Vertical Mergers With Bilateral Contracting and Upstream and Downstream Investment

ABSTRACT We extend the theory of bilateral vertical contracting to a double moral hazard setting in which upstream and downstream firms make complementary investments that enhance demand. Downstream firms make fixed investments to enter the downstream market, and contracts are private information and determined through simultaneous bilateral bargaining. We show that vertical mergers mitigate bilateral contracting externalities and hold‐up, thereby increasing complementary investments. If downstream products are either sufficiently distant or sufficiently close substitutes, a vertical merger benefits the merging firm, consumers, and the unintegrated downstream firm. For intermediate degrees of product differentiation, a case with linear demand and quadratic investment costs shows that consumers benefit if the marginal cost of investment is sufficiently low, as revealed, for example, by a high ratio of R&D investments to sales. We apply the model to a vertical merger in the computer industry.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Economics & Management Strategy
Published
2026-10-26
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1111/jems.70042
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

Vertical Mergers With Bilateral Contracting and Upstream and Downstream Investment

Daniel Patrick O'Brien, Mark Israel
Journal of Economics & Management Strategy
Merger and Competition Analysis
article

Vertical Mergers With Bilateral Contracting and Upstream and Downstream Investment

Daniel Patrick O'Brien, Mark Israel
article en

Abstract

ABSTRACT We extend the theory of bilateral vertical contracting to a double moral hazard setting in which upstream and downstream firms make complementary investments that enhance demand. Downstream firms make fixed investments to enter the downstream market, and contracts are private information and determined through simultaneous bilateral bargaining. We show that vertical mergers mitigate bilateral contracting externalities and hold‐up, thereby increasing complementary investments. If downstream products are either sufficiently distant or sufficiently close substitutes, a vertical merger benefits the merging firm, consumers, and the unintegrated downstream firm. For intermediate degrees of product differentiation, a case with linear demand and quadratic investment costs shows that consumers benefit if the marginal cost of investment is sufficiently low, as revealed, for example, by a high ratio of R&D investments to sales. We apply the model to a vertical merger in the computer industry.

Journal of Economics & Management Strategy
Openalex Percentile: Top 8%
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.

Laika access coming soon