IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/iecrev/v54y2013i3p977-1015.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Strategic Effects Of Three‐Part Tariffs Under Oligopoly

Author

Listed:
  • YONG CHAO

Abstract

The distinct element of a three‐part tariff (3PT), compared with linear pricing (LP) or a two‐part tariff, is its quantity target within which the marginal price is zero. This quantity target instrument enriches the firm's strategy set in dictating the competition to a specific level, even in the absence of a usual price discrimination motive. With general differentiated linear demands, the competitive effect of a 3PT in contrast to LP depends on the degree of substitutability between products: Competition is intensified when two products are more differentiated, yet softened when two products are more substitutable.

Suggested Citation

  • Yong Chao, 2013. "Strategic Effects Of Three‐Part Tariffs Under Oligopoly," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 54(3), pages 977-1015, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:iecrev:v:54:y:2013:i:3:p:977-1015
    DOI: 10.1111/iere.12025
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/iere.12025
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/iere.12025?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. Amir, Rabah & Stepanova, Anna, 2006. "Second-mover advantage and price leadership in Bertrand duopoly," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 55(1), pages 1-20, April.
    2. B. Douglas Bernheim & Michael D. Whinston, 1998. "Exclusive Dealing," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 106(1), pages 64-103, February.
    3. van Damme, Eric & Hurkens, Sjaak, 2004. "Endogenous price leadership," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 47(2), pages 404-420, May.
    4. Robert J. Dolan, 1987. "Quantity Discounts: Managerial Issues and Research Opportunities," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 6(1), pages 1-22.
    5. Michael D. Grubb, 2009. "Selling to Overconfident Consumers," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 99(5), pages 1770-1807, December.
    6. Anja Lambrecht & Katja Seim & Bernd Skiera, 2007. "Does Uncertainty Matter? Consumer Behavior Under Three-Part Tariffs," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(5), pages 698-710, 09-10.
    7. Baron, David P. & Besanko, David, 1984. "Regulation and information in a continuing relationship," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 1(3), pages 267-302.
    8. Aghion, Philippe & Bolton, Patrick, 1987. "Contracts as a Barrier to Entry," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 77(3), pages 388-401, June.
    9. Prat, A. & Rustichini, A., 1998. "Sequential Common Agency," Discussion Paper 1998-95, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
    10. Daniel P. O'Brien & Greg Shaffer, 1997. "Nonlinear Supply Contracts, Exclusive Dealing, and Equilibrium Market Foreclosure," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 6(4), pages 755-785, December.
    11. Walter Y. Oi, 1971. "A Disneyland Dilemma: Two-Part Tariffs for a Mickey Mouse Monopoly," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 85(1), pages 77-96.
    12. Mathewson, G Frank & Winter, Ralph A, 1987. "The Competitive Effects of Vertical Agreements: Comment," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 77(5), pages 1057-1062, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Jang, Jaewon & Kwon, Youngsun, 2014. "Growing use of three-part tariffs by MNOs: Understanding incentives of MNOs," 25th European Regional ITS Conference, Brussels 2014 101377, International Telecommunications Society (ITS).
    2. Jianqing Fisher Wu & Banafsheh Behzad, 2023. "Optimal three-part tariff pricing with Spence-Mirrlees reservation prices," Mathematical Methods of Operations Research, Springer;Gesellschaft für Operations Research (GOR);Nederlands Genootschap voor Besliskunde (NGB), vol. 97(2), pages 233-258, April.

    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. David Spector, 2011. "Exclusive contracts and demand foreclosure," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 42(4), pages 619-638, December.
    2. Can Erutku, 2006. "Rebates as incentives to exclusivity," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 39(2), pages 477-492, May.
    3. Kitamura, Hiroshi & Matsushima, Noriaki & Sato, Misato, 2018. "Exclusive contracts with complementary inputs," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 145-167.
    4. Klein, Joachim & Zenger, Hans, 2009. "Predatory Exclusive Dealing," Discussion Papers in Economics 10626, University of Munich, Department of Economics.
    5. Yaron Yehezkel, 2008. "Retailers' choice of product variety and exclusive dealing under asymmetric information," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 39(1), pages 115-143, March.
    6. Rosenkranz, Stephanie & Schmitz, Patrick W., 2001. "Vertikale Unternehmenskooperationen," MPRA Paper 6930, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    7. Belleflamme,Paul & Peitz,Martin, 2015. "Industrial Organization," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9781107687899.
    8. Giacomo Calzolari & Vincenzo Denicolò & Piercarlo Zanchettin, 2020. "The demand‐boost theory of exclusive dealing," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 51(3), pages 713-738, September.
    9. DeGraba, Patrick, 2013. "Naked exclusion by a dominant input supplier: Exclusive contracting and loyalty discounts," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 31(5), pages 516-526.
    10. Caillaud, Bernard & Rey, Patrick, 1995. "Strategic aspects of vertical delegation," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 39(3-4), pages 421-431, April.
    11. Tommy Staahl Gabrielsen & Lars Sørgard, 1999. "Exclusive versus Common Dealership," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 66(2), pages 353-366, October.
    12. David E. Mills, 2017. "Buyer‐Induced Exclusive Dealing," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 84(1), pages 66-81, July.
    13. Inderst, Roman & Peitz, Martin, 2012. "Informing consumers about their own preferences," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 30(5), pages 417-428.
    14. Gabrielsen, Tommy Staahl & Johansen, Bjørn Olav, 2015. "Buyer power and exclusion in vertically related markets," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 1-18.
    15. David Mills, 2007. "Quasi-Partnerships in Distribution," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 31(3), pages 155-168, November.
    16. Gratz, Linda & Reisinger, Markus, 2013. "On the competition enhancing effects of exclusive dealing contracts," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 31(5), pages 429-437.
    17. Michiel Bijlsma & Viktoria Kocsis & Victoria Shestalova & Gijsbert Zwart, 2008. "Vertical foreclosure: a policy framework," CPB Document 157, CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis.
    18. Fabian Herweg & Konrad Mierendorff, 2013. "Uncertain Demand, Consumer Loss Aversion, And Flat-Rate Tariffs," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 11(2), pages 399-432, April.
    19. Ellingsen, Tore, 1995. "Long Term Contracts, Arbitrage, and Vertical Restraints," SSE/EFI Working Paper Series in Economics and Finance 58, Stockholm School of Economics.
    20. Mikko Packalen, 2011. "Market Share Exclusion," Working Papers 1103, University of Waterloo, Department of Economics, revised Aug 2011.

    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:iecrev:v:54:y:2013:i:3:p:977-1015. 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://edirc.repec.org/data/deupaus.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.