IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/ecinqu/v29y1991i3p581-90.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Transaction Cost, Two-Part Tariffs, and Collusion

Author

Listed:
  • Young, Allan Richard

Abstract

When two goods exhibit demand complementarity, the sellers would generally charge lower prices under collusion than under rivalry--a cartel internalizes cross effects that independent firms ignore. For the particular case of "two-part" tariffs consisting of entrance fees and per-unit prices, this paper shows that entrance fees are indeed lower under collusion than under rivalry, but that per-unit prices are unaffected. The demand complementarity arises from transaction costs borne by consumers who enter the market. The policy implication is that collusion can be socially preferable to competition in the presence of such transaction costs. Copyright 1991 by Oxford University Press.

Suggested Citation

  • Young, Allan Richard, 1991. "Transaction Cost, Two-Part Tariffs, and Collusion," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 29(3), pages 581-590, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:ecinqu:v:29:y:1991:i:3:p:581-90
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Harrison, Mark & Kline, J. Jude, 2001. "Quantity competition with access fees," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 19(3-4), pages 345-373, March.

    More about this item

    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:oup:ecinqu:v:29:y:1991:i:3:p:581-90. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/weaaaea.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.