¬ã°Q¤é´Á |
2010¦~08¤ë07¤é
10:20 ~ |
||
¬ã°Q¦aÂI |
¥xÆW¤j¾ÇªÀ·|¬ì¾Ç°| ²Ä26±Ð«Ç |
||
°Q½×ÃD¥Ø |
ÃD¥Ø |
§@ªÌ |
¤åÄm¥X³B |
Bundled
Discounts by Independent Producers of Vertically Differentiated Goods |
|
Working paper, 2010 |
|
³ø§i¤H |
Áé暳³® |
||
°Ñ¥[¤Hû |
¶ÀÂE¡B¤ý¥ú¥¿¡BªL¿P²Q¡B³¯§»©ö¡B´^¥¿¯E¡B´¿ÀRªK¡B¤ý¬ý³Ç¡B±ä¥j¾s¡B²ø´_½å¡B®}¹t¡B³\³Í«Â¡B°ª°ê峯¡BªL®Ë¦p¡BÁé暳³®¡B§d©yÁ¾¡B©P«~¦°¡B³\¦Ü¤A¡B©P¦Bº½¡B¬IÎr¥þ |
||
°Q½×´£n |
Bundled discounts provide purchasers the opportunity to
pay less for a bundle of products than the sum of the prices of the bundle¡¦s
constituent products when purchased separately. Despite the fact that bundled
discounts are a widespread business practice, the academic literature has
devoted limited attention to this issue. There are several examples of
bundled discounts in industries where, at least with respect to one of the
products in the bundle, differentiation is clearly vertical. To the best of
our knowledge, however, vertical differentiation has been neglected by the
extant literature on bundled discounts. |
||
°Q½×µ²ªG»P«ØÄ³ |
This paper studies the competitive effects of bundled discounts in a
setting where the component goods are vertically differentiated and sold by
otherwise unrelated firms. When firms decide simultaneously about their
participation in a discounting scheme, in equilibrium, both pairs of firms offer
bundled discounts and, relative to the no-bundling benchmark: (i) all headline prices rise; (ii) all bundle prices,
net of the discount, rise; and (iii) all firms earn
higher profits. Furthermore, the equilibrium corresponds to the worst
scenario in terms of consumer and social welfare, when compared to bundled discounts
only offered by a single pair of firms or to the no-bundling benchmark. «ØÄ³»P©µ¦ù¡G (1)
¶i¤@¨B±´¨s¡A¦b««ª½¬ÛÃö¼Ò«¬¤¤¬°¦ó¤£·|µo¥Í¥}¥Ç§x¹Ò¡C (2)
«Øºc¼t°Ó¥i¿ï¾Ü±N²£«~¸j°â»P´£¨Ñ§é¦©ªº¼Ò«¬¤U¡A¤ÀªR¼t°Óªº³Ì ¾A·f°âµ¦²¤¡C |
||
³Æµù |
|
|
|