IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2004.01238.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Greater search cost reduces prices

Author

Listed:
  • Sander Heinsalu

Abstract

The optimal price of each firm falls in the search cost of consumers, in the limit to the monopoly price, despite the exit of lower-value consumers in response to costlier search. Exit means that fewer inframarginal consumers remain. The decrease in marginal buyers is smaller, because part of demand is composed of customers coming from rival firms. These buyers can be held up and are not marginal. Higher search cost reduces the fraction of incoming switchers among buyers, which decreases the hold-up motive, thus the price.

Suggested Citation

  • Sander Heinsalu, 2020. "Greater search cost reduces prices," Papers 2004.01238, arXiv.org.
    • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2004.01238
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://arxiv.org/pdf/2004.01238
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Michael Choi & Anovia Yifan Dai & Kyungmin Kim, 2018. "Consumer Search and Price Competition," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 86(4), pages 1257-1281, July.
    2. Stiglitz, J E, 1979. "Equilibrium in Product Markets with Imperfect Information," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 69(2), pages 339-345, May.
    3. Parakhonyak, Alexei & Titova, Maria, 2018. "Shopping malls, platforms and consumer search," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 183-213.
    4. Rajiv Lal & Miklos Sarvary, 1999. "When and How Is the Internet Likely to Decrease Price Competition?," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 18(4), pages 485-503.
    5. Paul Klemperer, 1987. "Markets with Consumer Switching Costs," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 102(2), pages 375-394.
    6. Schultz, Christian, 2005. "Transparency on the consumer side and tacit collusion," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 49(2), pages 279-297, February.
    7. Charles Murry & Yiyi Zhou, 2020. "Consumer Search and Automobile Dealer Colocation," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 66(5), pages 1909-1934, May.
    8. Nishida, Mitsukuni & Remer, Marc, 2018. "Lowering consumer search costs can lead to higher prices," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 162(C), pages 1-4.
    9. Hefti, Andreas, 2017. "Equilibria in symmetric games: theory and applications," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 12(3), September.
    10. Diamond, Peter A., 1971. "A model of price adjustment," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 3(2), pages 156-168, June.
    11. Zhou, Jidong, 2009. "Prominence and Consumer Search: The Case With Multiple Prominent Firms," MPRA Paper 12554, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    12. Mark Armstrong & John Vickers & Jidong Zhou, 2009. "Prominence and consumer search," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 40(2), pages 209-233, June.
    13. Asher Wolinsky, 1986. "True Monopolistic Competition as a Result of Imperfect Information," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 101(3), pages 493-511.
    14. Milgrom, Paul & Roberts, John, 1990. "Rationalizability, Learning, and Equilibrium in Games with Strategic Complementarities," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 58(6), pages 1255-1277, November.
    15. Andrew Rhodes & Jidong Zhou, 2019. "Consumer Search and Retail Market Structure," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(6), pages 2607-2623, June.
    16. Jidong Zhou, 2014. "Multiproduct Search and the Joint Search Effect," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 104(9), pages 2918-2939, September.
    17. Luis Cabral, 2016. "Dynamic Pricing in Customer Markets with Switching Costs," Review of Economic Dynamics, Elsevier for the Society for Economic Dynamics, vol. 20, pages 43-62, April.
    18. Simon Board & Marek Pycia, 2014. "Outside Options and the Failure of the Coase Conjecture," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 104(2), pages 656-671, February.
    19. Anderson, Simon P & Renault, Regis, 2000. "Consumer Information and Firm Pricing: Negative Externalities from Improved Information," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 41(3), pages 721-742, August.
    20. Sander Heinsalu, 2021. "Costlier switching strengthens competition even without advertising," Papers 2104.08934, arXiv.org.
    21. Andrew Rhodes, 2015. "Multiproduct Retailing," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 82(1), pages 360-390.
    22. Klemperer, Paul D, 1987. "Entry Deterrence in Markets with Consumer Switching Costs," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 97(388a), pages 99-117, Supplemen.
    23. Glenn Ellison & Alexander Wolitzky, 2012. "A search cost model of obfuscation," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 43(3), pages 417-441, September.
    24. Martin, Simon, 2020. "Market transparency and consumer search - Evidence from the German retail gasoline market," DICE Discussion Papers 350, Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf Institute for Competition Economics (DICE).
    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. Rafael R. Guthmann, 2024. "Price dispersion in dynamic competition," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 78(4), pages 1203-1232, December.
    2. Sander Heinsalu, 2021. "Costlier switching strengthens competition even without advertising," Papers 2104.08934, arXiv.org.
    3. Saara Hämäläinen & Vaiva Petrikaitė, 2024. "Prediction algorithms in matching platforms," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 78(3), pages 979-1020, November.

