Advertisement

When Multiple Merged Entities Lead in Stackelberg Oligopolies

  • Walter FerrareseEmail author
Article

Abstract

I study a merger model among symmetric Cournot firms where—before a merger occurs—firms choose output simultaneously and in which a merged entity acquires the market leadership. I find conditions under which a single or multiple mergers are profitable and solve the free-riding problem. The model connects to Liu and Wang (Econ Lett 129:1–3, 2015), who show that a single leading entity can profitably merge with an arbitrary number of firms. The current paper extends their results in two directions: first, I find the conditions under which the free-riding issue is solved; second, I study the implications of multiple mergers, in which the merged entities are allowed to be heterogeneous in the number of merging firms. A welfare analysis shows that mergers may be welfare-enhancing—even without efficiency gains. Moreover, the set of welfare-enhancing mergers is the same irrespective of the measure that is used: consumer surplus only, or the sum of consumer surplus and industry profits. This suggests caution for the antitrust authorities in evaluating the overall effect of these mergers.

Keywords

Horizontal mergers Stackelberg markets Welfare 

JEL Classification

L11 L13 L22 L41 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This paper is part of the first chapter of my Ph.D. thesis. I am extremely grateful to the Editor Lawrence J. White, two anonymous referees, my advisor Alberto Iozzi and the members of the Ph.D. defence committee Carmen Bevia, Luca Panaccione and Helder Vasconcelos. I am also grateful to Berardino Cesi, Lapo Filistrucchi, Antonio Nicoló, Francesco Ruscitti, Francois Salanié, the audience at seminars at the University of Rome Tor Vergata, the Max Planck Institute for Tax Law and Public Finance in Munich and the 2017 EARIE Conference in Maastricht.

References

  1. Atallah, G. (2015). Multi-firm mergers with leaders and followers. Seoul Journal of Economics, 28, 455–485.Google Scholar
  2. Andrade, G., Mitchell, M., & Stafford, E. (2001). New evidence and perspectives on mergers. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 15, 103–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Brito, D. (2003). Preemptive mergers under spatial competition. International Journal of Industrial Organization, 21, 1601–1622.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Brito, D., & Catalão-Lopes, M. (2011). Small fish become big fish: Mergers in Stackelberg markets revisited. The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis and Policy, 11, 1–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Budzinski, O., & Kretschmer, J. P. (2016). Implications of unprofitable horizontal mergers: A positive external effect does not suffice to clear a merger!. Contemporary Economics, 10, 13–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cunha, M., & Vasconcelos, H. (2015). Mergers in Stackelberg markets with efficiency gains. Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, 15, 105–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Daughety, A. F. (1990). Beneficial concentration. American Economic Review, 80, 1231–1237.Google Scholar
  8. Davis, D. (2002). Strategic interactions, market information and predicting the effects of mergers in differentiated product markets. International Journal of Industrial Organization, 20, 1277–1312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Deneckere, R., & Davidson, C. (1985). Incentives to form coalitions with Bertrand competition. Rand Journal of Economics, 16, 473–486.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Escrihuela-Villar, M., & Faulí-Oller, R. (2007). Mergers in asymmetric Stackelberg markets. Spanish Economic Review, 10, 279–288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Farrell, J., & Shapiro, C. (1990). Horizontal mergers: An equilibrium analysis. American Economic Review, 80, 107–126.Google Scholar
  12. Feltovich, N. (2001). Mergers, welfare and concentration: Results from a model of Stackelberg–Cournot oligopoly. Atlantic Economic Journal, 29, 378–392.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Fridolfsson, S. O., & Stennek, J. (2005). Why mergers reduce profits and raise share-prices: A theory of preemptive mergers. Journal of the European Economic Association, 3, 1083–1104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Gelves, A. (2008). Horizontal merger with an inefficient leader. Manchester School, 78, 379–394.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Gugler, K., Mueller, D. C., Yurtoglu, B., & Zulehner, C. (2003). The effects of mergers: An international comparison. International Journal of Industrial Organization, 21, 625–653.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Heywood, J. S., & McGinty, M. (2008). Leading and merging: Convex costs, Stackelberg and the merger paradox. Southern Economic Journal, 74, 879–893.Google Scholar
  17. Huck, S., Konrad, K., & Muller, W. (2001). Big fish eat small fish: On mergers in Stackelberg markets. Economics letters, 73, 213–217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Huck, S., Konrad, K., & Muller, W. (2004). Profitable horizontal mergers without cost advantages: The role of internal organization, information and market structure. Economica, 71, 575–587.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Huck, S., Konrad, K., Muller, W., & Normann, H. T. (2007). The merger paradox and why aspirations level let it fail in the laboratory. Economic Journal, 117, 1073–1095.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kamien, M. I., & Zang, I. (1990). The limits of Monopolization through acquisition. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 105, 465–499.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Kamien, M. I., & Zang, I. (1991). Competitively cost advantageous mergers and monopolization. Games and Economic Behavior, 3, 323–338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kamien, M. I., & Zang, I. (1993). Monopolization by sequential acquisition. Journal of Law, Economics & Organization, 9, 205–229.Google Scholar
  23. Lindqvist, T., & Stennek, J. (2005). The insiders’ dilemma: An experiment on merger formation. Experimental Economics, 8, 267–284.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Liu, C. C., & Wang, S. F. (2015). Leading merger in a Stackelberg oligopoly: Profitability and consumer welfare. Economics letters, 129, 1–3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Perry, M. K., & Porter, R. H. (1985). Oligopoly and the incentive for horizontal mergers. American Economic Review, 75, 219–227.Google Scholar
  26. Röller, L. H., Stennek, J., & Verboven, F. (2006). Efficiency gains from mergers. In F. Ilzkovitz & R. Meiklejohn (Eds.), European merger control: Do we need an efficiency defence? (pp. 84–101). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
  27. Salant, S., Switzer, S., & Reynolds, R. J. (1983). Losses from horizontal mergers: The effects of an exogenous change in industry structure on Cournot–Nash equilibrium. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 98, 185–199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Simon, H. A. (1955a). A behavioral model of rational choice. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 69, 99–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Simon, H. A. (1955b). Theories of decision making in economics and behavioral science. American Economic Review, 49, 253–283.Google Scholar
  30. Stigler, G. J. (1950). Monopoly and oligopoly by a merger. American Economic Review, 40, 23–34.Google Scholar
  31. Tichy, G. (2001). What do we know about success and failure of mergers? Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, 1, 347–394.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Università di Roma Tor VergataRomeItaly

Personalised recommendations