IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/uts/ecowps/2020-03.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Favored but Flawed Simultaneous Multiple-Round Auction

Author

Listed:
  • Nicolas C. Bedard

    (Wilfrid Laurier University, Ontario, Canada)

  • Jacob K. Goeree

    (AGORA Center for Market Design, UNSW, Sydney, Australia)

  • Philippos Louis

    (University of Cyprus, Cyprus)

  • Jingjing Zhang

    (University of Technology Sydney)

Abstract

We compare the first-price sealed-bid (FPSB) auction and the simultaneous multiple- round auction (SMRA) in an environment based on the planned sale of 900 MHz spectrum in Australia. Three bidders compete for five indivisible items. Bidders are permitted to obtain at most three items and need to obtain at least two to achieve profitable scale, i.e. items are complements. Value complementarities, which are a common feature of spectrum auctions, exacerbate the �fitting problem� and undermine the usual logic for superior price discovery in the SMRA. With substitutes, bidders reduce demands as prices rise and a tatonnement-like dynamic produces market-clearing prices. With complements, however, all that bidders may be interested in at higher prices are larger packages. In addition, the SMRA assigns provisional winners each round, which exposes bidders to the risk of losses when they win only a subset of their desired package. We find that the FPSB outperforms the SMRA across a range of bidding environments: in terms of efficiency, revenue, and protecting bidders from losses due to the exposure problem. Moreover, the FPSB exhibits superior price discovery in that it almost always results in competitive (�core�) prices unlike the SMRA, which frequently produces prices that are too low because of demand-reduction or too high because of the exposure problem. We demonstrate the robustness of our findings by considering two-stage variants of the FPSB and SMRA as well as environments in which bidders know their own values but not the distributions from which values are drawn.

