Nonlinear Pricing with Resale

We consider the problem of a monopolist---choosing an optimal nonlinear pricing scheme---facing two consumers who can resell some or all of the goods to each other in a secondary market. We suppose that the valuations of the consumers are drawn independently from a continuous distribution. We find conditions for the optimum direct mechanism and show that the monopolist can be better off or worse off as compared to the without resale case, depending on the specifics of the cost function of the monopolist and the utility functions of the consumers.

Selling Goods of Unknown Quality: Forward versus Spot Auctions

We consider an environment where the sale can take place so early that both the seller and the potential buyers have the same uncertainty about the quality of the good. We present a simple model that allows the seller to put the good for sale before or after this uncertainty is resolved, , namely via forward auction or spot auction, respectively. We solve for the equilibrium of these two auctions and then compare the resulting revenues. We also consider the revenue implications of the insurance in forward auctions.Forward Trading, Forward Auctions, Spot Auctions

Selling Goods of Unknown Quality: Forward versus Spot Auctions

We consider an environment where the sale can take place so early that both the seller and the potential buyers have the same uncertainty about the quality of the good. We present a simple model that allows the seller to put the good for sale before or after this uncertainty is resolved, , namely via forward auction or spot auction, respectively. We solve for the equilibrium of these two auctions and then compare the resulting revenues. We also consider the revenue implications of the insurance in forward auctions.Forward Trading, Forward Auctions, Spot Auctions

Efficient Market Design with Distributional Objectives

Given an initial matching and a policy objective on the distribution of agent types to institutions, we study the existence of a mechanism that weakly improves the distributional objective and satisfies constrained efficiency, individual rationality, and strategy-proofness. We show that such a mechanism need not exist in general. We introduce a new notion of discrete concavity, which we call pseudo M$^{\natural}$-concavity, and construct a mechanism with the desirable properties when the distributional objective satisfies this notion. We provide several practically relevant distributional objectives that are pseudo M$^{\natural}$-concave

Selling Goods of Unknown Quality: Forward versus Spot Auctions

We consider an environment where the sale can take place so early that both the seller and the potential buyers have the same uncertainty about the quality of the good. We present a simple model that allows the seller to put the good for sale before or after this uncertainty is resolved, , namely via forward auction or spot auction, respectively. We solve for the equilibrium of these two auctions and then compare the resulting revenues. We also consider the revenue implications of the insurance in forward auctions

Selling Goods of Unknown Quality: Forward versus Spot Auctions

We consider an environment where the sale can take place so early that both the seller and the potential buyers have the same uncertainty about the quality of the good. We present a simple model that allows the seller to put the good for sale before or after this uncertainty is resolved, , namely via forward auction or spot auction, respectively. We solve for the equilibrium of these two auctions and then compare the resulting revenues. We also consider the revenue implications of the insurance in forward auctions

«School choice with controlled choice constraints: hard bounds versus soft bounds»

Controlled choice over public schools attempts giving options to parents while maintaining diversity, often enforced by setting feasibility constraints with hard upper and lower bounds for each student type. We demonstrate that there might not exist assignments that satisfy standard fairness and non-wastefulness properties; whereas constrained non-wasteful assignments which are fair for same type students always exist. We introduce a "controlled" version of the deferred acceptance algorithm with an improvement stage (CDAAI) that finds a Pareto optimal assignment among such assignments. To achieve fair (across all types) and non-wasteful assignments, we propose the control constraints to be interpreted as soft bounds-flexible limits that regulate school priorities. In this setting, a modified version of the deferred acceptance algorithm (DAASB) finds an assignment that is Pareto optimal among fair assignments while eliciting true preferences. CDAAI and DAASB provide two alternative practical solutions depending on the interpretation of the control constraints. JEL C78, D61, D78, I20