Economic Theory

, Volume 31, Issue 3, pp 573–585 | Cite as

Bertrand Games and Sharing Rules

Research Article


We consider asymmetric Bertrand games with arbitrary payoffs at ties or sharing rules, and identify sufficient conditions for the zero-profit outcome and the existence of Nash equilibria. Subject to some technical conditions on non-tied payoffs the following hold. If the sharing rule is strictly tie-decreasing all players but one receive zero equilibrium payoffs, while everybody does so if non-tied payoffs are symmetric. Mixed (pure) strategy Nash equilibria exist if the sharing rule is (norm) tie-decreasing and coalition-monotone.


Bertrand games Sharing rule Tie-decreasing sharing rule Coalition monotonicity 

JEL Classification Numbers

C72 D43 L13 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Baye M.R., Morgan J. (1999) A folk theorem for one-shot Bertrand games. Econ Lett 65, 59–65CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Baye M.R., Morgan J. (2002) Winner-take-all price competition. Econ Theory 19, 271–282CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Blume A. (2003) Bertrand without fudge. Econ Lett 78(2): 167–168CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Dasgupta P., Maskin E. (1986) The existence of equilibrium in discontinuous economic games, I: Theory. Rev Econ Stud 53, 1–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Dastidar K.G. (1995) On the existence of pure strategy Bertrand equilibrium. Econ Theory 5(1): 19–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Deneckere, R.J., Kovenock, D. Capacity-constrained price competition when unit costs differ. Northwestern University, CMSEMS, Discussion Paper No. 861 (1989)Google Scholar
  7. Deneckere R.J., Kovenock D. (1996) Bertrand–Edgeworth duopoly with unit cost asymmetry. Econ Theory 8, 1–25Google Scholar
  8. Harrington J.E. (1989) A re-evaluation of perfect competition as the solution to the Bertrand price game. Math Soc Sci 17(3): 315–328CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Hoernig S.H. (2002) Mixed Bertrand equilibria under decreasing returns to scale: an embarrassment of riches. Econ Lett 74(3): 359–62CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Hoernig, S.H. Bertrand equilibria and sharing rules. CEPR Discussion Paper 4972 (2005)Google Scholar
  11. Kaplan T.R., Wettstein D. (2000) The possibility of mixed-strategy equilibria with constant-returns-to-scale technology under Bertrand competition. Spanish Econ Rev 2(1): 65–71CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Osborne M.J., Pitchik C. (1986) Price competition in a capacity-constrained duopoly. J Econ Theory 38, 238–260CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Reny P.J. (1999) On the existence of pure and mixed strategy Nash equilibria in discontinuous games. Econometrica 67(5): 1029–56CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Sharkey W.W., Sibley D.S. (1993) A Bertrand model of pricing and entry. Econ Lett 41(2): 199–206CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Simon L.K., Zame W.R. (1990) Discontinuous games and endogenous sharing rules. Econometrica 58(4): 861–72CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Sion M., Wolfe P. (1957) On a game without a value. Ann Math Stud 39, 299–306Google Scholar
  17. Vives X. (1999) Oligopoly pricing: old ideas and new tools. MIT Press, Cambridge (MA)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of EconomicsUniversidade Nova de LisboaLisboaPortugal
  2. 2.CEPRLondonUK

Personalised recommendations