IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecolet/v102y2009i2p67-69.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Private information in monopoly with random participation

Author

Listed:
  • Saak, Alexander E.

Abstract

In a setting with random participation the seller achieves higher expected profits under intermediate private information when the heterogeneity in reservation utilities is not too small or too great.

Suggested Citation

  • Saak, Alexander E., 2009. "Private information in monopoly with random participation," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 102(2), pages 67-69, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecolet:v:102:y:2009:i:2:p:67-69
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0165-1765(08)00280-2
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Levin, Jonathan, 2001. "Information and the Market for Lemons," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 32(4), pages 657-666, Winter.
    2. Lewis, Tracy R & Sappington, David E M, 1994. "Supplying Information to Facilitate Price Discrimination," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 35(2), pages 309-327, May.
    3. Jean-Charles Rochet & Lars A. Stole, 2002. "Nonlinear Pricing with Random Participation," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 69(1), pages 277-311.
    4. Marco Ottaviani & Andrea Prat, 2001. "The Value of Public Information in Monopoly," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 69(6), pages 1673-1683, November.
    5. Justin P. Johnson & David P. Myatt, 2006. "On the Simple Economics of Advertising, Marketing, and Product Design," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 96(3), pages 756-784, June.
    6. Tülin Erdem & Michael P. Keane, 1996. "Decision-Making Under Uncertainty: Capturing Dynamic Brand Choice Processes in Turbulent Consumer Goods Markets," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 15(1), pages 1-20.
    7. Berry, Steven & Levinsohn, James & Pakes, Ariel, 1995. "Automobile Prices in Market Equilibrium," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 63(4), pages 841-890, July.
    8. Saak, Alexander E., 2006. "The value of buyer's ignorance in monopoly," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 90(3), pages 373-377, March.
    9. Daniel A. Ackerberg, 2003. "Advertising, learning, and consumer choice in experience good markets: an empirical examination," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 44(3), pages 1007-1040, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Simon P. Anderson & Federico Ciliberto & Jura Liaukonyte & Régis Renault, 2016. "Push-me pull-you: comparative advertising in the OTC analgesics industry," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 47(4), pages 1029-1056, November.
    2. Bing Jing, 2011. "Exogenous Learning, Seller-Induced Learning, and Marketing of Durable Goods," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 57(10), pages 1788-1801, October.
    3. Bilancini, Ennio & Boncinelli, Leonardo, 2016. "Dynamic adverse selection and the supply size," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 233-242.
    4. Andrew Ching & Susumu Imai & Masakazu Ishihara & Neelam Jain, 2012. "A practitioner’s guide to Bayesian estimation of discrete choice dynamic programming models," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 10(2), pages 151-196, June.
    5. Inderst, Roman & Peitz, Martin, 2012. "Informing consumers about their own preferences," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 30(5), pages 417-428.
    6. Andrew T. Ching & Tülin Erdem & Michael P. Keane, 2020. "How much do consumers know about the quality of products? Evidence from the diaper market," The Japanese Economic Review, Springer, vol. 71(4), pages 541-569, October.
    7. Guofang Huang & Hong Luo & Jing Xia, 2019. "Invest in Information or Wing It? A Model of Dynamic Pricing with Seller Learning," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 65(12), pages 5556-5583, December.
    8. Gill, David & Sgroi, Daniel, 2012. "The optimal choice of pre-launch reviewer," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 147(3), pages 1247-1260.
    9. Justin P. Johnson & David P. Myatt, 2006. "On the Simple Economics of Advertising, Marketing, and Product Design," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 96(3), pages 756-784, June.
    10. Daniel Ackerberg, 2009. "A new use of importance sampling to reduce computational burden in simulation estimation," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 7(4), pages 343-376, December.
    11. Alexander E. Saak, 2012. "Dynamic Informative Advertising of New Experience Goods," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 60(1), pages 104-135, March.
    12. Andrew T. Ching & Tülin Erdem & Michael P. Keane, 2013. "Invited Paper ---Learning Models: An Assessment of Progress, Challenges, and New Developments," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(6), pages 913-938, November.
    13. Szymanowski, M.G., 2009. "Consumption-based learning about brand quality : Essays on how private labels share and borrow reputation," Other publications TiSEM b12825d8-5e21-4437-adda-b, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    14. Andrew T. Ching & Tülin Erdem & Michael P. Keane, 2013. "Learning Models: An Assessment of Progress, Challenges and New Developments," Economics Papers 2013-W07, Economics Group, Nuffield College, University of Oxford.
    15. Alexander E. Saak, 2011. "A Model of Labeling with Horizontal Differentiation and Cost Variability," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 93(4), pages 1131-1150.
    16. Saak, Alexander E., 2006. "The optimal private information in single unit monopoly," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 91(2), pages 267-272, May.
    17. Pradeep Chintagunta & Tülin Erdem & Peter E. Rossi & Michel Wedel, 2006. "Structural Modeling in Marketing: Review and Assessment," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(6), pages 604-616, 11-12.
    18. Stephan Seiler, 2010. "The impact of search costs on consumer behavior: a dynamic approach," 2010 Meeting Papers 559, Society for Economic Dynamics.
    19. Michael D. Grubb & Matthew Osborne, 2015. "Cellular Service Demand: Biased Beliefs, Learning, and Bill Shock," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 105(1), pages 234-271, January.
    20. Inderst, Roman & Peitz, Martin, 2008. "Selling Service Plans to Differentially Informed Customers," ZEW Discussion Papers 08-125, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.

    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:eee:ecolet:v:102:y:2009:i:2:p:67-69. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/ecolet .

    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.