Using an exhaustive database of bookings in one large chain of hotels active in Oslo (2013-2016), we estimate a nested-logit demand model that allows us to evaluate substitution patterns between online distribution channels. Making use of the chains' decision to delist from Expedia's platform, we can then compare simulated and actual effects of such an event on prices and market shares and identify ways to improve on simulated counterfactual outcomes.JEL Classification : D22, D43, L11, L81

We analyze a setting where a monopolist sells through retailers that set prices and provide valuable but non-contractible services to customers. We assume that contracts are private. We find that purely bilateral price restraints have no effect on the equilibrium outcome and that the standard Bertrand prices and service levels prevail. We also show that if manufacturers can commit to industry-wide resale prices, they can obtain higher prices and service levels but will generally not be able to achieve the fully integrated outcome. Using a specific linear demand system, we find that industry-wide price floors are harmful to consumers. (JEL L12, L42, L81, L60, D42, D86, D62)

We explore how the incentives for exclusion, both in upstream and downstream vertical markets, are related to the bargaining position of suppliers and retailers. We consider a model with a dominant upstream manufacturer and a competitive fringe of producers of imperfect substitutes o¤ering their products to two di¤erentiated downstream retailers. In this model we contrast the equilibrium outcome in two alternative situations. The …rst one is when the dominant supplier holds all the bargaining power, and this is compared with the outcome when the retailers have all the bargaining power. We show that exclusion occurs when interbrand and intrabrand competition is strong. Moreover, in contrast to the received literature, we …nd that when retailers have buyer power, this enhances welfare compared to when the manufacturer holds all the bargaining power.

We set up a merger game between retailing stores to study the incentives of independent stores to form a big store when some consumers have preferences for one‐stop shopping. Such one‐stop shopping creates complementarity between products, leading in turn to lower prices after a big store is formed but may also lead to an improvement in the bargaining position vis‐à‐vis producers through the creation of an inside option that small stores do not have. We find that big stores will not be formed when the stores' ex ante bargaining power vis‐à‐vis producers is high. Otherwise, an asymmetric situation occurs with only one big store created when one‐stop shoppers are abundant.

No abstract