Ralph Bernd Siebert

Market Power Versus Efficiency Effects of Mergers and Research Joint Ventures: Evidence from the Semiconductor Industry

Merger control authorities may approve a merger based on an efficiency defense. An important aspect in clearing mergers is that the efficiencies need to be merger-specific. Joint ventures, and in particular research joint ventures (RJVs), may achieve comparable efficiencies possibly without the anticompetitive (market power) effects of mergers. We empirically account for the endogenous formation of mergers and RJVs and provide evidence that at the semiconductor level, mergers and RJVs achieve dominant (net) efficiency effects. Our counterfactuals provide evidence that the efficiency gains caused by mergers would have been achieved by RJVs as well. Therefore, RJVs often represent viable alternatives to mergers from the consumer welfare point of view. At the more disaggregate level we find that the efficiency effects are larger in the microcomponents than in the memory market. This finding emphasizes the importance of market determinants (such as product differentiation and entry) having an impact on efficiency and market power effects.

Why Firms Form (or do not Form) RJVS

In this article, we examine why it is difficult to induce firms to form Research Joint Ventures (RJVs). We examine various incentives and disincentives for RJV formation by estimating an endogeneous switching model using data from the US National Cooperative Research Act. The empirical findings support hypotheses that firms of different sizes have disincentives to form RJVs and that cost-sharing is an important incentive for RJV participation.

An Experimental Study of Information Revelation Policies in Sequential Auctions

Theoretical models of information asymmetry have identified a trade-off between the desire to learn and the desire to prevent an opponent from learning private information. This paper reports a laboratory experiment that investigates if actual bidders account for this trade-off, using a sequential procurement auction with private cost information and varying information revelation policies. Specifically, the Complete Information Revelation Policy, where all submitted bids are revealed between auctions, is compared to the Incomplete Information Revelation Policy, where only the winning bid is revealed. The experimental results are largely consistent with the theoretical predictions. For example, bidders pool with other types to prevent an opponent from learning significantly more often under a Complete Information Revelation Policy. Also as predicted, the procurer pays less when employing an Incomplete Information Revelation Policy only when the market is highly competitive. Bids are usually more aggressive than the risk-neutral quantitative prediction, which is broadly consistent with risk aversion. This paper was accepted by Teck Ho, decision analysis.

The Introduction of New Product Qualities by Incumbent Firms: Market Proliferation versus Cannibalization

This study analyzes the optimal provision of goods in a market characterized by vertical product differentiation. We consider a duopoly model in which incumbents may introduce a new product with certain quality, and decide whether to keep or to withdraw the existing product from the market. We find that the strategic and cannibalization effects dominate, such that no room is left for discrimination among consumers. The innovator always withdraws the existing product from the market, in order to reduce price competition and to avoid cannibalizing its new product demand. In contrast to horizontally differentiated markets, firms are better off not to offer a range or interval of product qualities in vertically differentiated markets. Hence, firms fare better, despite offering a smaller variety of goods. ZUSAMMENFASSUNG - (Die Einfuehrung neuer Qualitaetsprodukte von Unternehmen: Marktnischenbesetzung versus Kannibalisierung der Nachfrage) Diese Studie analysiert das optimale Angebot von Guetern, die sich in der Qualitaet untescheiden. Wir betrachten ein Modell, in dem zwei insaessige Unternehmen neue Produkte mit unterschiedlicher Qualitaet in den Markt einfuehren koennen. Zudem koennen die Innovatoren entscheiden, ob ihre existierenden Produkte weiterhin im Markt angeboten oder abgezogen werden sollen. Wir zeigen, dass strategische Effekte und Kannibalisierungseffekte keine Diskriminierung zwischen den Konsumenten zulassen. Der Innovator zieht das existierende Produkt immer aus dem Markt, um einen erhoehten Preiswettbewerb und eine Kannibilisierung der eigenen Nachfrage zu vermeiden. Im Gegensatz zu horizontal differenzierten Maerkten, stellen sich Unternehmen in vertikal differenzierten Maerkten besser, eine geringere Produktvielfalt anzubieten.

Heterogeneous Merger Impacts on Competitive Outcomes

Mergers realize heterogeneous competitive effects on profits, production, and prices. To date, it is unclear whether differential merger outcomes are caused mostly by firms’ technology or product market attributes. Furthermore, empirical merger studies conventionally assume that, conditional on regressors, the impact of mergers on outcomes is the same for every firm. We allow the merger responses to vary across firms, even after controlling for regressors, and apply a random-coefficient or heterogeneous treatment effect model (in the context of Angrist and Krueger (1999), Heckman, Urzua, and Vytlacil (2006), and Cerulli (2012)). Based on a comprehensive dataset on the static random access memory industry, we find that firms’ postmerger output further increases (and postmerger price further declines) if merging firms are more efficient, operate in more elastic product markets, are more innovative, and acquire knowledge in technological areas that are relatively unexplored to themselves. A further interesting insight is that product market characteristics cause stronger postmerger outcome heterogeneities than do technology market characteristics. We also find that the postmerger effects accounting for heterogeneities differ greatly from those that consider homogeneous postmerger outcome effects. Our estimation results provide evidence that ignoring heterogeneous outcome effects can result in heterogeneity bias, just as ignoring premerger heterogeneities can lead to selectivity bias.

Excessive Entry and Social Inefficiencies: A Policy Experiment on Dynamic Efficiency Gains

This study evaluates how different lengths of entry protection impact consumer and producer surplus. We formulate a dynamic oligopoly model in the tradition of Ericson and Pakes (1995) and allow entry costs to vary over time. Firms choose the optimal time to enter a market, and make output and exit decisions. Using a detailed dataset on quarterly firm-level information on the static random access memory industry from 1977 to 2003, we find that entry costs decline by more than 80% throughout the life cycle which corresponds to entry cost reductions of

Why Firms Form Research Joint Ventures: Theory and Evidence

30 million per quarter. We perform a policy experiment to evaluate if declining entry costs over time cause social inefficiencies such that firms enter too early and incur excessive entry costs. Our policy experiment considers a social planner who can control the entry protection length of an incumbent firm. Our results show that a longer lasting entry protection monotonically reduces consumer welfare. Interestingly, a longer entry protection increases producer surplus in the industry due to entry cost savings associated with the prevention of excessive entry. If entry protection becomes sufficiently long the increase in producer surplus from achieving entry cost savings are getting close to compensating the losses in consumer welfare which would result in a total welfare increase.