Market Expansion Effects with Differentiated Goods: Monopoly versus Atomistic Competition

Paul Madden, Simon Rudkin

Business Economics and Management, Xi’an Jiaotong-Liverpool University, Suzhou, China.
School of Social Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.

DOI: 10.4236/tel.[phone]                

Abstract

In a horizontally differentiated goods market, where consumers face heterogeneous costs of entering the market and exhibit a taste for variety (via CES preferences) over the continuum of substitute goods, lowering the general market price level leads to increased consumer entry—the market expansion effect. Since atomistic competitors (each supplying 1 good) cannot influence this general price level, whilst a (multi-product) monopolist can, monopoly may lead to lower prices. In a model where market expansion effects are potentially large, the paper shows how monopoly leads to socially desirable lower prices, and greater variety, even when goods are arbitrarily close substitutes.

Keywords

Market Expansion Effects; Differentiated Goods; Socially Desirable Monopoly

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

[1]	K. Stahl, “Location and Spatial Pricing Theory with Non-Convex Transportation Cost Schedules,” Bell Journal of Economics, Vol. 13, No. 2, 1982, pp.575-582. doi:10.2307/3003478
[2]	H. Smith and D. Hay, “Streets, Malls and Supermarkets,” Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Vol. 14, No. 1, 2005, pp. 29-59. doi:10.1111/j.1430-9134.2005.00033.x
[3]	V. Nocke, K. Stahl and M. Peitz, “Platform Ownership,” Journal of the European Economic Association, Vol. 5, No. 6, 2007, pp. 1130-1160. doi:10.1162/JEEA.2007.5.6.1130
[4]	S. Peng, “Spatial Monopoly with Product Differentiation,” Southern Economic Journal, Vol. 70, No. 3, 2004, pp. 646-660. doi:10.2307/4135336
[5]	N. Schulz, “Are Markets More Competitive if Commodties are Closer Substitutes?” International Economic Review, Vol. 36, No. 4, 1996, pp. 963-983. doi:10.2307/2527268
[6]	N. Schulz and K. Stahl, “Do Consumers Search for Thehighest Price? Oligopoly Equilibrium in Differentiated-Products Markets,” RAND Journal of Economics, Vol. 27, No. 3, 1996, pp. 542-562. doi:10.2307/2555843
[7]	S. Anderson and R. Renault, “Pricing, Product Diversity and Search Costs: A Bertrand-Chamberlain-Diamond Model,” RAND Journal of Economics, Vol. 30, No. 4, 1999, pp. 719-735. doi:10.2307/2556072
[8]	Y. Chen and M. H. Riordan, “Price-Increasing Competition,” RAND Journal of Economics, Vol. 39, No. 4, 2008, pp. 1042-1058. doi:10.1111/j.1756-2171.2008.00049.x
[9]	S. J. Davis and K. M. Murphy, “A Competitive Perspective on Internet Explorer,” American Economic Review, Vol. 90, No. 2, 2000, pp. 184-187. doi:10.1257/aer.90.2.184
[10]	S. Rudkin, “The Impact of Supermarkets on Prices, Consumer Behaviour and Welfare; Theoretical and Empirical Issues”, Ph.D. Thesis, University of Manchester, Manchester, 2008.