Journal of Economics

, Volume 69, Issue 1, pp 41–52 | Cite as

Commitment and price competition in a dynamic differentiated-product duopoly

  • Michael R. Baye
  • Shyh-Fang Ueng
Articles
  • 85 Downloads

Abstract

This paper characterizes linear Markov-perfect equilibrium in a duopolistic environment where firms engage in dynamic price competition. Firms have constant (but potentially different) marginal costs and produce differentiated products. We show that, for the case of linear demand, dynamically stable Markov-perfect equilibrium prices are strictly higher than one-shot Nash equilibrium prices, but lower than fully collusive (monopoly) prices. We provide closed-form solutions for the Markov-perfect equilibrium prices which, in principle, can be estimated given data on firm demand and costs. Our results suggest that static two-stage models of price commitment are on reasonably solid ground in that they might be viewed as a “reduced form” for more complicated dynamic models.

Keywords

commitment Markov-perfect equilibrium price competition 

JEL classification

D43 C72 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Baye, M. R., and Kovenock, D. (1994): “How To Sell a Pickup Truck: ‘Beator-Pay’ Advertisements as Facilitating Devices.”International Journal of Industrial Organization 12: 21–33.Google Scholar
  2. Bagwell, K., and Staiger, R. (1997): “Collusion over the Business Cycle.”Rand Journal of Economics 28: 399–417.Google Scholar
  3. Belton, T. (1987): “A Model of Duopoly and Meeting or Beating Competition.”International Journal of Industrial Organization 5: 399–417.Google Scholar
  4. Friedman, J. (1990): “A Modification of the Folk Theorem to Apply to Time-Dependent Supergames.”Oxford Economic Papers 42: 317–335.Google Scholar
  5. Fudenberg, D., and Maskin, E. (1986): “The Folk Theorem in Repeated Games with Discounting and with Incomplete Information”.Econometrica 54: 533–554.Google Scholar
  6. Haltiwanger, J., and Harrington, J. E. (1991): “The Impact of Cyclical Demand Movements on Collusive Behavior.”Rand Journal of Economics 22: 89–106.Google Scholar
  7. Maskin, E., and Tirole, J. (1987): “A Theory of Dynamic Oligopoly III: Cournot Competition.”European Economic Review 31: 947–968.Google Scholar
  8. — (1988a). “A Theory of Dynamic Oligopoly I: Overview and Quantity Competition with Large Fixed Costs.”Econometrica 56: 549–569.Google Scholar
  9. —, (1988b): “A Theory of Dynamic Oligopoly II: Price Competition, Kinked Demand Curves, and Edgeworth Cycles.”Econometrica 56: 571–599.Google Scholar
  10. Pakes, A., and McGuire, P. (1994): “Computing Markov-Perfect Nash Equilibria: Numerical Implications of a Dynamic Differentiated Product Model.”Rand Journal of Economics 25: 555–589.Google Scholar
  11. Png, I., and Hirshleifer, D. (1987): “Price Discrimination through Offers to Match Price.”Journal of Business 60: 365–383.Google Scholar
  12. Rotemberg, J., and Saloner, G. (1986): “A Supergame-Theoretical Model of Business Cycles and Price Wars during Booms.”American Economic Review 76: 390–407.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1999

Authors and Affiliations

  • Michael R. Baye
    • 1
  • Shyh-Fang Ueng
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Business Economics and Public Policy, Kelley School of BusinessIndiana UniversityBloomingtonUSA
  2. 2.Institute of EconomicsAcademia SinicaTaipeiTaiwan

Personalised recommendations