IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/indorg/v18y2000i6p975-984.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Weak entrants are welcome

Author

Listed:
  • Ashiya, Masahiro

Abstract

This paper investigates the decision problem of an incumbent firm confronted by both a weak and a strong entrant in a differentiated market. Suppose that the incumbent can deter entry of the weak firm, but cannot deter entry of the strong firm by itself. Then the incumbent may allow entry of the weak firm and use it to alter the strong firm's entry decision. The present paper formalizes this idea, and it sheds new light on the fact that domestic firms are sometimes able to block strong foreign firms after trade loberalization. The idea also expalins why a dominant firm lets fringe firms be in the market.
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)

Suggested Citation

  • Ashiya, Masahiro, 2000. "Weak entrants are welcome," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 18(6), pages 975-984, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:indorg:v:18:y:2000:i:6:p:975-984
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167-7187(99)00021-1
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

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

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Berck, Peter & Perloff, Jeffrey M., 1988. "The dynamic annihilation of a rational competitive fringe by a low-cost dominant firm," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 12(4), pages 659-678, November.
    2. Elie Appelbaum & Chin Lim, 1985. "Contestable Markets under Uncertainty," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 16(1), pages 28-40, Spring.
    3. Giacomo Bonanno, 1987. "Location Choice, Product Proliferation and Entry Deterrence," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 54(1), pages 37-45.
    4. Kenneth L. Judd, 1985. "Credible Spatial Preemption," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 16(2), pages 153-166, Summer.
    5. Brander, James A & Eaton, Jonathan, 1984. "Product Line Rivalry," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 74(3), pages 323-334, June.
    6. Martinez-Giralt, Xavier & Neven, Damien J, 1988. "Can Price Competition Dominate Market Segmentation?," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(4), pages 431-442, June.
    7. Richard Schmalensee, 1978. "Entry Deterrence in the Ready-to-Eat Breakfast Cereal Industry," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 9(2), pages 305-327, Autumn.
    8. Ashiya, M., 1999. "Brand Proliferation is Useless to Deter Entry," ISER Discussion Paper 0476, Institute of Social and Economic Research, Osaka University.
    9. Richard Gilbert & Xavier Vives, 1986. "Entry Deterrence and the Free Rider Problem," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 53(1), pages 71-83.
    10. Neven, Damien J., 1987. "Endogenous sequential entry in a spatial model," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 5(4), pages 419-434.
    11. Edward C. Prescott & Michael Visscher, 1977. "Sequential Location among Firms with Foresight," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 8(2), pages 378-393, Autumn.
    12. Gillian K. Hadfield, 1991. "Credible Spatial Preemption through Franchising," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 22(4), pages 531-543, Winter.
    13. Ashiya, Masahiro, 2000. "Weak entrants are welcome," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 18(6), pages 975-984, August.
    14. Gallini, Nancy T, 1984. "Deterrence by Market Sharing: A Strategic Incentive for Licensing," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 74(5), pages 931-941, December.
    15. Vives, Xavier, 1988. "Sequential entry, industry structure and welfare," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 32(8), pages 1671-1687, October.
    16. repec:bla:econom:v:60:y:1993:i:240:p:465-74 is not listed on IDEAS
    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. Ashiya, M., 1999. "Brand Proliferation is Useless to Deter Entry," ISER Discussion Paper 0476, Institute of Social and Economic Research, Osaka University.
    2. Murooka, Takeshi, 2013. "A note on credible spatial preemption in an entry–exit game," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 118(1), pages 26-28.
    3. Takatoshi Tabuchi, 2009. "Hotelling's Spatial Competition Reconsidered," CIRJE F-Series CIRJE-F-674, CIRJE, Faculty of Economics, University of Tokyo.
    4. S. Baranzoni & P. Bianchi & L. Lambertini, 2000. "Multiproduct Firms, Product Differentiation, and Market Structure," Working Papers 368, Dipartimento Scienze Economiche, Universita' di Bologna.
    5. Yogesh V. Joshi & David J. Reibstein & Z. John Zhang, 2016. "Turf Wars: Product Line Strategies in Competitive Markets," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 35(1), pages 128-141, January.
    6. Victor Aguirregabiria & Gustavo Vicentini, 2006. "Dynamic Spatial Competition Between Multi-Store Firms," Working Papers tecipa-253, University of Toronto, Department of Economics.
    7. Bet, Germán, 2021. "Product specification under a threat of entry: Evidence from Airlines’ departure times," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 75(C).
    8. Chamorro-Rivas, Jose-Maria, 2000. "Plant proliferation in a spatial model of Cournot competition," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(5), pages 507-518, September.
    9. Peter-J. Jost, 2023. "Price commitment and the strategic launch of a fighter brand," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 21(3), pages 381-435, September.
    10. Takatoshi Tabuchi, 2012. "Multiproduct Firms in Hotelling’s Spatial Competition," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 21(2), pages 445-467, June.
    11. Ikuo Ishibashi & Noriaki Matsushima, 2006. "Inviting entrants may help incumbent firms," Discussion Papers 2006-46, Kobe University, Graduate School of Business Administration.
    12. Nie, Jiajia & Zhong, Ling & Li, Gendao & Cao, Kuo, 2022. "Piracy as an entry deterrence strategy in software market," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 298(2), pages 560-572.
    13. Ishibashi, Ikuo, 2003. "A note on credible spatial entry deterrence," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 21(2), pages 283-289, February.
    14. Peitz, Martin, 2002. "The pro-competitive effect of higher entry costs," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 20(3), pages 353-364, March.
    15. Aguirre, Inaki & Espinosa, Maria Paz & Macho-Stadler, Ines, 1998. "Strategic entry deterrence through spatial price discrimination," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 28(3), pages 297-314, May.
    16. Yi-Ling Cheng & Takatoshi Tabuchi, 2018. "Product Proliferation and First Mover Advantage in a Multiproduct Duopoly," CIRJE F-Series CIRJE-F-1091, CIRJE, Faculty of Economics, University of Tokyo.
    17. de Haas, Samuel & Herold, Daniel & Schäfer, Jan Thomas, 2022. "Entry deterrence due to brand proliferation: Empirical evidence from the German interurban bus industry," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 83(C).
    18. Kyle Bagwell & Garey Ramey, 1991. "Oligopoly Limit Pricing," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 22(2), pages 155-172, Summer.
    19. Lambertini, Luca, 2002. "Equilibrium locations in a spatial model with sequential entry in real time," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 47-58, January.
    20. Jean J. Gabszewicz & Jacques-François Thisse, 2000. "Microeconomic theories of imperfect competition," Cahiers d'Économie Politique, Programme National Persée, vol. 37(1), pages 47-99.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • D43 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design - - - Oligopoly and Other Forms of Market Imperfection
    • F13 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Trade Policy; International Trade Organizations
    • L13 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Oligopoly and Other Imperfect Markets

    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:eee:indorg:v:18:y:2000:i:6:p:975-984. 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/inca/505551 .

    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.