I consider a uniform-price auction under complete information. The possibility of resale attracts speculators who have no use value for the objects on sale. A high-value bidder may strictly prefer to let a speculator win some of the objects and then buy in the resale market, in order to keep the auction price low. Although resale induces entry by speculators and therefore increases the number of competitors, high-value bidders' incentives to “reduce demand” are also affected. Allowing resale to attract speculators reduces the seller's revenue when bidders' valuations are dispersed. Speculators increase the seller's revenue only when they are outbid. (JEL D44, D83)

We study a model where an endogenous number of competing manufacturers located around a circle contract with exclusive retailers who are privately informed about their costs. The number of brands in the market (determined by the manufacturers’ zero profit condition) depends on the presence of asymmetric information and on the types of contracts between manufacturers and retailers. With two‐part tariffs, wholesale prices fully reflect retailers’ costs; with linear contracts, wholesale prices are constant and independent of retailers’ costs. The number of brands is lower (resp. higher) with asymmetric information than with complete information when contracts are linear (resp. with two‐part tariffs). Moreover, although the number of brands is always higher with linear contracts than with two‐part tariffs, joint profits of manufacturers and retailers are higher with linear prices. We also discuss manufacturers’ incentives to choose different contract forms and analyze the effects of endogenous entry on welfare.

A losing bidder can still purchase the prize from the winner after the auction. We show why a strong bidder may prefer to drop out of the auction before the price has reached her valuation and acquire the prize in the aftermarket: a strong bidder may be in a better bargaining position in the aftermarket if her rival won at a relatively low price. So it can be common knowledge that, in equilibrium, a weak bidder will win the auction and, even without uncertainty about relative valuations, resale will take place. The possibility of reselling to a strong bidder attracts weak bidders to participate in the auction and raises the seller's revenue.

We consider a manufacturer's incentive to sell through an independent retailer, rather than directly to final consumers, when contracts with retailers cannot be observed by competitors. If retailers conjecture that identical competing manufacturers always offer identical contracts (symmetric beliefs), manufacturers choose vertical separation in equilibrium. Even with private contracts, vertically separated manufacturers reduce competition and increase profits by inducing less aggressive behaviour by retailers in the final market. ManufacturersÕ profits may be higher with private than with public contracts. Our results hold both with price and with quantity competition and do not hinge on retailersÕ beliefs being perfectly symmetric. We also discuss various justifications for symmetric beliefs, including incomplete information.

This paper surveys the recent literature on competition between mobile networks in the presence of call externalities and network effects. It argues that the regulation of mobile termination rates based on fully allocated costs, or "long-run incremental cost plus," exacerbates the network effects associated with "tariff-mediated network externalities," by increasing mobile networks' on-net/off-net price differentials. This reduces welfare and acts as a barrier to growth for smaller networks and new entrants. The paper argues for the adoption of "bill-and-keep" for mobile termination rates, and responds to recent theoretical arguments which suggest that such a move might harm mobile subscribers.