Collusion in Dynamic Buyer-Determined Reverse Auctions

References

• Ausubel LM, Cramton P, Pycia M, Rostek M, Weretka M (2014) Demand reduction and inefficiency in multi-unit auctions. Rev. Econom. Stud. 81(4):1366–1400.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Branco F (1997) The design of multidimensional auctions. RAND J. Econom. 28(1):63–81.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Brusco S, Lopomo G (2002) Collusion via signaling in simultaneous ascending bid auctions with heterogeneous objects, with and without complementarities. Rev. Econom. Stud. 69(2):407–436.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Che YK (1993) Design competition through multidimensional auctions. RAND J. Econom. 24(4):668–680.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chen Y, Riordan M (2007) Price and variety in the spokes model. Econom. J. 117(522):897–921.Google Scholar
• Doyle C (1988) Different selling strategies in Bertrand oligopoly. Econom. Lett. 28(4):387–390.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Elmaghraby W (2007) Auctions within E-sourcing events. Production Oper. Management 16(4):409–422.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Engelbrecht-Wiggans R, Haruvy RE, Katok E (2007) A comparison of buyer-determined and price-based multi-attribute mechanisms. Marketing Sci. 26(5):629–641.Link, Google Scholar
• Fischbacher U (2007) z-Tree: Zurich toolbox for ready-made economic experiments. Experiment. Econom. 10(2):171–178.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Graham DA, Marshall RC (1987) Collusive bidder behavior at single-object second-price and English auctions. J. Political Econom. 95(6):1217–1239.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Greiner B (2015) Subject pool recruitment procedures: Organizing experiments with ORSEE. J. Econom. Sci. Assoc. 1(1):114–125.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Haruvy E, Katok E (2013) Increasing revenue by decreasing information in procurement auctions. Production Oper. Management 22(1):19–35.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Huck S, Normann HT, Oechssler J (2004) Two are few and four are many: Number effects in experimental oligopolies. J. Econom. Behav. Organ. 53(4):435–446.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jap SD (2002) Online reverse auctions: Issues, themes, and prospects for the future. J. Acad. Marketing Sci. 30(4):506–525.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jap SD (2003) An exploratory study of the introduction of online reverse auctions. J. Marketing 67(3):96–107.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jap SD (2007) The impact of online reverse auction design on buyer–supplier relationships. J. Marketing 71(1):146–159.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Klemperer P (1999) Auction theory: A guide to the literature. J. Econom. Surveys 13(3):227–286.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kwasnica AM, Sherstyuk K (2013) Multi-unit auctions. J. Econom. Surveys 27(3):461–490.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Logan JW, Lutter RW (1989) Guaranteed lowest prices: Do they facilitate collusion? Econom. Lett. 31(2):189–192.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Morand PH, Thoma L (2006) Efficient procurement with quality concerns. Recherches Economiques de Louvain 72(2):129–155.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ockenfels A, Roth AE (2006) Late and multiple bidding in second price internet auctions: Theory and evidence concerning different rules for ending an auction. Games Econom. Behav. 55(2):297–320.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rezende L (2009) Biased procurement auctions. Econom. Theory 38(1):169–185.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Robinson MS (1985) Collusion and the choice of auction. RAND J. Econom. 16(1):141–145.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Salop SC (1986) Practices that (credibly) facilitate oligopoly coordination. Stiglitz JE, Mathewson GF, eds. New Developments in the Analysis of Market Structure (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA), 265–290.Crossref, Google Scholar
• SAP (2006) Reverse auction best practices: Practical approaches to ensure successful electronic reverse auction events. White paper, SAP, Deutschland SE and Co. KG, Walldorf, Germany.Google Scholar
• Schnitzer M (1994) Dynamic duopoly with best-price clauses. RAND J. Econom. 25(1):186–196.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sherstyuk K (1999) Collusion without conspiracy: An experimental study of one-sided auctions. Experiment. Econom. 2(1):59–75.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sherstyuk K (2002) Collusion in private value ascending price auctions. J. Econom. Behav. Organ. 48(2):177–195.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Stoll S, Zöttl G (2014) Transparency in buyer-determined auctions: Should quality be private or public. Working paper, Max Planck Institute for Innovation and Competition, Munich, Germany.Google Scholar
• Thomas CJ, Wilson BJ (2005) Verifiable offers and the relationship between auctions and multilateral negotiations. Econom. J. 115(506):1016–1031.Google Scholar