Procurement with Costly Bidding, Optimal Shortlisting, and Rebates

We consider the procurement of a complex, indivisible good when bid preparation is costly, assuming a population of heterogeneous contractors. Shortlisting is introduced to implement the optimal number of bidders, and we explore whether the procurer should reimburse the nonrecoverable cost of preparing a bid in whole or in part. We find that a reimbursement policy is profitable for the procurer only if performance and bidding costs are negatively correlated. Moreover, negative rebates (entry fees) always dominate positive rebates

Research Joint Ventures, Optimal Licensing, and R&D Subsidy Policy

We reconsider the justifications of R&D subsidies by Spencer and Brander (1983) and others by allowing firms to pool R&D investments and license innovations. In equilibrium R&D joint ventures are formed and licensing occurs in a way that eliminates the strategic benefits of R&D investment in the subsequent oligopoly game. Nevertheless, governments subsidize their domestic firms in order to raise their bargaining position in the joint venture. This holds true regardless of whether governments offer either unconditional or conditional subsidies. This suggests an alternative explanation of the observed proliferation of R&D subsidies

Research Joint Ventures, Licensing, and Industrial Policy

This paper reconsiders the explanation of R&D subsidies by Spencer and Brander (1983) and others by allowing firms to license their innovations and to pool their R&D investments. We show that in equilibrium R&D joint ventures are formed and licensing occurs in a way that eliminates the strategic benefits of R&D investment in the export oligopoly game. Nevertheless, national governments are driven to subsidize their own national firms in order to increase their strength in the joint venture bargaining game. Therefore, our analysis suggests an alternative explanation of the observed proliferation of R&D subsidies

International Licensing and R&D Subsidy

R&D rivalry and optimal R&D policies are investigated in an asymmetric four-stage game that involves international licensing. It is found that a government’s R&D policy crucially depends on its domestic firm’s bargaining power over the licensing gain. When the firm’s bargaining power is greater than one half, the government subsidizes its home firm’s R&D investment, while imposes a tax if the firm’s bargaining power is less than one half. Additionally, this result does not depend on the status of the firm (the licensor or the licensee). Finally, the effects of two different licensing contracts (fixedfee v.s. royalty per unit) on governments’ optimal R&D policies are investigated. ZUSAMMENFASSUNG - (Internationale Lizenzierungen und F&E Beihilfen) Der Beitrag beschäftigt sich mit Innovationswettbewerb und der Rolle von nationaler Politik im Falle von internationalen Lizenzierungspraktiken. In einem mehrstufigen Spiel werden die Anreizmechanismen untersucht. Es stellt sich heraus, daß die Verhandlungsstärke der nationalen Unternehmen im Lizenzierungsmarkt eine wichtige Rolle spielen. So erfolgt aus nationaler Sicht eine Subvention (Besteuerung) von F&EInvestitionen immer dann, wenn die Verhandlungsmacht groß (klein) ist. Darüber hinaus untersucht der Beitrag die Konsequenzen unterschiedlicher Lizenzierungspraktiken auf die optimale nationale F&E-Politik.International Licensing; R&D Subsidy; R&D Investment

Research Joint Ventures, Licensing, and Industrial Policy

This paper reconsiders the explanation of R&D subsidies by Spencer and Brander (1983) and others by allowing firms to license their innovations and to pool their R&D investments. We show that in equilibrium R&D joint ventures are formed and licensing occurs in a way that eliminates the strategic benefits of R&D investment in the export oligopoly game. Nevertheless, national governments are driven to subsidize their own national firms in order to increase their strength in the joint venture bargaining game. Therefore, our analysis suggests an alternative explanation of the observed proliferation of R&D subsidies.patent licensing; industrial organization; R&D subsidies; research joint ventures; innovation policy

Research Joint Ventures, Optimal Licensing, and R&D Subsidy Policy

We reconsider the justifications of R&D subsidies by Spencer and Brander (1983) and others by allowing firms to pool R&D investments and license innovations. In equilibrium R&D joint ventures are formed and licensing occurs in a way that eliminates the strategic benefits of R&D investment in the subsequent oligopoly game. Nevertheless, governments subsidize their domestic firms in order to raise their bargaining position in the joint venture. This holds true regardless of whether governments offer either unconditional or conditional subsidies. This suggests an alternative explanation of the observed proliferation of R&D subsidies.patent licensing; industrial organization; R&D subsidies; research joint ventures; technology policy

Procurement with Costly Bidding, Optimal Shortlisting, and Rebates

We consider the procurement of a complex, indivisible good when bid preparation is costly, assuming a population of heterogeneous contractors. Shortlisting is introduced to implement the optimal number of bidders, and we explore whether the procurer should reimburse the nonrecoverable cost of preparing a bid in whole or in part. We find that a reimbursement policy is profitable for the procurer only if performance and bidding costs are negatively correlated. Moreover, negative rebates (entry fees) always dominate positive rebates.Procurement; Auctions; Entry

Horizontal mergers with synergies: first-price vs. profit-share auction

We consider takeover bidding in a Cournot oligopoly when firms have private information concerning the synergy effect of merging with a takeover target. Two auction rules are considered: standard first-price and profit-share auctions, supplemented by entry fees. Since non-merged firms benefit from a merger if the synergies are low, bidders are subject to a positive externality. Nevertheless, pooling does not occur; and the profit-share auction is strictly more profitable than the first-price auction, regardless of whether firms observe the synergy parameter or only the winning bid before they play the oligopoly game

Horizontal mergers with synergies: first-price vs. profit-share auction

We consider takeover bidding in a Cournot oligopoly when firms have private information concerning the synergy effect of merging with a takeover target. Two auction rules are considered: standard first-price and profit-share auctions, supplemented by entry fees. Since non-merged firms benefit from a merger if the synergies are low, bidders are subject to a positive externality. Nevertheless, pooling does not occur; and the profit-share auction is strictly more profitable than the first-price auction, regardless of whether firms observe the synergy parameter or only the winning bid before they play the oligopoly game.Horizontal mergers; takeovers; auctions; externalities; oligopoly

Licensing a common value innovation when signaling strength may backfire

This paper reconsiders the licensing of a common value innovation to a downstream duopoly, assuming a dual licensing scheme that combines a first-price license auction with royalty contracts for losers. Prior to bidding firms observe imperfect signals of the expected cost reduction; after the auction the winning bid is made public. Bidders may signal strength to their rivals through aggressive bidding, which may however backfire and mislead the innovator to set an excessively high royalty rate. We provide sufficient conditions for existence of monotone bidding strategies and for the profitability of combining auctions and royalty contracts for losers