|
||||
|
||||
Competition Policy in Auctions and 'Bidding Markets'
Paul Klemperer University of Oxford - Department of Economics; Centre for Economic Policy Research (CEPR) HANDBOOK OF ANTITRUST ECONOMICS, P. Buccirossi, ed., MIT Press, Forthcoming Abstract: The existence of a "bidding market" is commonly cited as a reason to tolerate the creation or maintenance of highly concentrated markets. We discuss three erroneous arguments to that effect: the "consultants' fallacy" that "market power is impossible", the "academics' fallacy" that (often) "market power does not matter", and the "regulators' fallacy" that "intervention against pernicious market power is unnecessary", in markets characterised by auctions or bidding processes. Furthermore we argue that the term "bidding market" as it is widely used in antitrust is unhelpful or misleading. Auctions and bidding processes do have some special features - including their price formation processes, common-values behaviour, and bid-taker power - but the significance of these features has been overemphasized, and they often imply a need for stricter rather than more lenient competition policy.
Keywords: Auctions, Bidding Markets, Competition Policy, Bidding, Antitrust, Market Power, Common Values, Anti-trust JEL Classifications: L400, D440, K210, L100 Accepted Paper SeriesDate posted: April 11, 2008 ; Last revised: April 11, 2008Suggested CitationContact Information
|
|
|||||||||||||||
© 2009 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Terms of Use Privacy Policy
This page was served by apollo 4 in 0.125 seconds.