldi, 2006. "Second-Hand Markets and Collusion by Manufacturers of Semidurable Goods," Boston University - Department of Economics - Working Papers Series WP2006-028, Boston University - Department of Economics.
    6. Kumar, Praveen, 2002. "Price and quality discrimination in durable goods monopoly with resale trading," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 20(9), pages 1313-1339, November.
    7. Andrikopoulos, Athanasios & Markellos, Raphael N., 2015. "Dynamic interaction between markets for leasing and selling automobiles," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 260-270.
    8. Basak Altan, 2020. "Dynamic Durable Goods Monopoly and Market Power," Games, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-14, May.
    9. Fethke, Gary & Jagannathan, Raj, 2000. "Why would a durable good monopolist also produce a cost-inefficient nondurable good?," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 18(5), pages 793-812, July.
    10. Tian Xia & Richard Sexton, 2010. "Brand or Variety Choices and Periodic Sales as Substitute Instruments for Monopoly Price Discrimination," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 36(4), pages 333-349, June.
    11. Kumar, Praveen, 2006. "Intertemporal price-quality discrimination and the Coase conjecture," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 42(7-8), pages 896-940, November.
    12. Francesco Nava & Pasquale Schiraldi, 2019. "Differentiated Durable Goods Monopoly: A Robust Coase Conjecture," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 109(5), pages 1930-1968, May.
    13. Karp, Larry, 1995. "Depreciation Erodes the Coase Conjecture," Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley, Working Paper Series qt1fs6j5nn, Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley.
    14. Anton, James J. & Biglaiser, Gary, 2013. "Quality, upgrades and equilibrium in a dynamic monopoly market," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 148(3), pages 1179-1212.
    15. Karp, Larry, 1996. "Depreciation erodes the Coase Conjecture," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 40(2), pages 473-490, February.
    16. S. Huang & Y. Yang & K. Anderson, 2001. "A Theory of Finitely Durable Goods Monopoly with Used-Goods Market and Transaction Costs," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 47(11), pages 1515-1532, November.
    17. Laussel, Didier & Van Long, Ngo & Resende, Joana, 2015. "Network effects, aftermarkets and the Coase conjecture: A dynamic Markovian approach," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 84-96.
    18. Ramesh Sankaranarayanan, 2007. "Innovation and the Durable Goods Monopolist: The Optimality of Frequent New-Version Releases," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(6), pages 774-791, 11-12.
    19. James J. Anton & Gary Biglaiser, 2010. "Quality, Upgrades, and Equilibrium in a Dynamic Monopoly Model," Working Papers 10-36, Duke University, Department of Economics.
    20. Mason, Robin, 2000. "Network externalities and the Coase conjecture," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 44(10), pages 1981-1992, December.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:randje:v:39:y:2008:i:1:p:1-19. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/randdus.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.