Sharing rules in Bertrand duopolies with increasing returns

Despite their empirical relevance, increasing returns to scale are understudied in experimental markets. We use Bertrand duopolies with increasing returns to examine the effects of two sharing rules on collusive behavior and prices in a pre-registered experiment: the symmetric rule (where each of the two firms that set the same price serves half of the market demand) and the winner-takes-all rule (where a fair randomization device decides which of the two firms serves the entire market). We hypothesized that market prices would be higher under the winner-takes-all rule because it provides a collusion mechanism that the symmetric rule does not. While we find that subjects under the winner-takes-all rule coordinate more often on one price than the symmetric sharing rule, this does not increase market prices. Coordination on high prices is rare. Additionally, the winner-takes-all rule facilitates the subjects’ ability to coordinate on equal prices after sharing a market in the previous period.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization
Published
2025-03-18
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jebo.2025.106968
Primary Topic
Merger and Competition Analysis
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Sharing rules in Bertrand duopolies with increasing returns

Andreas Orland
Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization
Merger and Competition Analysis
article

Sharing rules in Bertrand duopolies with increasing returns

Andreas Orland
article en

Abstract

Despite their empirical relevance, increasing returns to scale are understudied in experimental markets. We use Bertrand duopolies with increasing returns to examine the effects of two sharing rules on collusive behavior and prices in a pre-registered experiment: the symmetric rule (where each of the two firms that set the same price serves half of the market demand) and the winner-takes-all rule (where a fair randomization device decides which of the two firms serves the entire market). We hypothesized that market prices would be higher under the winner-takes-all rule because it provides a collusion mechanism that the symmetric rule does not. While we find that subjects under the winner-takes-all rule coordinate more often on one price than the symmetric sharing rule, this does not increase market prices. Coordination on high prices is rare. Additionally, the winner-takes-all rule facilitates the subjects’ ability to coordinate on equal prices after sharing a market in the previous period.

Journal of Economic Behavior & OrganizationVol. 233
Corvinus University of Budapest (HU)
Decent work and economic growth
Openalex Percentile: Top 92%
Merger and Competition Analysis
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.