IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/pit/wpaper/6759.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Bidder Collusion: Accounting for All Feasible Bidders

Author

Listed:
  • Jean-François Richard

Abstract

The Idaho Department of Lands (IDL) sells timber from state lands bymeans of ascending bid auction. In our empirical analysis of all IDL scaleauctions from 2004 through 2015, accounting for all auction-specific feasiblebidders, we find significant evidence of bidder collusion. Given the complexityof the empirical model and the absence of analytic results, we apply the methodof simulated moments to estimate the parameters and Monte Carlo simulationsto produce standard deviations of the estimates. The loss to Idaho from thebidder collusion is estimated to be approximately $43 million over this timeperiod.

Suggested Citation

  • Jean-François Richard, 2019. "Bidder Collusion: Accounting for All Feasible Bidders," Working Paper 6759, Department of Economics, University of Pittsburgh.
  • Handle: RePEc:pit:wpaper:6759
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econ.pitt.edu/sites/default/files/working_papers/WP.19.06.upload.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Baldwin, Laura H & Marshall, Robert C & Richard, Jean-Francois, 1997. "Bidder Collusion at Forest Service Timber Sales," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 105(4), pages 657-699, August.
    2. Hendricks, Kenneth & Porter, Robert H, 1988. "An Empirical Study of an Auction with Asymmetric Information," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 78(5), pages 865-883, December.
    3. Robert H. Porter & J. Douglas Zona, 1999. "Ohio School Milk Markets: An Analysis of Bidding," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 30(2), pages 263-288, Summer.
    4. Laffont, Jean-Jacques & Ossard, Herve & Vuong, Quang, 1995. "Econometrics of First-Price Auctions," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 63(4), pages 953-980, July.
    5. Marhsall, Robert C. & Marx, Leslie M., 2014. "The Economics of Collusion: Cartels and Bidding Rings," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262525941, April.
    6. Susan Athey & Jonathan Levin & Enrique Seira, 2011. "Comparing open and Sealed Bid Auctions: Evidence from Timber Auctions," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 126(1), pages 207-257.
    7. Hendry, David F., 1984. "Monte carlo experimentation in econometrics," Handbook of Econometrics, in: Z. Griliches† & M. D. Intriligator (ed.), Handbook of Econometrics, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 16, pages 937-976, Elsevier.
    8. Philip A. Haile & Elie Tamer, 2003. "Inference with an Incomplete Model of English Auctions," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 111(1), pages 1-51, February.
    9. Porter, Robert H & Zona, J Douglas, 1993. "Detection of Bid Rigging in Procurement Auctions," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 101(3), pages 518-538, June.
    10. John Asker, 2010. "A Study of the Internal Organization of a Bidding Cartel," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 100(3), pages 724-762, June.
    11. Graham, Daniel A & Marshall, Robert C, 1987. "Collusive Bidder Behavior at Single-Object Second-Price and English Auctions," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 95(6), pages 1217-1239, December.
    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. Javier D. Donna & José†Antonio Espín†Sánchez, 2018. "Complements and substitutes in sequential auctions: the case of water auctions," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 49(1), pages 87-127, March.
    2. Susan Athey & Philip A. Haile, 2006. "Empirical Models of Auctions," NBER Working Papers 12126, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    3. Lamy, Laurent, 2012. "The econometrics of auctions with asymmetric anonymous bidders," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 167(1), pages 113-132.
    4. Granlund, David & Rudholm, Niklas, 2023. "Calculating the probability of collusion based on observed price patterns," Umeå Economic Studies 1014, Umeå University, Department of Economics, revised 13 Oct 2023.
    5. Victor Aguirregabiria & Margaret Slade, 2017. "Empirical models of firms and industries," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 50(5), pages 1445-1488, December.
    6. John Asker & Chaim Fershtman & Jihye Jeon & Ariel Pakes, 2020. "A computational framework for analyzing dynamic auctions: The market impact of information sharing," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 51(3), pages 805-839, September.
    7. Wang, Hong, 2017. "Information acquisition versus information manipulation in multi-period procurement markets," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 48-59.
    8. Sherstyuk, Katerina, 2002. "Collusion in private value ascending price auctions," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 48(2), pages 177-195, June.
    9. John Asker & Chaim Fershtman & Jihye Jeon & Ariel Pakes, 2016. "The Competitive Effects of Information Sharing," NBER Working Papers 22836, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    10. Susan Athey & Jonathan Levin & Enrique Seira, 2011. "Comparing open and Sealed Bid Auctions: Evidence from Timber Auctions," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 126(1), pages 207-257.
    11. Patrick Bajari & Garrett Summers, "undated". "Detecting Collusion in Procurement Auctions: A Selective Survey of Recent Research," Working Papers 01014, Stanford University, Department of Economics.
    12. Kei Kawai & Jun Nakabayashi & Juan Ortner & Sylvain Chassang, 2023. "Using Bid Rotation and Incumbency to Detect Collusion: A Regression Discontinuity Approach," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 90(1), pages 376-403.
    13. Johannes Wachs & J'anos Kert'esz, 2019. "A network approach to cartel detection in public auction markets," Papers 1906.08667, arXiv.org.
    14. Guillermo Marshall, 2024. "Identification in english auctions with shill bidding," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 22(2), pages 193-222, June.
    15. Martin Huber & David Imhof & Rieko Ishii, 2022. "Transnational machine learning with screens for flagging bid‐rigging cartels," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 185(3), pages 1074-1114, July.
    16. Ken Hendricks & Robert Porter & Guofu Tan, 2008. "Bidding rings and the winner's curse," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 39(4), pages 1018-1041, December.
    17. Robert Clark & Decio Coviello & Jean-Fran�ois Gauthier & Art Shneyerov, 2018. "Bid Rigging and Entry Deterrence in Public Procurement: Evidence from an Investigation into Collusion and Corruption in Quebec," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 34(3), pages 301-363.
    18. Gabrielli, M. Florencia & Willington, Manuel, 2023. "Estimating damages from bidding rings in first-price auctions," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 126(C).
    19. Villas-Boas, Sofia B, 2006. "An Introduction to Auctions," Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley, Working Paper Series qt4tk408vh, Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley.
    20. A. Banerji, 2010. "Millers, Commission Agents and Collusion in Grain Auction Markets: Evidence From Basmati Auctions in North India," Working Papers id:2891, eSocialSciences.

    More about this item

    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:pit:wpaper:6759. 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: Department of Economics, University of Pittsburgh (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/depghus.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.