IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/jqecon/v20y2022i1d10.1007_s40953-021-00279-3.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Lease Auctions with Retention Options

Author

Listed:
  • Pranjal Chandrakar

    (Mahindra University)

  • Shubhabrata Das

    (Decision Science, Indian Institute of Management Bangalore)

  • Manaswini Bhalla

    (Economics and Social Sciences, Indian Institute of Management Bangalore)

Abstract

When a lease expires, the lessor can choose between auctioning it and offering the retention option to the current leaseholder. In the latter case, the leaseholder gets the opportunity to retain or renew the lease by paying the retention price, as decided by the lessor. However, if a leaseholder declines the retention option, the concerned lease is re-allocated via auction. This study compares a lessor’s revenue when it offers the retention option against that when it does not. Retention options prompt academic interest as they are often used to allocate coal, oil, and other mines. They are also used to assign players’ services in sports tournaments like the Indian Premier League (IPL). We study three game-theoretic models with varying assumptions (number of leases, complete/incomplete information, etc.) to achieve the aforementioned objective. In each game, we find the leaseholder’s equilibrium retention strategy and lessor’s expected revenue. We find that retention options help increase the lessor’s revenue when competition among the leaseholder is low. Otherwise, auctioning the leases fetches more revenue.

Suggested Citation

  • Pranjal Chandrakar & Shubhabrata Das & Manaswini Bhalla, 2022. "Lease Auctions with Retention Options," Journal of Quantitative Economics, Springer;The Indian Econometric Society (TIES), vol. 20(1), pages 97-136, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:jqecon:v:20:y:2022:i:1:d:10.1007_s40953-021-00279-3
    DOI: 10.1007/s40953-021-00279-3
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s40953-021-00279-3
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s40953-021-00279-3?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
    ---><---

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

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Stanley Reynolds & John Wooders, 2009. "Auctions with a buy price," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 38(1), pages 9-39, January.
    2. Krishna, Kala, 1993. "Auctions with Endogenous Valuations: The Persistence of Monopoly Revisited," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 83(1), pages 147-160, March.
    3. Jean-Pierre Benoît & Vijay Krishna, 2001. "Multiple-Object Auctions with Budget Constrained Bidders," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 68(1), pages 155-179.
    4. Jong-Rong Chen & Kong-Pin Chen & Chien-Fu Chou & Ching-I Huang, 2013. "A Dynamic Model of Auctions with Buy-It-Now: Theory and Evidence," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 61(2), pages 393-429, June.
    5. Sunnevag, Kjell J., 2000. "Designing auctions for offshore petroleum lease allocation," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(1), pages 3-16, March.
    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. Kong‐Pin Chen & Szu‐Hsien Ho & Chi‐Hsiang Liu & Chien‐Ming Wang, 2017. "The Optimal Listing Strategies In Online Auctions," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 58(2), pages 421-437, May.
    2. Chen, Kong-Pin & Lai, Hung-pin & Yu, Ya-Ting, 2018. "The seller's listing strategy in online auctions: Evidence from eBay," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 107-144.
    3. Grebe, Tim & Ivanova-Stenzel, Radosveta & Kröger, Sabine, 2021. "How do sellers benefit from Buy-It-Now prices in eBay auctions?," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 183(C), pages 189-205.
    4. Pitchik, Carolyn, 2009. "Budget-constrained sequential auctions with incomplete information," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 66(2), pages 928-949, July.
    5. Wang, Hong, 2017. "Analysis and design for multi-unit online auctions," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 258(3), pages 1191-1203.
    6. Ivanova-Stenzel, Radosveta & Grebe, Tim & Kröger, Sabine, 2019. "How do sellers benefit from Buy-It-Now prices in eBay auctions?," VfS Annual Conference 2019 (Leipzig): 30 Years after the Fall of the Berlin Wall - Democracy and Market Economy 203606, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    7. Toshihiro Tsuchihashi, 2021. "A buyout option alleviates implicit collusion in uniform‐price auctions," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 42(5), pages 1146-1155, July.
    8. Alexander Maslov, 2022. "Competition in online markets with auctions and posted prices," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 137(2), pages 145-169, October.
    9. Alexander Maslov, 2020. "A Note on Buyers’ Behavior in Auctions with an Outside Option," Games, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-9, July.
    10. Radosveta Ivanova-Stenzel & Sabine Kröger, 2023. "Risk, Reward and Uncertainty in Buyer-Seller Transactions," CIRANO Working Papers 2023s-13, CIRANO.
    11. Shunda, Nicholas, 2009. "Auctions with a buy price: The case of reference-dependent preferences," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 67(2), pages 645-664, November.
    12. James Lake & Maia Linask, 2015. "Costly distribution and the non-equivalence of tariffs and quotas," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 165(3), pages 211-238, December.
    13. Bobkova, Nina, 2020. "Asymmetric budget constraints in a first-price auction," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 186(C).
    14. Armstrong, Mark & Zhou, Jidong, 2010. "Exploding offers and buy-now discounts," MPRA Paper 22531, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    15. Genti Kostandini & Elton Mykerezi & Eftila Tanellari & Nour Dib, 2011. "Does Buyer Experience Pay Off? Evidence from eBay," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 39(3), pages 253-265, November.
    16. Gale, Ian L. & Stegeman, Mark, 2001. "Sequential Auctions of Endogenously Valued Objects," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 36(1), pages 74-103, July.
    17. Popkowski Leszczyc, Peter T.L. & Qiu, Chun & He, Yongfu, 2009. "Empirical Testing of the Reference-Price Effect of Buy-Now Prices in Internet Auctions," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 85(2), pages 211-221.
    18. A. Talman & Zaifu Yang, 2015. "An efficient multi-item dynamic auction with budget constrained bidders," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 44(3), pages 769-784, August.
    19. Brusco, Sandro & Lopomo, Giuseppe & Marx, Leslie M., 2009. "The [`]Google effect' in the FCC's 700Â MHz auction," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 21(2), pages 101-114, June.
    20. Julio Peña Torres & Gabriel Fernández Aguirre, 2008. "Disuasión de Entrada Vía Subastas: Free Riding o Colusión?," ILADES-UAH Working Papers inv215, Universidad Alberto Hurtado/School of Economics and Business.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    English auction; Lease allocation; Lease renewal; Lease retention; Retention price; Retention strategy;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D44 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design - - - Auctions
    • D45 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design - - - Rationing; Licensing
    • D47 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design - - - Market Design

    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:spr:jqecon:v:20:y:2022:i:1:d:10.1007_s40953-021-00279-3. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.