    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. Heski Bar-Isaac & Sandro Shelegia, 2023. "Search, Showrooming, and Retailer Variety," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 42(2), pages 251-270, March.
    2. Zhou, Jidong, 2020. "Improved Information in Search Markets," MPRA Paper 100509, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. Sander Heinsalu, 2021. "Costlier switching strengthens competition even without advertising," Papers 2104.08934, arXiv.org.
    4. Andrew Rhodes & Jidong Zhou, 2019. "Consumer Search and Retail Market Structure," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(6), pages 2607-2623, June.
    5. Ding, Yucheng & Zhang, Tianle, 2018. "Price-directed consumer search," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 106-135.
    6. Mark Armstrong, 2017. "Ordered Consumer Search," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 15(5), pages 989-1024.
    7. Martin Obradovits & Philipp Plaickner, 2023. "Price-Directed Search, Product Differentiation and Competition," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 63(3), pages 317-348, November.
    8. Pak Hung Au & Mark Whitmeyer, 2021. "Attraction Versus Persuasion," HKUST CEP Working Papers Series 202102, HKUST Center for Economic Policy.
    9. Jose A. Carrasco & Rodrigo Yañez, 2022. "Sequential search and firm prominence," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 74(1), pages 209-233, July.
    10. Belleflamme,Paul & Peitz,Martin, 2015. "Industrial Organization," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9781107687899.
    11. Moraga-González, José L. & Sándor, Zsolt & Wildenbeest, Matthijs R., 2014. "Prices, Product Differentiation, And Heterogeneous Search Costs," IESE Research Papers D/1097, IESE Business School.
    12. Gamp, Tobias & Krähmer, Daniel, 2022. "Biased Beliefs in Search Markets," Rationality and Competition Discussion Paper Series 365, CRC TRR 190 Rationality and Competition.
    13. Mark Armstrong & Jidong Zhou, 2016. "Search Deterrence," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 83(1), pages 26-57.
    14. Haan, Marco A. & Moraga-González, José L. & Petrikaitė, Vaiva, 2018. "A model of directed consumer search," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 223-255.
    15. Casner, Ben, 2020. "Seller curation in platforms," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 72(C).
    16. Jay Lu & Simon Board, 2015. "Information Provision and Consumer Search," 2015 Meeting Papers 1427, Society for Economic Dynamics.
    17. Michael R. Galbreth & Bikram Ghosh, 2020. "The effect of exogenous product familiarity on endogenous consumer search," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 18(2), pages 195-235, June.
    18. Natalia Fabra & Juan-Pablo Montero, 2022. "Product Lines and Price Discrimination in Markets with Information Frictions," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(2), pages 981-1001, February.
    19. Chen, Yongmin & Li, zhuozheng & Zhang, Tianle, 2019. "A Search Model of Experience Goods," MPRA Paper 93547, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    20. Brett Hollenbeck & Renato Zaterka Giroldo, 2022. "Winning Big: Scale and Success in Retail Entrepreneurship," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 41(2), pages 271-293, March.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • D82 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Asymmetric and Private Information; Mechanism Design
    • C72 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Noncooperative Games
    • D43 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design - - - Oligopoly and Other Forms of Market Imperfection

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:arx:papers:2004.01238. 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: arXiv administrators (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://arxiv.org/ .

    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.