IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hhs/cbsnow/2002_002.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Must Trust Bust?

Author

Listed:
  • Møllgaard, Peter

    (Department of Economics, Copenhagen Business School)

Abstract

Our trust in competition policy is based on faith in markets. When markets are oligopolies, already classical economists’ trust in competition busted: Oligopolies carry the seeds of collusion. To develop, collusion needs trust between firms. But new leniency programmes are designed to bust that trust. I discuss when trust busters are likely to succeed and when trust prevails.

Suggested Citation

  • Møllgaard, Peter, 2002. "Must Trust Bust?," Working Papers 02-2002, Copenhagen Business School, Department of Economics.
    • Handle: RePEc:hhs:cbsnow:2002_002
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://openarchive.cbs.dk/cbsweb/handle/10398/7646
    Download Restriction: Full text not avaiable
    ---><---

    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. repec:bla:jindec:v:45:y:1997:i:4:p:429-43 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. H. Peter Møllgaard & Per Baltzer Overgaard, 2001. "Market Transparency and Competition Policy," Rivista di Politica Economica, SIPI Spa, vol. 91(4), pages 11-64, April-May.
    3. Svend Albæk & Peter Møllgaard & Per B. Overgaard, 1997. "Government‐Assisted Oligopoly Coordination? A Concrete Case," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 45(4), pages 429-443, December.
    4. Polinsky, A Mitchell & Shavell, Steven, 1992. "Enforcement Costs and the Optimal Magnitude and Probability of Fines," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 35(1), pages 133-148, April.
    5. Johan Stennek, 1997. "Coordination in Oligopoly," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 99(4), pages 541-554, December.
    6. H. Peter Møllgaard & Per Baltzer Overgaard, 1999. "Market Transparency: A Mixed Blessing?," CIE Discussion Papers 1999-15, University of Copenhagen. Department of Economics. Centre for Industrial Economics, revised Feb 2000.
    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. Per Baltzer Overgaard & Peter Møllgaard, 2005. "Information Exchange, Market Transparency and Dynamic Oligopoly," CIE Discussion Papers 2005-11, University of Copenhagen. Department of Economics. Centre for Industrial Economics.
    2. Rasch, Alexander & Herre, Jesko, 2013. "Customer-side transparency, elastic demand, and tacit collusion under differentiation," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 25(1), pages 51-59.
    3. Lommerud, Kjell Erik & Sorgard, Lars, 2003. "Entry in telecommunication: customer loyalty, price sensitivity and access prices," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 15(1), pages 55-72, March.
    4. Liliane Karlinger, 2008. "How Demand Information Can Destabilize a Cartel," Vienna Economics Papers 0803, University of Vienna, Department of Economics.
    5. Nils-Henrik M. von der Fehr, 2013. "Transparency in Electricity Markets," Economics of Energy & Environmental Policy, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 2).
    6. Yiquan Gu & Tobias Wenzel, 2017. "Consumer confusion, obfuscation and price regulation," Scottish Journal of Political Economy, Scottish Economic Society, vol. 64(2), pages 169-190, May.
    7. Michael Gmeiner, 2019. "Seasonal Demand and Net Entry," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 39(2), pages 1135-1143.
    8. Huck, Steffen & Normann, Hans-Theo & Oechssler, Jorg, 2000. "Does information about competitors' actions increase or decrease competition in experimental oligopoly markets?," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 18(1), pages 39-57, January.
    9. Dirk Bergemann & Johannes Horner, 2010. "Should Auctions Be Transparent?," Levine's Working Paper Archive 661465000000000128, David K. Levine.
    10. Patrick Rey & Jean Tirole, 2019. "Price Caps as Welfare-Enhancing Coopetition," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 127(6), pages 3018-3069.
    11. Anke Becker & Thomas Deckers & Thomas Dohmen & Armin Falk & Fabian Kosse, 2012. "The Relationship Between Economic Preferences and Psychological Personality Measures," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 4(1), pages 453-478, July.
    12. Ethan M. J. Lieber, 2017. "Does It Pay to Know Prices in Health Care?," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 9(1), pages 154-179, February.
    13. Boone, J. & Potters, J.J.M., 2002. "Transparency, Prices and Welfare with Imperfect Substitutes," Discussion Paper 2002-7, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
    14. Kyle Hampton & Katerina Sherstyuk, 2012. "Demand shocks, capacity coordination, and industry performance: lessons from an economic laboratory," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 43(1), pages 139-166, March.
    15. Marcel Wieting & Geza Sapi, 2021. "Algorithms in the Marketplace: An Empirical Analysis of Automated Pricing in E-Commerce," Working Papers 21-06, NET Institute.
    16. Kurt R. Brekke & Dag Morten Dalen & Odd Rune Straume, 2024. "Competing with precision: incentives for developing predictive biomarker tests," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 126(1), pages 60-97, January.
    17. Kwon, Illoong & Jun, Daesung, 2015. "Information disclosure and peer effects in the use of antibiotics," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 1-16.
    18. Christian Lorenz, 2008. "Screening markets for cartel detection: collusive markers in the CFD cartel-audit," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 26(2), pages 213-232, October.
    19. Christos Genakos & Pantelis Koutroumpis & Mario Pagliero, 2018. "The Impact of Maximum Markup Regulation on Prices," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 66(2), pages 239-300, June.
    20. Sarah Grunewald & Ted C. Schroeder & Clement E. Ward, 2004. "Cattle Feeder Perceptions of Livestock Mandatory Price Reporting," Review of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 26(4), pages 521-538.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Competition policy; Oligopolies; Collusion; Trust; Leniency programmes;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • G10 - Financial Economics - - General Financial Markets - - - General (includes Measurement and Data)
    • G18 - Financial Economics - - General Financial Markets - - - Government Policy and Regulation
    • L13 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Oligopoly and Other Imperfect Markets

    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:hhs:cbsnow:2002_002. 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: CBS Library Research Registration Team (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/incbsdk.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.