IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/canjec/v51y2018i1p94-126.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How do selling mechanisms affect profits, surplus, capacity and prices with unknown demand?

Author

Listed:
  • Patrick Hummel

Abstract

I analyze a model in which a seller wishes to sell multiple homogeneous goods to a large group of buyers with unknown demand. The seller may either sell objects via a posted‐price mechanism, a discriminatory‐price auction, a uniform‐price auction, their open‐bid analogs, or a revelation mechanism in which the seller first asks all potential buyers to report their valuations and then sets a reserve price. I show that the revelation mechanism leads to the greatest profits, the auction mechanisms result in identical expected profits and the posted‐price mechanism results in the smallest profits. However, the more profitable mechanisms impose stronger informational requirements that may make these mechanisms infeasible in practice, and the posted‐price mechanism also results in the greatest total surplus. I also find the seller chooses a lower capacity and reserve price in an auction than in the posted‐price mechanism. Comment est‐ce que les mécanismes de vente affectent les profits, le surplus, la capacité, et les prix quand on fait face à une demande inconnue? L'auteur analyse un modèle dans lequel un vendeur veut vendre plusieurs biens homogènes à un vaste groupe d'acheteurs dont on ne connaît pas la demande. Le vendeur peut soit vendre des objets via un mécanisme de prix affichés, une enchère qui permet de discriminer parles prix, une enchère à prix uniforme, des mécanismes analogues via des offres publiques d'achat, ou un mécanisme de révélation des préférences dans lequel le vendeur demande d'abord à tous les acheteurs potentiels de révéler leurs évaluations des produits et de définir leur prix de réserve. On montre que le mécanisme de révélation assure les profits les plus élevés, que les divers mécanismes d'enchère entraînent des profits anticipés identiques, et que le mécanisme du prix affiché engendre les profits les plus bas. Cependant les mécanismes les plus profitables imposent de plus importants prérequis informationnels qui peuvent fort bien les rendre impossibles à mettre en pratique. De plus, le mécanisme des prix affichés dégage le plus grand surplus total. L'auteur a aussi découvert que le vendeur choisit une capacité inférieure et un prix de réserve plus bas dans une enchère que dans le mécanisme des prix affichés.

