IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sbe/breart/v25y2005i2a2506.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Dynamic Market Clearing Price Mechanism with Multiple Demands

Author

Abstract

We propose a dynamic selling procedure for the generalization of the buyer-seller market game of Shapley and Shubik (1972) to the case where buyers can purchase more than one indivisible object, up to their quota, and have separable and additive utilities. This mechanism generalizes the auction studied by Demange et al. (1986), which in its turn is a generalization of the English auction to the multi-item case. It represents an enormous simplification of the restriction of the auction proposed by Gul and Stachetti (2000) to the linear case, by providing a different and simpler technique. Increasing the prices of all items of an overdemanded set chosen by the auctioneer always leads to the same price vector, namely the minimum competitive equilibrium price, in a finite number of steps. Consequently, the mechanism sells any two similar objects at the same price. When buyers are allowed to acquire the total amount of objects, the mechanism is strategy-proof.

Suggested Citation

  • Sotomayor, Marilda, 2005. "A Dynamic Market Clearing Price Mechanism with Multiple Demands," Brazilian Review of Econometrics, Sociedade Brasileira de Econometria - SBE, vol. 25(2), November.
    • Handle: RePEc:sbe:breart:v:25:y:2005:i:2:a:2506
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://periodicos.fgv.br/bre/article/view/2506
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gabrielle Demange & Ahmet Alkan & David Gale, 1991. "Fair Allocation of Indivisible Goods and Money and Criteria of Justice," Post-Print halshs-00670945, HAL.
    2. Ashenfelter, Orley, 1989. "How Auctions Work for Wine and Art," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 3(3), pages 23-36, Summer.
    3. Crawford, Vincent P & Knoer, Elsie Marie, 1981. "Job Matching with Heterogeneous Firms and Workers," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 49(2), pages 437-450, March.
    4. Sotomayor, Marilda, 2002. "A Simultaneous Descending Bid Auction for Multiple Items and Unitary Demand," Revista Brasileira de Economia - RBE, EPGE Brazilian School of Economics and Finance - FGV EPGE (Brazil), vol. 56(3), July.
    5. Gul, Faruk & Stacchetti, Ennio, 2000. "The English Auction with Differentiated Commodities," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 92(1), pages 66-95, May.
    6. Demange, Gabrielle & Gale, David & Sotomayor, Marilda, 1986. "Multi-Item Auctions," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 94(4), pages 863-872, August.
    7. Marilda Sotomayor, 1992. "The Multiple Partners Game," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: Mukul Majumdar (ed.), Equilibrium and Dynamics, chapter 17, pages 322-354, Palgrave Macmillan.
    8. William Vickrey, 1961. "Counterspeculation, Auctions, And Competitive Sealed Tenders," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 16(1), pages 8-37, March.
    9. McAfee R. Preston & Vincent Daniel, 1993. "The Declining Price Anomaly," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 60(1), pages 191-212, June.
    10. Marilda Sotomayor, 1999. "The lattice structure of the set of stable outcomes of the multiple partners assignment game," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 28(4), pages 567-583.
    11. Alkan, Ahmet & Demange, Gabrielle & Gale, David, 1991. "Fair Allocation of Indivisible Goods and Criteria of Justice," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 59(4), pages 1023-1039, July.
    12. Kelso, Alexander S, Jr & Crawford, Vincent P, 1982. "Job Matching, Coalition Formation, and Gross Substitutes," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 50(6), pages 1483-1504, November.
    13. Leonard, Herman B, 1983. "Elicitation of Honest Preferences for the Assignment of Individuals to Positions," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 91(3), pages 461-479, June.
    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. Sotomayor, Marilda, 2007. "Connecting the cooperative and competitive structures of the multiple-partners assignment game," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 134(1), pages 155-174, May.
    2. Gerard van der Laan & Zaifu Yang, 2016. "An ascending multi-item auction with financially constrained bidders," The Journal of Mechanism and Institution Design, Society for the Promotion of Mechanism and Institution Design, University of York, vol. 1(1), pages 109-149, December.
    3. Mishra, Debasis & Talman, Dolf, 2010. "Characterization of the Walrasian equilibria of the assignment model," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 46(1), pages 6-20, January.
    4. David Pérez-Castrillo & Marilda Sotomayor, 2017. "On the manipulability of competitive equilibrium rules in many-to-many buyer–seller markets," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 46(4), pages 1137-1161, November.
    5. Sotomayor, Marilda, 2002. "A Simultaneous Descending Bid Auction for Multiple Items and Unitary Demand," Revista Brasileira de Economia - RBE, EPGE Brazilian School of Economics and Finance - FGV EPGE (Brazil), vol. 56(3), July.
    6. Marilda Sotomayor, 2008. "Adjusting Prices in the Many-to-many Assignment Game," Working Papers 2008-13, Brown University, Department of Economics.
    7. Mishra, Debasis & Talman, Dolf, 2010. "Characterization of the Walrasian equilibria of the assignment model," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 46(1), pages 6-20, January.
    8. Zhou, Yu & Serizawa, Shigehiro, 2023. "Multi-object auction design beyond quasi-linearity: Leading examples," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 210-228.
    9. Jagadeesan, Ravi & Kominers, Scott Duke & Rheingans-Yoo, Ross, 2018. "Strategy-proofness of worker-optimal matching with continuously transferable utility," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 287-294.
    10. Mishra, Debasis & Parkes, David C., 2007. "Ascending price Vickrey auctions for general valuations," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 132(1), pages 335-366, January.
    11. Bikhchandani, Sushil & Ostroy, Joseph M., 2002. "The Package Assignment Model," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 107(2), pages 377-406, December.
    12. Andersson, Tommy & Svensson, Lars-Gunnar, 2018. "Sequential rules for house allocation with price restrictions," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 41-59.
    13. Cramton, Peter C, 1995. "Money Out of Thin Air: The Nationwide Narrowband PCS Auction," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 4(2), pages 267-343, Summer.
    14. John William Hatfield & Paul R. Milgrom, 2005. "Matching with Contracts," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 95(4), pages 913-935, September.
    15. Cao, Zhigang & Qin, Chengzhong & Yang, Xiaoguang, 2018. "Shapley's conjecture on the cores of abstract market games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 466-477.
    16. Jeremy T. Fox, 2018. "Estimating matching games with transfers," Quantitative Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 9(1), pages 1-38, March.
    17. Benjamin Edelman & Michael Ostrovsky & Michael Schwarz, 2007. "Internet Advertising and the Generalized Second-Price Auction: Selling Billions of Dollars Worth of Keywords," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 97(1), pages 242-259, March.
    18. Jeremy T. Fox, 2010. "Identification in matching games," Quantitative Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 1(2), pages 203-254, November.
    19. Andersson, Tommy & Ehlers, Lars & Svensson, Lars-Gunnar, 2016. "Transferring ownership of public housing to existing tenants: A market design approach," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 165(C), pages 643-671.
    20. Lars-Gunnar Svensson, 2009. "Coalitional strategy-proofness and fairness," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 40(2), pages 227-245, August.

    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:sbe:breart:v:25:y:2005:i:2:a:2506. 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: Núcleo de Computação da FGV EPGE (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/sbeeeea.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.