When Does Extra Risk Strictly Increase the Value of Options?

It is well known that risk increases the value of options. This paper makes that precise in a new way. The conventional theorem says that the value of an option does not fall if the underlying option becomes riskier in the conventional sense of the mean-preserving spread. This paper uses two new definitions of ``riskier'' to show that the value of an option strictly increases (a) if the underlying asset becomes ``pointwise riskier,'' and (b) only if the underlying asset becomes ``extremum riskier.''options, risk, mean-preserving spread,calls

A Reputation Model of Quality in North-South Trade

Countries have different comparative advantages in quality. These might be due to technological differences, or to reputation differences of the sort described in Klein & Leffler (1981). Reputation differences are particularly interesting, since good reputations are a form of “social capital” that is amenable to modelling. They can explain why firms in these industries like to export even if the foreign price is no higher than the domestic one, and why governments would like to have large “high- value” sectors.

The Objectives of Sexual Harassment Law, with Application to 1998's Ellerth, Oncale, and Faragher Decisions

Imposing liability on a company for sexual harassment by supervisors cannot be justified as promoting equality between the sexes, protection of workers, or protection of the owners of the company. Such liability might be justified to prevent breach of contract or behavior offensive to the general public-- a "civility code". The recent Supreme Court ruling in Oncale that same-sex harassment is illegal can be justified on these grounds. The ruling in Ellerth and Faragher concerning employer liability for sexual harassment by supervisors contrary to the employer's interest is less satisfactory because the Court's rule will encourage litigation and defensive bureaucratic complexity.sexual harassment, Supreme Court, mandated fringe benefits

Getting Carried Away in Auctions as Imperfect Value Discovery

Bidders in auctions must decide whether and when to incur the cost of estimating the most they are willing to pay. This can explain why people seem to get carried away, bidding higher than they had planned before the auction and then finding they had paid more than the object was worth to them. Even when such behavior is rational, ex ante, it may be perceived as irrational if one ignores other situations in which people revise their bid ceilings upwards and are happy when that enables them to win the auction.

When Does Extra Risk Strictly Increase an Option's Value?

It is well known that risk increases the value of options. This paper makes that precise in a new way. The conventional theorem says that the value of an option does not fall if the underlying option becomes riskier in the conventional sense of the mean-preserving spread. This paper uses two new definitions of "riskier" to show that the value of an option strictly increases (a) if the underlying asset becomes "pointwise riskier," and (b) only if the underlying asset becomes "extremum riskier."

Price Discrimination between Retailers with and without Market Power

Some retail markets are more competitive than others. A manufacturer with market power in the wholesale market who sells his product to competing retailers in cities and monopolistic ones in each of various towns must set the wholesale price difference between towns and cities to be smaller than the transportation cost to prevent “grey market” arbitrage. If he uses linear pricing, the town retail price will be even higher than under single-retailer double marginalization. Two-part tariffs do not solve the problem as they would if there were a single retailer, because the wholesale unit price must be higher than marginal cost to prevent arbitrage to the cities. If transportation costs are low, price discrimination is difficult and two- part tariffs come to resemble inefficient linear monopoly pricing. High transportation costs allow greater efficiency in contracting, and this can outweigh the negative direct effect on welfare.price discrimination, double marginalization, retail network, transportation costs, two-part tariffs, vertical restraints

Quality-Ensuring Profits

In the reputation model of Klein and Leffler (1981) firms refrain from cutting quality or price because if they did they would forfeit future profits. Something similar can happen even in a static setting. First, if there exist some discerning consumers who can observe quality, firms wish to retain their purchases. Second, if all consumers can sometimes but not always spot flaws, firms do not want to lose the business of those who would spot them on a given visit. Third, if the law provides a penalty for fraud, but not one so high as to to make fraud unprofitable, firms may prefer selling high quality at high prices to low quality at high prices plus some chance of punishment.reputation, product quality, moral hazard, quality-guaranteeing price

Internalities and Paternalism: Applying the Compensation Criterion to Multiple Selves across Time

One reason to call an activity a vice and suppress it is that it reduces a person’s future happiness more than it increases his present happiness. Gruber and Koszegi (2001) show how a vice tax can increase a person’s welfare in a model of multiple selves with hyperbolic preferences across time. The present paper shows that an interself analogy of the Kaldor-Hicks compensation criterion can justify a vice ban whether preferences are hyperbolic or exponential, but subject to the caveat that the person has a binding constraint on borrowing.internalities, sin tax, moral regulation, Kaldor-Hicks criterion, time inconsistency, hyperbolic preferences

Strategic Implications of Uncertainty Over One’s Own Private Value in Auctions

Suppose a bidder must decide whether and when to incur the cost of estimating his own private value in an auction. This can explain why a bidder might increase his bid ceiling in the course of an auction, and why a bidder would like to know the private values of other bidders. It also can explain sniping — flurries of bids at the end of auctions with deadlines — as the result of other bidders trying to avoid stimulating the uninformed bidder to examine his value.