@phdthesis{Greer2015,
  author    = {Greer, Katja},
  title     = {Essays in Industrial Organization: Vertical Agreements in a Dynamic View},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-136939},
  school      = {Universit{\"a}t W{\"u}rzburg},
  year      = {2015},
  abstract  = {This dissertation deals with the contract choice of upstream suppliers as well as the consequences on competition and efficiency in a dynamic setting with inter-temporal externalities. The introduction explains the motivation of the analysis and the comparison of different contract types, as for example standard contracts like simple two-part tariffs and additional specifications as contracts referencing the quantity of the contract-offering firm or the relative purchase level. The features of specific market structures should be considered in the analysis of specific vertical agreements and their policy implications. In particular, the role of dynamic changes regarding demand and cost parameters may have an influence on the results observed. In the first model, a dominant upstream supplier and a non-strategic rival sell their products to a single downstream firm. The rival supplier faces learning effects which decrease the rival's costs with respect to its previous sales. Therefore, learning effects represent a dynamic competitive threat to the dominant supplier. In this setup, the dominant supplier can react on inter-temporal externalities by specifying its contract to the downstream firm. The model shows that by offering market-share discounts, instead of simple two-part tariffs or quantity discounts, the dominant supplier maximizes long-run profits, and restricts the efficiency gains of its rival. If demand is linear, the market-share discount lowers consumer surplus and welfare. The second model analyzes the strategic use of bilateral contracts in a sequential bargaining game. A dominant upstream supplier and its rival sequentially negotiate with a single downstream firm. The contract choice of the dominant supplier as well as the rival supplier's reaction are investigated. In a single-period sequential contracting game, menus of simple two-part tariffs achieve the industry profit maximizing outcome. In a dynamic setting where the suppliers sequentially negotiate in each period, the dominant supplier uses additional contractual terms that condition on the rival's quantity. Due to the first-mover advantage of the first supplier, the rival supplier is restricted in its contract choice. The consequences of the dominant supplier's contract choice depend on bargaining power. In particular, market-share contracts can be efficiency enhancing and welfare-improving whenever the second supplier has a relatively high bargaining position vis-`a-vis the downstream firm. For a relatively low bargaining position of the rival supplier, the result is similar to the one determined in the first model. We show that results depend on the considered negotiating structure. The third model studies the contract choice of two upstream competitors that simultaneously deal with a common buyer. In a complete information setting where both suppliers get to know whether further negotiations fail or succeed, a singleperiod model solves for the industry-profit maximizing outcome as long as contractual terms define at least a wholesale price and a fixed fee. In contrast, this collusive outcome cannot be achieved in a two-period model with inter-temporal externalities. We characterize the possible market scenarios, their outcomes and consequences on competition and efficiency. Our results demonstrate that in case a rival supplier is restricted in its contract choice, the contract specification of a dominant supplier can partially exclude the competitor. Whenever equally efficient suppliers can both strategically choose contract specifications, the rivals defend their market shares by adapting appropriate contractual conditions. The final chapter provides an overview of the main findings and presents some concluding remarks.},
  subject      = {Unternehmenskooperation},
  language  = {en}
}
@phdthesis{Steinmetz2009,
  author    = {Steinmetz, Alexander},
  title     = {Essays on Strategic Behavior and Dynamic Oligopoly Competition},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-47934},
  school      = {Universit{\"a}t W{\"u}rzburg},
  year      = {2009},
  abstract  = {This thesis deals with three selected dimensions of strategic behavior, namely investment in R\&D, mergers and acquisitions, and inventory decisions in dynamic oligopolies. The question the first essay addresses is how the market structure evolves due to innovative activities when firms' level of technological competence is valuable for more than one project. The focus of the work is the analysis of the effect of learning-by-doing and organizational forgetting in R\&D on firms' incentives to innovate. A dynamic step-by-step innovation model with history dependency is developed. Firms can accumulate knowledge by investing in R\&D. As a benchmark without knowledge accumulation it is shown that relaxing the usual assumption of imposed imitation yields additional strategic effects. Therefore, the leader's R\&D effort increases with the gap as she is trying to avoid competition in the future. When firms gain experience by performing R\&D, the resulting effect of knowledge induces technological leaders to rest on their laurels which allows followers to catch up. Contrary to the benchmark case the leader's innovation effort declines with the lead. This causes an equilibrium where the incentives to innovate are highest when competition is most intense. Using a model of oligopoly in general equilibrium the second essay analyzes the integration of economies that might be accompanied by cross-border merger waves. Studying economies which prior to trade were in stable equilibrium where mergers were not profitable, we show that globalization can trigger cross-border merger waves for a sufficiently large heterogeneity in marginal cost. In partial equilibrium, consumers benefit from integration even when a merger wave is triggered which considerably lowers intensity of competition. Welfare increases. In contrast, in general equilibrium where interactions between markets and therefore effects on factor prices are considered, gains from trade can only be realized by reallocation of resources. The higher the technological dissimilarity between countries the better can efficiency gains be realized in integrated general equilibrium. The overall welfare effect of integration is positive when all firms remain active but indeterminate when firms exit or are absorbed due to a merger wave. It is possible for decreasing competition to dominate the welfare gain from more efficient resource allocation across sectors. Allowing for firms' entry alters results as in an integrated world coexistence of firms of different countries is never possible. Comparative advantages with respect to entry and production are important for realizing efficiency gains from trade. The third essay analyzes the interaction between price and inventory decisions in an oligopoly industry and its implications for the dynamics of prices. The work extends existing literature and especially the work of Hall and Rust (2007) to endogenous prices and strategic oligopoly competition. We show that the optimal decision rule is an (S,s) order policy and prices and inventories are strategic substitutes. Fixed ordering costs generate infrequent orders. Additionally, with strategic competition in prices, (S,s) inventory behavior together with demand uncertainty generates cyclical pattern in prices The last chapter presents some concluding remarks on the results of the essays.},
  subject      = {Wettbewerbsstrategie},
  language  = {en}
}