The Investment Effects of Price Caps under Imperfect Competition. A Note.

This note analyzes a simple Cournot model where firms choose outputs and capacities facing varying demand and price-cap regulation. We find that binding price caps set above long-run marginal cost increase (rather than decrease) aggregate capacity investment. (author's abstract)Series: Working Papers / Research Institute for Regulatory Economic

A Modified Yardstick Competition Mechanism

This paper analyzes a modified yardstick competition mechanism (MYC), where the yardstick employed consists of a tariff basket and total costs. This mechanism has a significant information advantage: the regulator "only" needs to observe total costs and output of all firms. The modified yardstick competition mechanism can ensure a socially optimal outcome when allowing for spatial and second degree price discrimination, without increasing the informational requirements. We also introduce regulatory lags in the model. A systematic comparison between the results of traditional yardstick regulation and modified yardstick regulation is carried out. Finally, we discuss the applicability of the mechanism.Regulation, Yardstick competition, Mechanism design, Information asymmetry

Product Market Competition and Lobbying Coordination in the U.S. Mobile Telecommunications Industry

This paper empirically investigates market behavior and firms´ lobbying in a unified structural setup. In a sequential game, where firms lobby for regulation before they compete in the product market, we derive a destable measure of lobbying coordination. Applying the setting to the early U.S. cellular services industry, we find that lobbying expenditures, as measured by campaign contributions, and market conduct were consistent with a one-shot Nash equilibrium and that price caps were binding on average. Furthermore, campaign contributions from cellular firms effectively lowered the burden of the price caps and reduced production costs.

Product Market Competition and Lobbying Coordination in the U.S. Mobile Telecommunications Industry

This paper empirically investigates market behavior and firms’ lobbying in a unified structural setup. In a sequential game, where firms lobby for regulation before they compete in the product market, we derive a testable measure of lobbying coordination. Applying the setting to the early U.S. cellular services industry, we find that lobbying expenditures, as measured by campaign contributions, and market conduct were consistent with a one-shot Nash equilibrium and that price caps were binding on average. Furthermore, campaign contributions from cellular firms effectively lowered the burden of the price caps and reduced production costs. ZUSAMMENFASSUNG - (Produktmarktwettbewerb und Koordination im Lobbying in der U.S. Mobilfunkindustrie) Dieses Paper untersucht Marktverhalten und Lobbying durch Unternehmen empirisch in einem vereinheitlichten strukturellen Ansatz. In einem sequentiellen Spiel, wo die Firmen für Regulierung Lobbyismus betreiben, bevor sie im Produktmarkt konkurrieren, leiten wir ein testbares Maß für Lobbying- Koordination her. In einer Anwendung auf den frühen US Mobilfunkmarkt zeigen wir, dass Marktverhalten und Lobbying-Ausgaben (gemessen als Parteispenden) mit einem einfachen Nashgleichgewicht vereinbar sind und die Preisobergrenzen im Durchschnitt binden. Außerdem waren Parteispenden offenbar ein effektives Mittel um die Preisgrenzen zu lockern und kostenbezogene Regulierung abzumildern.Collusion, Lobbying, Price Cap, Regulation, Rent-Seeking, Interest, Groups, Telecommunication

The effect of experience in Cournot play

Strategic play requires that players in oligopolies be more sophisticated than in perfectly competitive markets. It thus seems reasonable to assume that player experience becomes important as the environment gets more complicated. We find that subject experience indeed plays an important role. While inexperienced symmetric duopolies play around the Nash-Cournot quantity, experienced duopolies reduce output and get closer to the monopolistic outcome. Both inexperienced and experienced symmetric quadropolies,however, produce output above the Nash-Coumot equilibrium but, even in this case, output is lower for experienced quadropolies. Experience, however, does not make markets less competitive with the introduction of cost asymmetry. Under cost asymmetry, and relative to the equilibrium prediction, high cost firms produce more output than low cost firms. Analysis of individual data tells us that experienced duopolies and quadropolies adjust output in the same direction as their rivals. Due to the strategic substitutability of quantity choice, we interpret this as an attempt at tacitly colluding. This is true for both duopolies and quadropolies.

Modeling Electricity Markets as Two-Stage Capacity Constrained Price Competition Games under Uncertainty

The last decade has seen an increasing application of game theoretic tools in the analysis of electricity markets and the strategic behavior of market players. This paper focuses on the model examined by Fabra et al. (2008), where the market is described by a two-stage game with the firms choosing their capacity in the first stage and then competing in prices in the second stage. By allowing the firms to endogenously determine their capacity, through the capacity investment stage of the game, they can greatly affect competition in the subsequent pricing stage. Extending this model to the demand uncertainty case gives a very good candidate for modeling the strategic aspect of the investment decisions in an electricity market. After investigating the required assumptions for applying the model in electricity markets, we present some numerical examples of the model on the resulting equilibrium capacities, prices and profits of the firms. We then proceed with two results on the minimum value of price caps and the minimum required revenue from capacity mechanisms in order to induce adequate investments

The Economics of Competition Policy: Recent Developments and Cautionary Notes in Antitrust and Regulation

Competition policy has become more prominent while the thinking underlying those policies has undergone substantial revision. We survey advances in antitrust economics and the economics of regulation. Increasing reliance on non-cooperative game theory as a foundation for antitrust has led to rethinking conventional approaches. We review some of these contributions in the context of mergers, vertical restraints, and competition in "network industries." Turning to regulation, we review standard rationales and identify some major contemporary refinements, with examples of the motives behind them and their application. After brief thoughts on privatization, we conclude with suggestions on design and implementation, with some observations on whether these developments are as valuable in the corridors of policy as they may be in the halls of academe.

Rage Against the Machines - How Subjects Learn to Play Against Computers

We use an experiment to explore how subjects learn to play against computers which are programmed to follow one of a number of standard learning algorithms. The learning theories are (unbeknown to subjects) a best response process, fictitious play, imitation, reinforcement learning, and a trial & error process. We test whether subjects try to influence those algorithms to their advantage in a forward-looking way (strategic teaching). We find that strategic teaching occurs frequently and that all learning algorithms are subject to exploitation with the notable exception of imitation. The experiment was conducted, both, on the internet and in the usual laboratory setting. We find some systematic differences, which however can be traced to the different incentives structures rather than the experimental environment.