IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cpr/ceprdp/2864.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Bilateral Oligopoly

Author

Listed:
  • Stennek, Johan
  • Björnerstedt, Jonas

Abstract

In many intermediate goods markets buyers and sellers both have market power. Contracts are usually long-term and negotiated bilaterally, codifying many elements in addition to price. We model such bilateral oligopolies as a set of simultaneous Rubinstein-Ståhl bargainings between pairs of buyers and sellers, over contracts specifying price and quantity. Equilibrium quantities are efficient regardless of concentration. The law of one price does not hold. Prices depend on concentration of capital and concentration of sales. If the quantity sold represents a small share of both the firms' sales and purchases, then the price is close to the Walrasian price.

Suggested Citation

  • Stennek, Johan & Björnerstedt, Jonas, 2001. "Bilateral Oligopoly," CEPR Discussion Papers 2864, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    • Handle: RePEc:cpr:ceprdp:2864
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://cepr.org/publications/DP2864
    Download Restriction: CEPR Discussion Papers are free to download for our researchers, subscribers and members. If you fall into one of these categories but have trouble downloading our papers, please contact us at subscribers@cepr.org
    ---><---

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

    Other versions of this item:

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Björnerstedt, Jonas & Westermark, Andreas, 2006. "Bargaining and Strategic Discrimination," Working Paper Series 2006:6, Uppsala University, Department of Economics.
    2. Stennek, Johan & Tangerås, Thomas, 2006. "Competition vs. Regulation in Mobile Telecommunications," Working Paper Series 685, Research Institute of Industrial Economics.
    3. Manasakis, Constantine & Vlassis, Minas, 2014. "Downstream mode of competition with upstream market power," Research in Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(1), pages 84-93.
    4. Inderst, Roman & Wey, Christian, 2007. "Buyer power and supplier incentives," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 51(3), pages 647-667, April.
    5. Jim Engle-Warnick & Bradley Ruffle, 2002. "Buyer Countervailing Power versus Monopoly Power: Evidence from Experimental Posted-Offer Markets," Economics Papers 2002-W14, Economics Group, Nuffield College, University of Oxford.
    6. Sapi, Geza, 2012. "Bargaining, vertical mergers and entry," DICE Discussion Papers 61, Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf Institute for Competition Economics (DICE).
    7. Alberto Iozzi & Tommaso Valletti, 2014. "Vertical Bargaining and Countervailing Power," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 6(3), pages 106-135, August.
    8. Catherine C. de Fontenay & Joshua S. Gans, 2005. "Vertical Integration in the Presence of Upstream Competition," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 36(3), pages 544-572, Autumn.
    9. Vettas, Nikolaos & Biglaiser, Gary, 2004. "Dynamic Price Competition with Capacity Constraints and Strategic Buyers," CEPR Discussion Papers 4315, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    10. Franz Wirl, 2015. "Downstream and upstream oligopolies when retailer’s effort matters," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 116(2), pages 99-127, October.
    11. You, Jing & Imai, Katsushi S. & Gaiha, Raghav, 2016. "Declining Nutrient Intake in a Growing China: Does Household Heterogeneity Matter?," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 171-191.
    12. Noriaki Matsushima & Laixun Zhao, 2015. "Strategic dual sourcing as a driver for free revealing of innovation," ISER Discussion Paper 0936, Institute of Social and Economic Research, Osaka University.
    13. Suchan Chae & Paul Heidhues, 2004. "Buyers' Alliances for Bargaining Power," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 13(4), pages 731-754, December.
    14. Jonas Björnerstedt & Andreas Westermark, 2009. "The inefficiency of price quantity bargaining," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 40(2), pages 301-332, August.
    15. Smith, Howard & Thanassoulis, John, 2012. "Upstream uncertainty and countervailing power," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 30(6), pages 483-495.
    16. Smith, Howard & Thanassoulis, John, 2006. "Upstream Competition and Downstream Buyer Power," CEPR Discussion Papers 5803, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    17. Qi Feng & Lauren Xiaoyuan Lu, 2012. "The Strategic Perils of Low Cost Outsourcing," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 58(6), pages 1196-1210, June.
    18. Bedre-Defolie, Ö., 2012. "Vertical coordination through renegotiation," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 30(6), pages 553-563.
    19. de Fontenay, Catherine C. & Gans, Joshua S., 2004. "Can vertical integration by a monopsonist harm consumer welfare?," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 22(6), pages 821-834, June.
    20. Vettas, Nikolaos & Petrakis, Emmanuel & Milliou, Chrysovalantou, 2003. "Endogenous Contracts Under Bargaining in Competing Vertical Chains," CEPR Discussion Papers 3976, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    21. Allan Collard-Wexler & Gautam Gowrisankaran & Robin S. Lee, 2019. ""Nash-in-Nash" Bargaining: A Microfoundation for Applied Work," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 127(1), pages 163-195.
    22. Dobson, Paul W. & Waterson, Michael, 2007. "The competition effects of industry-wide vertical price fixing in bilateral oligopoly," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 25(5), pages 935-962, October.
    23. Konovalov, Alexander, 2014. "Competition and Cooperation in Network Games," Working Papers in Economics 583, University of Gothenburg, Department of Economics.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Bilateral oligopoly; Bargaining; Intermediate goods; Decentralized trade; Walrasian outcome;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C70 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - General
    • D20 - Microeconomics - - Production and Organizations - - - General
    • D40 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design - - - General
    • L10 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - General
    • L40 - Industrial Organization - - Antitrust Issues and Policies - - - General

    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:cpr:ceprdp:2864. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cepr.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.