IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ormnsc/v65y2019i11p5219-5233.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Optimality of Ad Valorem Contracts

Author

Listed:
  • Andrei Hagiu

    (Boston University Questrom School of Business, Boston, Massachusetts 02215)

  • Julian Wright

    (Department of Economics, National University of Singapore, Singapore 117570)

Abstract

We provide a new theory of ad valorem contracts (i.e., contracts that vary with the value of the transaction), which can explain why such contracts are widely used between vertically related parties (e.g., in franchising and licensing). Ad valorem contracts allow upstream firms (principals) to preserve their own incentives to make ongoing investments in the channel and deal with pricing distortions caused by channel coordination problems, while at the same time adjusting their investment on the basis of demand shocks that are only observed by the downstream firms (agents). We show that the optimal ad valorem contract allows the principal to achieve the same profits as if it could observe the demand shocks and control price. This optimal contract makes use of revenue sharing (to balance investment incentives and make the principal’s investment responsive to demand through price), upfront fixed fees (to extract the agents’ expected profit), and an additional term that depends nonlinearly on either price or demand (to correct for remaining pricing distortions). Our results are robust to the introduction of competition between agents, production costs, and imperfect monitoring of the agents’ prices.

Suggested Citation

  • Andrei Hagiu & Julian Wright, 2019. "The Optimality of Ad Valorem Contracts," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 65(11), pages 5219-5233, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:inm:ormnsc:v:65:y:2019:i:11:p:5219-5233
    DOI: 10.1287/mnsc.2018.3180
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2018.3180
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/mnsc.2018.3180?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. repec:bla:jemstr:v:4:y:1995:i:1:p:7-31:a is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Sugato Bhattacharyya & Francine Lafontaine, 1995. "Double-Sided Moral Hazard and the Nature of Share Contracts," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 26(4), pages 761-781, Winter.
    3. Richard E. Romano, 1994. "Double Moral Hazard and Resale Price Maintenance," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 25(3), pages 455-466, Autumn.
    4. Rao, Ram C & Srinivasan, Shubashri, 1995. "Why Are Royalty Rates Higher in Service-Type Franchises?," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 4(1), pages 7-31, Spring.
    5. Gerard Llobet & Jorge Padilla, 2016. "The Optimal Scope of the Royalty Base in Patent Licensing," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 59(1), pages 45-73.
    6. Gaudin, Germain & White, Alexander, 2014. "On the antitrust economics of the electronic books industry," DICE Discussion Papers 147 [rev.], Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf Institute for Competition Economics (DICE).
    7. Øystein Foros & Hans Jarle Kind & Greg Shaffer, 2017. "Apple's agency model and the role of most-favored-nation clauses," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 48(3), pages 673-703, August.
    8. D. B. Suits & R. A. Musgrave, 1953. "Ad Valorem and Unit Taxes Compared," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 67(4), pages 598-604.
    9. Zhu Wang & Julian Wright, 2017. "Ad valorem platform fees, indirect taxes, and efficient price discrimination," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 48(2), pages 467-484, May.
    10. Justin P. Johnson, 2017. "The Agency Model and MFN Clauses," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 84(3), pages 1151-1185.
    11. Rajiv Lal, 1990. "Improving Channel Coordination Through Franchising," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 9(4), pages 299-318.
    12. Oz Shy & Zhu Wang, 2011. "Why Do Payment Card Networks Charge Proportional Fees?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 101(4), pages 1575-1590, June.
    13. Øystein Foros & Kåre P. Hagen & Hans Jarle Kind, 2009. "Price-Dependent Profit Sharing as a Channel Coordination Device," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 55(8), pages 1280-1291, August.
    14. Gérard P. Cachon & Martin A. Lariviere, 2005. "Supply Chain Coordination with Revenue-Sharing Contracts: Strengths and Limitations," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 51(1), pages 30-44, January.
    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. Duan, Wenqi & Li, Chen, 2023. "Be alert to dangers: Collapse and avoidance strategies of platform ecosystems," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 162(C).
    2. Gianluigi Giustiziero & Tobias Kretschmer & Deepak Somaya & Brian Wu, 2023. "Hyperspecialization and hyperscaling: A resource‐based theory of the digital firm," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 44(6), pages 1391-1424, June.
    3. Wang, Dazhong & Xu, Xinyi & Zeng, Xianjie, 2023. "Comparisons of standard royalty auctions with seller post-auction effort," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 107(C).
    4. Wang, Dazhong & Xu, Xinyi & Zeng, Xianjie, 2022. "Bid signaling in first-price royalty auction," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 216(C).
    5. Manel Antelo & Antonio Sampayo, 2024. "Licensing of a new technology by an outside and uninformed licensor," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 142(2), pages 111-162, July.
    6. Ma, Siyu & Sen, Debapriya & Tauman, Yair, 2022. "Optimal patent licensing: from three to two part tariffs," MPRA Paper 111624, University Library of Munich, Germany.