Suggested Citation

  • Nicolas C. Bedard & Jacob K. Goeree & Philippos Louis & Jingjing Zhang, 2020. "The Favored but Flawed Simultaneous Multiple-Round Auction," Working Paper Series 2020/03, Economics Discipline Group, UTS Business School, University of Technology, Sydney.
  • Handle: RePEc:uts:ecowps:2020/03
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.uts.edu.au/sites/default/files/2020-07/Jingjing%20Zhang%20final%20WP_1_1.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Peter Cramton, 1997. "The FCC Spectrum Auctions: An Early Assessment," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 6(3), pages 431-495, September.
    2. Robert Day & Paul Milgrom, 2008. "Core-selecting package auctions," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 36(3), pages 393-407, March.
    3. Urs Fischbacher, 2007. "z-Tree: Zurich toolbox for ready-made economic experiments," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 10(2), pages 171-178, June.
    4. Michael H. Rothkopf, 2007. "Thirteen Reasons Why the Vickrey-Clarke-Groves Process Is Not Practical," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 55(2), pages 191-197, April.
    5. , K. & ,, 2016. "On the impossibility of core-selecting auctions," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 11(1), January.
    6. Klemperer, Paul, 2002. "How (not) to run auctions: The European 3G telecom auctions," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 46(4-5), pages 829-845, May.
    7. Goeree, Jacob K. & Lien, Yuanchuan, 2014. "An equilibrium analysis of the simultaneous ascending auction," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 153(C), pages 506-533.
    8. Paul Milgrom, 2000. "Putting Auction Theory to Work: The Simultaneous Ascending Auction," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 108(2), pages 245-272, April.
    9. Robert W. Day & S. Raghavan, 2007. "Fair Payments for Efficient Allocations in Public Sector Combinatorial Auctions," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 53(9), pages 1389-1406, September.
    10. Ben Greiner, 2015. "Subject pool recruitment procedures: organizing experiments with ORSEE," Journal of the Economic Science Association, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 1(1), pages 114-125, July.
    11. Munro, David R. & Rassenti, Stephen J., 2019. "Combinatorial clock auctions: Price direction and performance," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 195-217.
    12. Lawrence M. Ausubel & Peter Cramton, 2004. "Auctioning Many Divisible Goods," Journal of the European Economic Association, MIT Press, vol. 2(2-3), pages 480-493, 04/05.
    13. Alvin E. Roth, 2002. "The Economist as Engineer: Game Theory, Experimentation, and Computation as Tools for Design Economics," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 70(4), pages 1341-1378, July.
    14. Gul, Faruk & Stacchetti, Ennio, 1999. "Walrasian Equilibrium with Gross Substitutes," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 87(1), pages 95-124, July.
    15. Milgrom,Paul, 2004. "Putting Auction Theory to Work," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521536721, November.
    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. Nicholas C. Bedard & Jacob K. Goeree & Philippos Louis & Jingjing Zhang, 2024. "Sealed-bid versus ascending spectrum auctions," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 27(2), pages 299-324, April.
    2. Kaplan, Todd R. & Zamir, Shmuel, 2015. "Advances in Auctions," Handbook of Game Theory with Economic Applications,, Elsevier.
    3. Alexander Teytelboym & Shengwu Li & Scott Duke Kominers & Mohammad Akbarpour & Piotr Dworczak, 2021. "Discovering Auctions: Contributions of Paul Milgrom and Robert Wilson," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 123(3), pages 709-750, July.
    4. Ning Sun & Zaifu Yang, 2014. "An Efficient and Incentive Compatible Dynamic Auction for Multiple Complements," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 122(2), pages 422-466.
    5. , K. & ,, 2016. "On the impossibility of core-selecting auctions," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 11(1), January.
    6. Peter Cramton, 2013. "Spectrum Auction Design," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 42(2), pages 161-190, March.
    7. Marszalec, Daniel, 2018. "Fear not the simplicity - An experimental analysis of auctions for complements," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 152(C), pages 81-97.
    8. Itai Sher, 2012. "Optimal shill bidding in the VCG mechanism," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 50(2), pages 341-387, June.
    9. Chernomaz, Kirill & Levin, Dan, 2012. "Efficiency and synergy in a multi-unit auction with and without package bidding: An experimental study," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 76(2), pages 611-635.
    10. Francisco Robles, 2016. "An implementation of the Vickrey outcome with gross-substitutes," UB School of Economics Working Papers 2016/353, University of Barcelona School of Economics.
    11. Martin Bichler & Pasha Shabalin & Jürgen Wolf, 2013. "Do core-selecting Combinatorial Clock Auctions always lead to high efficiency? An experimental analysis of spectrum auction designs," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 16(4), pages 511-545, December.
    12. Lawrence M. Ausubel, 2006. "An Efficient Dynamic Auction for Heterogeneous Commodities," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 96(3), pages 602-629, June.
    13. Paul Milgrom, 2009. "Assignment Messages and Exchanges," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 1(2), pages 95-113, August.
    14. Alvin E. Roth, 2009. "What Have We Learned from Market Design?," Innovation Policy and the Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 9(1), pages 79-112.
    15. Gentry, Matthew & Komarova, Tatiana & Schiraldi, Pasquale & Shin, Wiroy, 2019. "On monotone strategy equilibria in simultaneous auctions for complementary goods," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 109-128.
    16. Lawrence M. Ausubel & Peter Crampton & Paul Milgrom, 2004. "The Clock-Proxy Auction: A Practical Combinatorial Auction Design," Discussion Papers 03-034, Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research.
    17. Kazumori, Eiichiro & Belch, Yaakov, 2019. "t-Tree: The Tokyo toolbox for large-scale combinatorial auction experiments," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance, Elsevier, vol. 24(C).
    18. Sun, Ning & Yang, Zaifu, 2016. "An Efficient and Strategy-Proof Double-Track Auction for Substitutes and Complements," Center for Mathematical Economics Working Papers 523, Center for Mathematical Economics, Bielefeld University.
    19. Akiyoshi Shioura & Zaifu Yang, 2013. "Equilibrium, Auction, Multiple Substitutes and Complements," Discussion Papers 13/17, Department of Economics, University of York.
    20. Peter Cramton, 2004. "Simultaneous Ascending Auction," Papers of Peter Cramton 04mit4, University of Maryland, Department of Economics - Peter Cramton, revised 2004.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Spectrum auctions; laboratory experiments; price discovery; exposure problem; market design;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C78 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Bargaining Theory; Matching Theory
    • C92 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Laboratory, Group Behavior
    • D47 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design - - - Market Design

    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:uts:ecowps:2020/03. 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: Duncan Ford (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/edutsau.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.