Pricing Strategies and Partial Privatization Policy Based on Complementary Competitive Market
Tóm tắt
This study investigates pricing strategies and privatization policies by assuming an asymmetric mixed duopoly market for complementary services. In addition, this study examines how technology affects the relationship between the degree of privatization and the degree of complementarity. The main results are as follows: When discriminatory pricing is adopted, the relationship between the degree of complementarity and the optimal degree of privatization is a monotonically increasing shape for inefficiently decreasing returns to scale. For an efficient one or for a constant return to scale, its relationship is an inverse U-shape. When uniform pricing is adopted, the monotone relationship (the inverse U-shaped relationship) holds for the decreasing return to scale (constant return to scale). When the degree of complementarity is small (large), uniform pricing (discriminatory pricing) with partial privatization is socially preferable as a pricing strategy. These results suggest that industries providing complementary services need to adopt discriminatory pricing with partial privatization.
Tài liệu tham khảo
Adachi T, Matsushima N (2014) The welfare effects of third-degree price discrimination in a differentiated oligopoly. Econ Inq 52:1231–1244
Aguirre I (2011) Multimarket competition and welfare effects of price discrimination. The University of the Basque Country Working Paper Series:, 1 L 55/11
Armstrong M, Vickers J (2001) Competitive price discrimination. Rand J Econ 32:579–605
Bárcena-Ruiz JC, Dong Q, Wang LFS (2020) Foreign-owned firms and the partial privatization of state-holding corporations. Jpn Econ Rev 71:287–301
Bárcena-Ruiz JC, Garzón MB (2017) Privatization of state-holding corporations. J Econ 120:171–188
Bárcena-Ruiz JC, Garzón MB (2020) Partial privatization in an international mixed oligopoly under product differentiation. J Econ 131:77–100
Dastidar KG (2006) Third-degree price discrimination in oligopolies. Manch Sch 74:231–249
Dixit A (1979) A model of duopoly suggesting a theory of entry barriers. Bell J Econ 10:20–32
Dong Q, Bárcena-Ruiz JC, Garzón MB (2018) Partial privatization of state-holding corporations. Manch Sch 86:119–138
Fjell K, Pal D (1996) Mixed oligopoly in the presence of foreign private firms. Can J Econ 29:737–743
Fujiwara K (2007) Partial privatization in a differentiated mixed oligopoly. J Econ 92:51–65
Haraguchi J, Matsumura T (2016) Cournot-Bertrand comparison in mixed oligopoly. J Econ 117:117–136
Haraguchi J, Matsumura T (2021) Profit-enhancing entries in mixed oligopolies. South Econ J 88:33–55
Haraguchi J, Matsumura T, Yoshida S (2018) Competitive pressure from neighboring markets and the optimal privatization policy. Jpn World Econ 46:1–8
Holmes TJ (1989) Effects of third-degree price discrimination in an oligopoly. Am Econ Rev 79:244–250
Kawasaki A (2020a) Pricing strategies and partial privatization policies. Mimeo
Kawasaki A (2020b) Airport pricing strategy by hub airports: does the number of local airports matter? Asia-Pac J Regional Sci 4:835–857
Kawasaki A, Matsuzaki S (2020) Privatization of multiproduct public firms. Asia-Pac J Account Econ. https://doi.org/10.1080/16081625.2020.1726776
Kawasaki A, Naito T (2019) Partial privatization under asymmetric multi-market competition. Rev Urban Regional Dev Stud 31:60–76
Liu Q, Shuai J (2013) Multidimensional price discrimination. Int J Indust Organ 31:417–428
Masuda T, Sato S (2017) Partial privatization under multi-market price competition. MPRA Paper No.82269
Matsumura T (1998) Partial privatization in mixed duopoly. J Public Econ 70:473–483
Matsumura T, Kanda O (2005) Mixed oligopoly in free-entry markets. J Econ 84:27–48
Matsumura T, Matsushima N (2012) Airport privatization and international competition. Jpn Econ Rev 63:431–450
Matsumura T, Ogawa A (2012) Price versus quantity in a mixed duopoly. Econ Lett 116:174–177
Matsumura T, Okamura M (2015) Competition and privatization policies revisited the payoff interdependence approach. J Econ 116:137–150
Ohnishi K (2011) Partial privatization in price-setting mixed duopolies with complementary goods. Mod Econ 2:45–48
Schmalensee R (1981) Output and welfare implications of monopolistic third-degree price discrimination. Am Econ Rev 71:242–247
Schwartz M (1990) Third-degree price discrimination and output: generalizing a welfare result. Am Econ Rev 80:1259–1262
Varian HR (1985) Price discrimination and social welfare. Am Econ Rev 75:870–875