IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/qjecon/v101y1986i2p307-321..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Divisionalization and Entry Deterrence

Author

Listed:
  • Marius Schwartz
  • Earl A. Thompson

Abstract

This paper assumes that incumbent firms can create new independent divisions more cheaply than potential entrants, who must incur the additional overhead costs of new entry. The main theoretical result is that such divisionalization ability leads perfectly informed incumbents to preempt all rational entry into their industries. In contrast, existing models of entry deterrence imply that informed incumbents, even those with steadily decreasing average costs, will often allow rational entry. Our result may explain why successful, large-scale entry by firms with no informational advantage is extremely rare. The use of divisions to preempt entry may also explain why large firms in high-profit oligopolies often divisionalize, allowing their divisions to compete freely despite the negative pecuniary externality that each division imposes on others.

Suggested Citation

  • Marius Schwartz & Earl A. Thompson, 1986. "Divisionalization and Entry Deterrence," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 101(2), pages 307-321.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:qjecon:v:101:y:1986:i:2:p:307-321.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.2307/1891117
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

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

    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:qjecon:v:101:y:1986:i:2:p:307-321.. 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://academic.oup.com/qje .

    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.