IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/nea/journl/y2012i16p104-126.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Competition on Aftermarkets: the Subject Matter and Policy Applications

Author

Listed:
  • Shastitko, A.

    (Moscow Lomonossov State University, Moscow, Russia)

Abstract

The classification for different variants of interrelation between basic and derivative products has been elaborated through the lens of issue of market product boundaries identification to enforce antimonopoly law. It were described types of reasons for non-use (mitigation) of antimonopoly enforcement. Among these reasons: wider definition of the market product boundaries; R&D, reputation, increasing returns to scale.

Suggested Citation

  • Shastitko, A., 2012. "Competition on Aftermarkets: the Subject Matter and Policy Applications," Journal of the New Economic Association, New Economic Association, vol. 16(4), pages 104-126.
    • Handle: RePEc:nea:journl:y:2012:i:16:p:104-126
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.econorus.org/repec/journl/2012-16-104-126r.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Michael Waldman, 2010. "Competition, Monopoly, and Aftermarkets," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 26(1), pages 54-91, April.
    2. Luis Cabral, 2008. "Aftermarket Power and Basic Market Competition," Working Papers 08-20, New York University, Leonard N. Stern School of Business, Department of Economics.
    3. Chen, Zhiqi & Ross, Thomas W., 1999. "Refusals to deal and orders to supply in competitive markets," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 17(3), pages 399-417, April.
    4. Richard Schmalensee, 1981. "Monopolistic Two-Part Pricing Arrangements," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 12(2), pages 445-466, Autumn.
    5. Severin Borenstein & Jeffrey K. Mackie‐Mason & Janet S. Netz, 2000. "Exercising Market Power in Proprietary Aftermarkets," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 9(2), pages 157-188, June.
    6. Walter Y. Oi, 1971. "A Disneyland Dilemma: Two-Part Tariffs for a Mickey Mouse Monopoly," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 85(1), pages 77-96.
    7. Salop, Steven C, 1993. "Exclusionary Vertical Restraints Law: Has Economics Mattered?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 83(2), pages 168-172, May.
    8. Elzinga, Kenneth G & Mills, David E, 2001. "Independent Service Organizations and Economic Efficiency," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 39(4), pages 549-560, October.
    9. Motta,Massimo, 2004. "Competition Policy," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521016919, October.
    10. Hodaka Morita & Michael Waldman, 2010. "Competition, Monopoly Maintenance, and Consumer Switching Costs," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 2(1), pages 230-255, February.
    11. Авдашева С. Б. & Шаститко А. Е. & Калмычкова Е. Н., 2007. "Экономические Основы Антимонопольной Политики: Российская Практика В Контексте Мирового Опыта," Higher School of Economics Economic Journal Экономический журнал Высшей школы экономики, CyberLeninka;Федеральное государственное автономное образовательное учреждение высшего образования «Национальный исследовательский университет «Высшая школа экономики», vol. 11(3), pages 381-424.
    12. Emch, E., 2000. "Price Discrimination via Proprietary Aftermarkets," Papers 00-11, U.S. Department of Justice - Antitrust Division.
    13. Paul L. Joskow, 2002. "Transaction Cost Economics, Antitrust Rules, and Remedies," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 18(1), pages 95-116, April.
    14. 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. Golovanova, S., 2013. "Competition Restriction Problem in the Markets Linked to the Markets of Essential Facilities," Journal of the New Economic Association, New Economic Association, vol. 20(4), pages 110-132.

    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. Miao, Chun-Hui, 2022. "The pricing of ancillary goods when selling on a platform," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 83(C).
    2. Miao, Chun-Hui, 2010. "Consumer myopia, standardization and aftermarket monopolization," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 54(7), pages 931-946, October.
    3. Ahmadi, Iman & Skiera, Bernd & Lambrecht, Anja & Heubrandner, Florian, 2017. "Time preferences and the pricing of complementary durables and consumables," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 34(4), pages 813-828.
    4. Michael Waldman, 2004. "Antitrust Perspectives for Durable-Goods Markets," CESifo Working Paper Series 1306, CESifo.
    5. Hodaka Morita & Michael Waldman, 2010. "Competition, Monopoly Maintenance, and Consumer Switching Costs," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 2(1), pages 230-255, February.
    6. Wesley R. Hartmann & Harikesh S. Nair, 2010. "Retail Competition and the Dynamics of Demand for Tied Goods," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 29(2), pages 366-386, 03-04.
    7. 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.
    8. Marco Savioli & Lorenzo Zirulia, 2020. "Does add-on presence always lead to lower baseline prices? Theory and evidence," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 129(2), pages 143-172, March.
    9. Hartmann, Wesley R. & Nair, Harikesh S., 2007. "Retail Competition and the Dynamics of Consumer Demand for Tied Goods," Research Papers 1990, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
    10. Yin, Xiangkang, 2004. "Two-part tariff competition in duopoly," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 22(6), pages 799-820, June.
    11. Dorigoni, Susanna & Portatadino, Sergio, 2008. "LNG development across Europe: Infrastructural and regulatory analysis," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(9), pages 3366-3373, September.
    12. Gao, Shen & van ’t Veld, Klaas, 2021. "Pegging input prices to output prices—A special price adjustment clause in long-term CO2 sales contracts," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 104(C).
    13. Ruxian Wang & Maqbool Dada & Ozge Sahin, 2019. "Pricing Ancillary Service Subscriptions," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 65(10), pages 4712-4732, October.
    14. Yukihiko Funaki & Harold Houba & Evgenia Motchenkova, 2020. "Market power in bilateral oligopoly markets with non-expandable infrastructures," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 49(2), pages 525-546, June.
    15. Keisuke Hattori & Amihai Glazer, 2013. "How to Commit to a Future Price," Working Papers 131402, University of California-Irvine, Department of Economics.
    16. Paul Isely & Matthew Roelofs, 2004. "Primary market and aftermarket competition in the bicycle component industry," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 36(18), pages 2097-2102.
    17. Pekka Sääskilahti, 2016. "Buying Decision Coordination and Monopoly Pricing of Network Goods," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 25(2), pages 313-333, April.
    18. Ricard Gil & Evsen Korkmaz & Ozge Sahin, 2020. "Can free-shipping hurt online retailers?," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 18(3), pages 305-342, September.
    19. Ricard Gil & Evsen Korkmaz & Ozge Sahin, 0. "Can free-shipping hurt online retailers?," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 0, pages 1-38.
    20. Skander Essegaier & Sunil Gupta & Z. John Zhang, 2002. "Pricing Access Services," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 21(2), pages 139-159, June.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    aftermarket; competition; antimonopoly policy;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • K21 - Law and Economics - - Regulation and Business Law - - - Antitrust Law
    • L14 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Transactional Relationships; Contracts and Reputation
    • L40 - Industrial Organization - - Antitrust Issues and Policies - - - 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:nea:journl:y:2012:i:16:p:104-126. 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: Alexey Tcharykov (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/nearuea.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.