IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/van/wpaper/0303.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Merging Auction Houses

Author

Listed:
  • Jesse A. Schwartz

    (Department of Economics, Vanderbilt University)

  • Ricardo Ungo

    (Department of Economics, Vanderbilt University)

Abstract

In this paper, we study the incentives for market concentration of (online and traditional) auction houses. Would sellers and buyers be better off if two separate auction houses merged? We suppose that each auction house has a separate clientele of sellers and buyers. Sellers value their (identical) units at 0, while buyers have independent private values. Each auction house uses an ascending auction or by revenue equivalence any auction mechanism that allocates units efficiently among those buyers at that auction house. If no buyers are lost upon the merger, we find that efficiency gains increase, but that the expected sellers' revenue increases by more than the efficiency gains, leaving the buyers worse off. This result extends Bulow and Klemperer's (1996) insight that the competition of an additional bidder increases auction revenue by more than the ability to commit to an optimal auction with one less bidder; in our model, the extra competition created by having all of the bidders bid against each other after the merger more than offsets any supply effects. With an example, we show that if buyers choose whether to participate or not, it is possible upon a merger that so many buyers are lost, the sellers are actually worse off. We conclude that without transfers from sellers to buyers, the merger may or may not be profitable for sellers.

Suggested Citation

  • Jesse A. Schwartz & Ricardo Ungo, 2003. "Merging Auction Houses," Vanderbilt University Department of Economics Working Papers 0303, Vanderbilt University Department of Economics.
  • Handle: RePEc:van:wpaper:0303
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.accessecon.com/pubs/VUECON/vu03-w03.pdf
    File Function: First version, 2003
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Waehrer, Keith & Perry, Martin K, 2003. "The Effects of Mergers in Open-Auction Markets," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 34(2), pages 287-304, Summer.
    2. Paul Klemperer, 1999. "Auction Theory: A Guide to the Literature," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 13(3), pages 227-286, July.
    3. Austan Goolsbee & Judith Chevalier, 2002. "Measuring Prices and Price Competition Online: Amazon and Barnes and Noble," NBER Working Papers 9085, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. Peters, Michael & Severinov, Sergei, 2006. "Internet auctions with many traders," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 130(1), pages 220-245, September.
    5. Stephen W. Salant & Sheldon Switzer & Robert J. Reynolds, 1983. "Losses From Horizontal Merger: The Effects of an Exogenous Change in Industry Structure on Cournot-Nash Equilibrium," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 98(2), pages 185-199.
    6. Krishna, Vijay, 2009. "Auction Theory," Elsevier Monographs, Elsevier, edition 2, number 9780123745071.
    7. Klemperer, Paul, 1999. " Auction Theory: A Guide to the Literature," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 13(3), pages 227-86, July.
    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. Jennifer Brown & John Morgan, 2009. "How Much Is a Dollar Worth? Tipping versus Equilibrium Coexistence on Competing Online Auction Sites," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 117(4), pages 668-700, August.

    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. Onur A. Koska & Ilke Onur & Frank Stähler, 2018. "The scope of auctions in the presence of downstream interactions and information externalities," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 125(2), pages 107-136, October.
    2. Maréchal, François & Morand, Pierre-Henri, 2011. "First-price sealed-bid auctions when bidders exhibit different attitudes toward risk," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 113(2), pages 108-111.
    3. Mezzetti, Claudio & Pekec, Aleksandar Sasa & Tsetlin, Ilia, 2008. "Sequential vs. single-round uniform-price auctions," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 62(2), pages 591-609, March.
    4. Damian R. Beil & Lawrence M. Wein, 2009. "A Pooling Analysis of Two Simultaneous Online Auctions," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 11(1), pages 33-51, October.
    5. repec:cte:werepe:we081207 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. Parlour, Christine A. & Prasnikar, Vesna & Rajan, Uday, 2007. "Compensating for the winner's curse: Experimental evidence," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 60(2), pages 339-356, August.
    7. Porter, David & Rassenti, Stephen & Shobe, William & Smith, Vernon & Winn, Abel, 2009. "The design, testing and implementation of Virginia's NOx allowance auction," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 69(2), pages 190-200, February.
    8. Axel Ockenfels & David Reiley & Abdolkarim Sadrieh, 2006. "Online Auctions," NBER Working Papers 12785, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    9. Markus Groth, 2009. "The transferability and performance of payment-by-results biodiversity conservation procurement auctions: empirical evidence from northernmost Germany," Working Paper Series in Economics 119, University of Lüneburg, Institute of Economics.
    10. Jiang, Zhong-Zhong & Fang, Shu-Cherng & Fan, Zhi-Ping & Wang, Dingwei, 2013. "Selecting optimal selling format of a product in B2C online auctions with boundedly rational customers," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 226(1), pages 139-153.
    11. Gadi Fibich & Arieh Gavious, 2010. "Large auctions with risk-averse bidders," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 39(3), pages 359-390, July.
    12. Birgit Heydenreich & Rudolf Müller & Marc Uetz & Rakesh V. Vohra, 2009. "Characterization of Revenue Equivalence," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 77(1), pages 307-316, January.
    13. Onderstal, Sander, 2009. "Bidding for the unemployed: An application of mechanism design to welfare-to-work programs," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 53(6), pages 715-722, August.
    14. François Maréchal & Pierre-Henri Morand, 2012. "The public release of information in first-price sealed-bid auctions," Review of Economic Design, Springer;Society for Economic Design, vol. 16(4), pages 323-330, December.
    15. E Ballestero & C Bielza & D Pla-Santamaría, 2006. "A decision approach to competitive electronic sealed-bid auctions for land," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 57(9), pages 1126-1133, September.
    16. Carpenter, Jeffrey P. & Holmes, Jessica & Matthews, Peter Hans, 2004. "Charity Auctions: A Field Experimental Investigation," IZA Discussion Papers 1330, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    17. Benoit, Jean-Pierre & Dubra, Juan, 2006. "Information revelation in auctions," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 57(2), pages 181-205, November.
    18. Elbittar, Alexander, 2009. "Impact of valuation ranking information on bidding in first-price auctions: A laboratory study," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 69(1), pages 75-85, January.
    19. Xun Tang, 2008. "Bounds on Revenue Distributions in Counterfactual Auctions with Reserve Prices," PIER Working Paper Archive 08-042, Penn Institute for Economic Research, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania.
    20. A. Alexander Elbittar, 2005. "Impact of Valuation Ranking Information on Bidding in First-Price," Microeconomics 0508008, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    21. Lagerlof, Johan, 2012. "Does Cost Uncertainty in the Bertrand Model Soften Competition?," CEPR Discussion Papers 8817, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Auctions; mergers;

    JEL classification:

    • C78 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Bargaining Theory; Matching Theory
    • D44 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design - - - Auctions

    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:van:wpaper:0303. 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: John P. Conley (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.vanderbilt.edu/econ/wparchive/index.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.