Market power

Abstract: The potential of post-contractural apportunistic behavior for improving market efficiency through intrafirm rather than interfirm transactions is examined under the assumption that vertical costs will increase less than contracting costs as specialized assets and appropriable quasi rents increase. Vertical integration protects against the risk of contract cancellation and can create market power which is not generally referred to as monopoly. Contracts used as a alternative provide economically enforceable protection against opportunistic behavior. Solutions to opportunistic behavior problems can include joint ownership of common assets and condominium ownership of services. Economies of scale are major factors in some businesses, such as insurance. The complexities of ownership relations makes it difficult to assign higher costs to either the contract or vertical-integration approach. This suggests that economic analysis should be used to identify which is most advantageous for specific kinds of activities.

Abstract: This paper reviews much of the scientific literature on the market for corporate control. The evidence indicates that corporate takeovers generate positive gains, that target firm shareholders benefit, and that bidding firm shareholders do not lose. The gains created by corporate takeovers do not appear to come from the creation of market power. With the exception of actions that exclude potential bidders, it is difficult to find managerial actions related to corporate control that harm shareholders. Finally, we argue the market for corporate control is best viewed as an arena in which managerial teams compete for the rights to manage corporate resources.

Abstract: Causal ambiguity inherent in the creation of productive processes is modeled by attaching an irreducible ex ante uncertainty to the level of firm efficiency that is achieved by sequential entrants. Without recourse to scale economies or market power, the model generates equilibria in which there are stable interfirm differences in profitability, an above-normal industry rate of return, and a lack of entry even when firms are atomistic price-takers. The free-entry equilibrium for rational noncollusive firms is characterized for atomistic firms and for firms of fixed size, and some analytic results are obtained for the more realistic case in which firms have an arbitrary cost function. Numerical results for the associations implied between concentration, industry profitability, fixed entry costs, and the dispersion of firm profitabilities are obtained for selected cases.

Abstract: Centralization of wage bargaining Lars Calmfors and John Driffill The structure of labour markets is increasingly perceived as a determinant of the macroeconomic performance of a country. This article focuses on one aspect of labour markets, the degree of centralization of wage setting. The main conclusion is that extremes work best. Either highly centralized systems with national bargaining (such as in Austria and the Nordic countries), or highly decentralized systems with wage setting at the level of individual firms (such as in Japan, Switzerland and the US) seem to perform well. The worst outcomes with respect to employment may well be found in systems with an intermediate degree of centralization (such as in Belgium and the Netherlands). This conclusion is reasonably well supported by the available empirical evidence. It is also logical. Indeed, large and all-encompassing trade unions naturally recognize their market power and take into account both the inflationary and unemployment effects of wage increases. Conversely, unions operating at the individual firm or plant level have very limited market power. In intermediate cases, unions can exert some market power but are led to ignore the macroeconomic implications of their actions. These conclusions challenge the conventional wisdom which asserts that the more ‘corporatist’ is an economy, the better is its economic performance.

Abstract: There is considerable evidence that producer-level churning contributes substantially to aggregate (industry) productivity growth, as more productive businesses displace less productive ones. However, this research has been limited by the fact that producer-level prices are typically unobserved; thus within-industry price differences are embodied in productivity measures. If prices reflect idiosyncratic demand or market power shifts, high "productivity" businesses may not be particularly efficient, and the literature's findings might be better interpreted as evidence of entering businesses displacing less profitable, but not necessarily less productive, exiting businesses. In this paper, we investigate the nature of selection and productivity growth using data from industries where we observe producer-level quantities and prices separately. We show there are important differences between revenue and physical productivity. A key dissimilarity is that physical productivity is inversely correlated with plant-level prices while revenue productivity is positively correlated with prices. This implies that previous work linking (revenue-based) productivity to survival has confounded the separate and opposing effects of technical efficiency and demand on survival, understating the true impacts of both. We further show that young producers charge lower prices than incumbents, and as such the literature understates the productivity advantage of new producers and the contribution of entry to aggregate productivity growth.