    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. Gokhan Guven & Eren Inci & Antonio Russo, 2017. "Apparent Competition in Two-Sided Platforms," CESifo Working Paper Series 6660, CESifo.
    2. Gerard Llobet & Jorge Padilla, 2016. "The Optimal Scope of the Royalty Base in Patent Licensing," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 59(1), pages 45-73.
    3. Anderson, Simon & Bedre-Defolie, Özlem, 2022. "Online trade platforms: Hosting, selling, or both?," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 84, pages 1-15.
    4. Masayoshi Maruyama & Yu Yamashita, 2012. "Franchise Fees and Royalties: Theory and Empirical Results," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 40(3), pages 167-189, May.
    5. Sushil Bikhchandani, 2020. "Intermediated surge pricing," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(1), pages 31-50, January.
    6. Zhu Wang & Julian Wright, 2018. "Should platforms be allowed to charge ad valorem fees?," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 66(3), pages 739-760, September.
    7. Zhu Wang & Julian Wright, 2017. "Ad valorem platform fees, indirect taxes, and efficient price discrimination," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 48(2), pages 467-484, May.
    8. Kunter, Marcus, 2012. "Coordination via cost and revenue sharing in manufacturer–retailer channels," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 216(2), pages 477-486.
    9. Hempelmann, Bernd, 2006. "Optimal franchise contracts with private cost information," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 449-465, March.
    10. Oystein Foros & Hans Jarle Kind & Greg Shaffer, 2013. "Turning the Page on Business Formats for Digital Platforms: Does Apple's Agency Model Soften Competition?," CESifo Working Paper Series 4362, CESifo.
    11. Dur, Robert & Non, Arjan & Roelfsema, Hein, 2010. "Reciprocity and incentive pay in the workplace," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 31(4), pages 676-686, August.
    12. Andrei Hagiu & Julian Wright, 2019. "Controlling vs. Enabling," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 65(2), pages 577-595, February.
    13. Choi, Jay Pil, 2001. "Technology transfer with moral hazard," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 19(1-2), pages 249-266, January.
    14. Anna D'Annunzio & Mohammed Mardan & Antonio Russo, 2020. "Multi‐part tariffs and differentiated commodity taxation," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 51(3), pages 786-804, September.
    15. Moussawi-Haidar, Lama & Çömez-Dolgan, Nagihan, 2017. "Percentage rent contracts between co-stores," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 258(3), pages 912-925.
    16. J-M Chen & H-L Cheng & I-C Lin, 2011. "On channel coordination under price-dependent revenue-sharing: can eBay's fee structure coordinate the channel?," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 62(11), pages 1992-2001, November.
    17. Maruyama, Masayoshi & Yamashita, Yu, 2014. "Revenue versus incentive: Theory and empirical analysis of franchise royalties," Journal of the Japanese and International Economies, Elsevier, vol. 34(C), pages 154-161.
    18. Albert Y. Ha & Shilu Tong, 2008. "Revenue sharing contracts in a supply chain with uncontractible actions," Naval Research Logistics (NRL), John Wiley & Sons, vol. 55(5), pages 419-431, August.
    19. Babur De los Santos & Daniel P. O'Brien & Matthijs R. Wildenbeest, 2018. "Agency Pricing and Bargaining: Evidence from the E-Book Market," Working Papers 18-14, NET Institute.
    20. Olmos, Marta Fernández & Grazia, Cristina & Perito, Maria Angela, 2011. "Quality and Double Sided Moral Hazard in Share Contracts," Agricultural Economics Review, Greek Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 12(1).

    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:inm:ormnsc:v:65:y:2019:i:11:p:5219-5233. 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: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.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.