IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ibn/masjnl/v6y2012i4p2.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Bribe-Giving and Endogenous Partnership in Oligopolies: Some Theoretical Conjectures

Author

Listed:
  • Partha Gangopadhyay
  • Jenny Zhang
  • Mark Zreika

Abstract

As stories of bribe-giving, like corporate contributions to campaign funds and Enron scandals, continue to rock the corporate world, it is imperative that implication of such activities on long-term market outcomes is evaluated. Can bribe-giving have long-term and far-reaching consequences for an oligopolistic market? In this paper we attempt to provide an answer to this question by developing a simple duopoly model that characterizes a perfect Nash equilibrium of bribe-giving. This allows us to establish some perplexing comparative static properties of the market equilibrium. The primary intuition behind our results is that bribe-giving can have serious impacts on the long-run equilibrium of an oligopoly through their effects on the incentives of and constraints on individual firms to form alliances, or partnerships. Bribe-giving, through its effects on individual costs, can trigger a series of endogenously-driven changes in an industry. One of the key changes is the endogenous formation of business alliances (also known as endogenous mergers), which is driven by changes in costs as a direct consequence of bribes. We construct a model of endogenous mergers, to our understanding for the first time, to shed some light on the incentives of firms to endogenously merge in the context of bribe-giving. We show that this can seriously influence the welfare of market participants.

Suggested Citation

  • Partha Gangopadhyay & Jenny Zhang & Mark Zreika, 2012. "Bribe-Giving and Endogenous Partnership in Oligopolies: Some Theoretical Conjectures," Modern Applied Science, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 6(4), pages 1-2, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:ibn:masjnl:v:6:y:2012:i:4:p:2
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/mas/article/download/14983/10640
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/mas/article/view/14983
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Amir, Rabah & Diamantoudi, Effrosyni & Xue, Licun, 2009. "Merger performance under uncertain efficiency gains," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 27(2), pages 264-273, March.
    2. Kamien, Morton I. & Zang, Israel, 1991. "Competitively cost advantageous mergers and monopolization," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 3(3), pages 323-338, August.
    3. Georg Noeldeke & Klaus Schmidt, 1998. "Sequential Investments and Options to Own," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 29(4), pages 633-653, Winter.
    4. Barros, Pedro Pita, 1998. "Endogenous mergers and size asymmetry of merger participants," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 60(1), pages 113-119, July.
    5. Emilie Dargaud, 2012. "Endogenous mergers and maximal concentration: a note," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 32(1), pages 137-146.
    6. Nilssen, Tore & Sorgard, Lars, 1998. "Sequential horizontal mergers," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 42(9), pages 1683-1702, November.
    7. Kang, Jun-Koo, 1993. "The international market for corporate control *1: Mergers and acquisitions of U.S. firms by Japanese firms," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 345-371, December.
    8. Gene M. Grossman & Elhanan Helpman, 1996. "Electoral Competition and Special Interest Politics," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 63(2), pages 265-286.
    9. Kamien, Morton I & Zang, Israel, 1993. "Monopolization by Sequential Acquisition," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 9(2), pages 205-229, October.
    10. Steven Pilloff, 1999. "Does the Presence of Big Banks Influence Competition in Local Markets?," Journal of Financial Services Research, Springer;Western Finance Association, vol. 15(3), pages 159-177, May.
    11. Morton I. Kamien & Israel Zang, 1990. "The Limits of Monopolization Through Acquisition," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 105(2), pages 465-499.
    12. Gautam Gowrisankaran, 1999. "A Dynamic Model of Endogenous Horizonal Mergers," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 30(1), pages 56-83, Spring.
    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. Eileen Fumagalli & Tore Nilssen, 2019. "Sweetening the Pill: a Theory of Waiting to Merge," Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, Springer, vol. 19(3), pages 351-388, September.
    2. Horn, Henrik & Persson, Lars, 2001. "Endogenous mergers in concentrated markets," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 19(8), pages 1213-1244, September.
    3. Nilssen, Tore & Sorgard, Lars, 1998. "Sequential horizontal mergers," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 42(9), pages 1683-1702, November.
    4. Fridolfsson, Sven-Olof & Stennek, Johan, 2005. "Hold-up of anti-competitive mergers," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 23(9-10), pages 753-775, December.
    5. Fridolfsson, Sven-Olof & Stennek, Johan, 1999. "Why Mergers Reduce Profits, and Raise Share Prices," Working Paper Series 511, Research Institute of Industrial Economics, revised 03 Dec 2001.
    6. Fumagalli, Eileen & Nilssen, Tore, 2008. "Waiting to Merge," Memorandum 13/2008, Oslo University, Department of Economics.
    7. Yasuhiko Nakamura, 2013. "Wage Bargaining And Merger Incentives With Asymmetric Costs," Bulletin of Economic Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 65, pages 56-84, May.
    8. Ray Chaudhuri, A., 2008. "A Dynamic Model of Endogenous Mergers and Trade Liberalization," Other publications TiSEM c5b9dd83-55cf-4bc9-9a58-f, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    9. Amrita Ray Chaudhuri, 2014. "Cross-Border Mergers and Market Segmentation," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 62(2), pages 229-257, June.
    10. Langinier, Corinne & Ray Chaudhuri, Amrita, 2024. "Merger Review under Asymmetric Information," Working Papers 2024-9, University of Alberta, Department of Economics.
    11. Onur A. Koska & Frank Stähler, 2014. "Optimal Acquisition Strategies in Unknown Territories," Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics (JITE), Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 170(3), pages 406-426, September.
    12. Borla, Stefania, 2012. "Spatial competition and merging incentives when firms produce complements," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 42(1-2), pages 221-229.
    13. Granier, Laurent & Podesta, Marion, 2010. "Bundling and Mergers in Energy Markets," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(6), pages 1316-1324, November.
    14. Sven‐Olof Fridolfsson & Johan Stennek, 2010. "Industry Concentration and Welfare: On the Use of Stock Market Evidence from Horizontal Mergers," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 77(308), pages 734-750, October.
    15. Roberto Burguet & Ramon Caminal, 2015. "Bargaining Failures And Merger Policy," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 56(3), pages 1019-1041, August.
    16. Ramon Faulí‐Oller & Joel Sandonís & Juana Santamaría, 2011. "Downstream Mergers And Upstream Investment," Manchester School, University of Manchester, vol. 79(4), pages 884-898, July.
    17. Clark, Derek J. & Sand, Jan Yngve, 2010. "Endogenous technology sharing in R&D intensive industries," Economics - The Open-Access, Open-Assessment E-Journal (2007-2020), Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel), vol. 4, pages 1-48.
    18. Persson, Lars & Norbäck, Pehr-Johan & Tåg, Joacim, 2012. "Buying to Sell: Private Equity Buyouts and Industrial Restructuring," CEPR Discussion Papers 8992, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    19. Moez Souissi & Pierre Lasserre, 2007. "It Takes Two to Tango.. La fusion : exercice de deux options réelles," Economie & Prévision, La Documentation Française, vol. 0(2), pages 51-65.
    20. Walter Ferrarese, 2020. "When Multiple Merged Entities Lead in Stackelberg Oligopolies," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 56(1), pages 131-142, February.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • R00 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - General - - - General
    • Z0 - Other Special Topics - - General

    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:ibn:masjnl:v:6:y:2012:i:4:p:2. 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: Canadian Center of Science and Education (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cepflch.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.