Suggested Citation

  • Patrick Hummel, 2018. "How do selling mechanisms affect profits, surplus, capacity and prices with unknown demand?," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 51(1), pages 94-126, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:canjec:v:51:y:2018:i:1:p:94-126
    DOI: 10.1111/caje.12317
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/caje.12317
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/caje.12317?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Benoît Julien & John Kennes & Ian King, 2002. "Auctions Beat Posted Prices in a Small Market," Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics (JITE), Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 158(4), pages 548-562, December.
    2. Michael Peters & Sergei Severinov, 2008. "An ascending double auction," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 37(2), pages 281-306, November.
    3. Ilya Segal, 2003. "Optimal Pricing Mechanisms with Unknown Demand," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 93(3), pages 509-529, June.
    4. 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.
    5. Richard Engelbrecht-Wiggans & John A. List & David H. Reiley, 2006. "Demand Reduction In Multi-Unit Auctions With Varying Numbers Of Bidders: Theory And Evidence From A Field Experiment ," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 47(1), pages 203-231, February.
    6. Burt, Oscar R & Brewer, Durward, 1971. "Estimation of Net Social Benefits from Outdoor Recreation," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 39(5), pages 813-827, September.
    7. Peters, Michael & Severinov, Sergei, 2006. "Internet auctions with many traders," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 130(1), pages 220-245, September.
    8. David Lucking-Reiley & John A. List, 2000. "Demand Reduction in Multiunit Auctions: Evidence from a Sportscard Field Experiment," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 90(4), pages 961-972, September.
    9. Harris, Milton & Raviv, Artur, 1981. "A Theory of Monopoly Pricing Schemes with Demand Uncertainty," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 71(3), pages 347-365, June.
    10. Glenn Ellison & Drew Fudenberg & Markus Möbius, 2004. "Competing Auctions," Journal of the European Economic Association, MIT Press, vol. 2(1), pages 30-66, March.
    11. Jaime F. Zender & James J.D. Wang, 2002. "Auctioning divisible goods," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 19(4), pages 673-705.
    12. Varian, Hal R., 2007. "Position auctions," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 25(6), pages 1163-1178, December.
    13. Wang, Ruqu, 1993. "Auctions versus Posted-Price Selling," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 83(4), pages 838-851, September.
    14. Hammond, Robert G., 2010. "Comparing revenue from auctions and posted prices," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 28(1), pages 1-9, January.
    15. Ruqu Wang, 1998. "Auctions versus Posted-Price Selling: The Case of Correlated Private Valuations," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 31(2), pages 395-410, May.
    16. Yongmin Chen & Ruqu Wang, 2006. "Market Design with Correlated Valuations," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 73(292), pages 659-672, November.
    17. Kultti, Klaus, 1999. "Equivalence of Auctions and Posted Prices," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 27(1), pages 106-113, April.
    18. Sun, Daewon, 2008. "Dual mechanism for an online retailer," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 187(3), pages 903-921, June.
    19. Leland, Hayne E, 1972. "Theory of the Firm Facing Uncertain Demand," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 62(3), pages 278-291, June.
    20. René Caldentey & Gustavo Vulcano, 2007. "Online Auction and List Price Revenue Management," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 53(5), pages 795-813, May.
    21. Yvonne Durham & Matthew R. Roelofs & Todd A. Sorensen & Stephen S. Standifird, 2013. "A Laboratory Study Of Auctions With A Buy Price," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 51(2), pages 1357-1373, April.
    22. Back, Kerry & Zender, Jaime F., 2001. "Auctions of divisible goods with endogenous supply," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 73(1), pages 29-34, October.
    23. Hila Etzion & Edieal Pinker & Abraham Seidmann, 2006. "Analyzing the Simultaneous Use of Auctions and Posted Prices for Online Selling," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 8(1), pages 68-91, March.
    24. Meyer, Robert A, 1975. "Monopoly Pricing and Capacity Choice under Uncertainty," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 65(3), pages 326-337, June.
    25. Michael Peters, 2014. "Competing mechanisms," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 47(2), pages 373-397, May.
    26. Garrett van Ryzin & Gustavo Vulcano, 2004. "Optimal Auctioning and Ordering in an Infinite Horizon Inventory-Pricing System," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 52(3), pages 346-367, June.
    27. Jérémie Gallien, 2006. "Dynamic Mechanism Design for Online Commerce," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 54(2), pages 291-310, April.
    28. Nirvikar Singh & Xavier Vives, 1984. "Price and Quantity Competition in a Differentiated Duopoly," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 15(4), pages 546-554, Winter.
    29. Peters, Michael, 2014. "Competing Mechanisms," Microeconomics.ca working papers michael_peters-2014-7, Vancouver School of Economics, revised 19 Feb 2014.
    30. Gustavo Vulcano & Garrett van Ryzin & Costis Maglaras, 2002. "Optimal Dynamic Auctions for Revenue Management," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 48(11), pages 1388-1407, November.
    31. Hummel, Patrick, 2016. "Position auctions with dynamic resizing," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 38-46.
    32. Ilan Kremer, 2004. "Underpricing and Market Power in Uniform Price Auctions," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 17(3), pages 849-877.
    33. Liran Einav & Theresa Kuchler & Jonathan Levin & Neel Sundaresan, 2015. "Assessing Sale Strategies in Online Markets Using Matched Listings," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 7(2), pages 215-247, May.
    34. Michael Peters, 2014. "Competing mechanisms," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 47(2), pages 373-397, May.
    35. Hummel, Patrick, 2015. "Simultaneous use of auctions and posted prices," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 269-284.
    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. Hummel, Patrick, 2015. "Simultaneous use of auctions and posted prices," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 269-284.
    2. Jiang, Zhong-Zhong & Fang, Shu-Cherng & Fan, Zhi-Ping & Wang, Dingwei, 2013. "Selecting optimal selling format of a product in B2C online auctions with boundedly rational customers," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 226(1), pages 139-153.
    3. Caio Waisman, 2021. "Selling mechanisms for perishable goods: An empirical analysis of an online resale market for event tickets," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 19(2), pages 127-178, June.
    4. Sun, Daewon & Li, Erick & Hayya, Jack C., 2010. "The optimal format to sell a product through the internet: Posted price, auction, and buy-price auction," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 127(1), pages 147-157, September.
    5. 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.
    6. Alexander Maslov, 2023. "Auctions versus posted prices in the revenue management of limited inventory," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 44(3), pages 1476-1490, April.
    7. Ying-Ju Chen, 2017. "Optimal Dynamic Auctions for Display Advertising," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 65(4), pages 897-913, August.
    8. Kevin Hasker & Robin Sickles, 2010. "eBay in the Economic Literature: Analysis of an Auction Marketplace," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 37(1), pages 3-42, August.
    9. Alexander Maslov, 2022. "Competition in online markets with auctions and posted prices," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 137(2), pages 145-169, October.
    10. Woonghee Tim Huh & Ganesh Janakiraman, 2008. "Inventory Management with Auctions and Other Sales Channels: Optimality of (s, S) Policies," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 54(1), pages 139-150, January.
    11. Christopher Boyer & B. Brorsen & Tong Zhang, 2014. "Common-value auction versus posted-price selling: an agent-based model approach," Journal of Economic Interaction and Coordination, Springer;Society for Economic Science with Heterogeneous Interacting Agents, vol. 9(1), pages 129-149, April.
    12. Dominic Coey & Bradley J. Larsen & Brennan C. Platt, 2020. "Discounts and Deadlines in Consumer Search," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 110(12), pages 3748-3785, December.
    13. Sun, Daewon, 2008. "Dual mechanism for an online retailer," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 187(3), pages 903-921, June.
    14. René Caldentey & Gustavo Vulcano, 2007. "Online Auction and List Price Revenue Management," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 53(5), pages 795-813, May.
    15. repec:awi:wpaper:0460 is not listed on IDEAS
    16. Yu Ning & Su Xiu Xu & George Q. Huang & Xudong Lin, 2021. "Optimal digital product auctions with unlimited supply and rebidding behavior," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 307(1), pages 399-416, December.
    17. Li, Anqi & Xing, Yiqing, 2020. "Intermediated implementation," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 123(C).
    18. Wang, Hong, 2017. "Analysis and design for multi-unit online auctions," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 258(3), pages 1191-1203.
    19. Kaplan, Todd R. & Zamir, Shmuel, 2015. "Advances in Auctions," Handbook of Game Theory with Economic Applications,, Elsevier.
    20. 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.
    21. Peyman Khezr & Anne Cumpston, 2022. "A review of multiunit auctions with homogeneous goods," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(4), pages 1225-1247, September.

    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:wly:canjec:v:51:y:2018:i:1:p:94-126. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1540-5982 .

    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.