Theory and Decision

, Volume 75, Issue 1, pp 117–136 | Cite as

Strategic collusion in auctions with externalities

Article
  • 151 Downloads

Abstract

We study a first-price auction preceded by a negotiation stage with complete information, during which bidders may form a bidding ring. We prove that in the absence of externalities, the grand cartel forms in equilibrium, allowing ring members to gain the auctioned object for a minimal price. However, identity-dependent externalities may lead to the formation of small rings, as often observed in practice. Potential ring members may condition their participation on high transfer payments as a compensation for their expected (negative) externalities if the ring forms. The cartel may therefore profitably exclude these bidders, although risking tougher competition in the auction. We also analyze ring (in)efficiency in the presence of externalities, showing that a ring may prefer sending an inefficient member to the auction, if the efficient member exerts threatening externalities on bidders outside the ring, which in turn leads to a higher winning price.

Keywords

Auctions Collusion Externalities Bargaining Sub-game perfect 

JEL Classification

C72 D44 

References

  1. Bajari P., Ye L. (2003) Deciding between competition and collusion. Review of Economics and Statistics 85: 971–989CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Biran, O. (2007). Efficiency and the final consumer in resale markets with externalities. Master Thesis, Technion-Israel Institute of Technology.Google Scholar
  3. Biran, O. (2011). Mécanismes d’échange en présence d’externalités. PhD Thesis, Université Paris-Dauphine.Google Scholar
  4. Biran O., Forges F. (2011) Core-stable rings in auctions with independent private values. Games and Economic Behavior 73: 52–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bloch F. (1996) Sequential formation of coalitions in games with externalities and fixed payoff division. Games and Economic Behavior 14: 90–123CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bloch F., Gomes A. (2006) Contracting with externalities and outside options. Journal of Economic Theory 127: 172–201CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Caillaud B., Jehiel P. (1998) Collusion in auctions with externalities. RAND Journal of Economics 29: 680–702CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Graham D. A., Marshall R. C. (1987) Collusive bidder behavior at single-object second-price and English auctions. The Journal of Political Economy 95: 1217–1239CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Haeringer G. (2004) Equilibrium binding agreements: A comment. Journal of Economic Theory 117: 140–143CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Hendricks K., Porter R., Tan G. (2008) Bidding rings and the winner’s curse. RAND Journal of Economics 39: 1018–1041CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Jehiel P., Moldovanu B. (1996) Strategic nonparticipation. RAND Journal of Economics 27: 84–98CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Jehiel P., Moldovanu B. (1999) Resale markets and the assignment of property rights. Review of Economic Studies 66: 971–991CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Jehiel P., Moldovanu B., Stacchetti E. (1996) How (not) to sell nuclear weapons. American Economic Review 86: 814–829Google Scholar
  14. Jehiel P., Moldovanu B., Stacchetti E. (1999) Multidimensional mechanism design for auctions with externalities. Journal of Economic Theory 85: 258–293CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Mailath G.J., Zemsky P. (1991) Collusion in second price auctions with heterogeneous bidders. Games and Economic Behavior 3: 467–486CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Marshall R. C., Marx L. M. (2007) Bidder collusion. Journal of Economic Theory 133: 374–402CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. McAfee R. P., McMillan J. (1992) Bidding rings. The American Economic Review 82: 579–599Google Scholar
  18. Porter R., Zona D. (1993) Detection of bid rigging in procurement auctions. Journal of Political Economy 101: 518–538CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Porter R., Zona D. (1999) Ohio school milk markets: An analysis of bidding. RAND Journal of Economics 30: 263–288CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Ray D., Vohra R. (1997) Equilibrium binding agreements. Journal of Economic Theory 73: 30–78CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Ray D., Vohra R. (1999) A theory of endogenous coalition structures. Games and Economic Behavior 26: 286–336CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Ray D., Vohra R. (2001) Coalitional power and public goods. The Journal of Political Economy 109: 1355–1384CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Robinson M. S. (1985) Collusion and the choice of auction. The RAND Journal of Economics 16: 141–145CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.CEREMADE, Université Paris-DauphineParisFrance

Personalised recommendations