Marketing Agencies and Collusive Bidding in Online Ad Auctions

References

• Allouah A, Besbes O (2017) Auctions in the online display advertising chain: A case for independent campaign management. Research Paper No. 17-60, Columbia Business School, New York.Google Scholar
• Ashlagi I, Monderer D, Tennenholtz M (2009) Mediators in position auctions. Games Econom. Behav. 67(1):2–21.Google Scholar
• Athey S, Nekipelov D (2014) A structural model of sponsored search advertising auctions. Working paper, Stanford University, Stanford, CA.Google Scholar
• Aumann RJ (1959) Acceptable points in general cooperative n-person games. Tucker A, Luce R, eds. Contributions to the Theory of Games IV (Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ).Google Scholar
• Ausubel LM, Milgrom P (2006) The lovely but lonely Vickrey auction. Combinatorial Auctions (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA).Google Scholar
• Balseiro S, Candogan O (2017) Optimal contracts for intermediaries in online advertising. Oper. Res. 65(4):878–896.Google Scholar
• Bernheim BD, Whinston MD (1985) Common marketing agency as a device for facilitating collusion. RAND J. Econom. 16(2):269–281.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bernheim BD, Whinston MD (1986) Common agency. Econometrica 54(4):923–942.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bernheim BD, Peleg B, Whinston MD (1987) Coalition-proof Nash equilibria I. Concepts. J. Econom. Theory 17:1–12.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Borgers T, Cox I, Pesendorfer M, Petricek V (2013) Equilibrium bids in sponsored search auctions: Theory and evidence. Amer. Econom. J. Microeconomics 5(4):163–187.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Che Y-K, Choi S, Kim J (2017) An experimental study of sponsored-search auctions. Games Econom. Behav. 102:20–43.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Decarolis F, Goldmanis M, Penta A (2018) Common agency and coordinated bids in sponsored search auctions. Working paper, Bocconi University, Milan, Italy.Google Scholar
• Despotakis S, Hafalir I, Ravi R, Sayed A (2017) Expertise in online markets. Management Sci. 63(11):3895–3910.Link, Google Scholar
• Edelman B, Ostrovsky M (2007) Strategic bidder behavior in sponsored search auctions. Decision Support Systems 43(1):192–198.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Edelman B, Ostrovsky M, Schwarz M (2007) Internet advertising and the generalized second-price auction: Selling billions of dollars worth of keywords. Amer. Econom. Rev. 97(1):242–259.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ghose A, Yang S (2009) An empirical analysis of search engine advertising: Sponsored search in electronic markets. Management Sci. 55(10):1605–1622.Link, Google Scholar
• Gomes R, Sweeney K (2014) Bayes Nash equilibria of the generalized second-price auction. Games Econom. Behav. 86:421–437.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Graham DA, Marshall RC (1987) Collusive bidder behavior at single-object second-price and English auctions. J. Political Econom. 95(6):1217–39.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Harrington JE, Skrzypacz A (2007) Collusion under monitoring of sales. RAND J. Econom. 38(2):314–331.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Harrington JE, Skrzypacz A (2011) Private monitoring and communication in cartels: Explaining recent collusive practices. Amer. Econom. Rev. 101(6):2425–2449.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hendricks K, Porter R, Tan G (2008) Bidding rings and the winner’s curse. RAND J. Econom. 39(4):1018–1041.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hsieh Y-W, Shum M, Yang S (2018) To score or not to score? Estimates of a sponsored search auction model. Research Paper No. 15-09, Universty of Southern California, Los Angeles.Google Scholar
• Kalai AT (2010) A commitment folk theorem. Games Econom. Behav. 69(1):127–137.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Levin J, Skrzypacz A (2016) Properties of the combinatorial clock auction. Amer. Econom. Rev. 106(9):2528–2551.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lorenzon E (2018) Collusion with a rent seeking agency in sponsored search auctions. Working paper, Paris Dauphine University, Paris.Google Scholar
• Mailath GJ, Zemsky P (1991) Collusion in second price auctions with heterogeneous bidders. Games Econom. Behav. 3(4):467–486.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mansour Y, Muthukrishnan S, Nisan N (2012) Doubleclick ad exchange auction. Preprint, submitted April 2, http://arxiv.org/abs/1204.0535.Google Scholar
• McAfee R, McMillan J (1992) Bidding rings. Amer. Econom. Rev. 82(3):579–599.Google Scholar
• McAfee RP (2011) The design of advertising exchanges. Rev. Indust. Organ. 39(3):169–185.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Metz C (2015) Facebook doesn't make as much money as it could—on purpose. Wired (September 21), https://www.wired.com/2015/09/facebook-doesnt-make-much-money-couldon-purpose.Google Scholar
• Monderer D, Tennenholtz M (2009) Strong mediated equilibrium. Artificial Intelligence 173(1):180–195.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ortner J, Chassang S (2018) Making corruption harder: Asymmetric information, collusion, and crime. J. Political Econom. 126(5):2108–2133.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ottaviani M (2003) Overture and Google: Internet pay-per-click (PPC) advertising auctions. Case Study-03-022, London Business School, London.Google Scholar
• PwC (2017) Global entertainment media outlook. Accessed September 13, 2018, https://www.pwc.com/gx/en/industries/tmt/media/outlook.html.Google Scholar
• Ray D, Vohra R (1997) Equilibrium binding agreements. J. Econom. Theory 73(1):30–78.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ray D, Vohra R (2014) The farsighted stable set. Econometrica 83(3):977–1011.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Roth B, Shorrer RI (2018) Making it safe to use centralized marketplaces: Dominant individual rationality and applications to market design. Working paper, Harvard Business School, Boston.Google Scholar
• Varian H (2007) Position auctions. Internat. J. Indust. Organ. 25(6):1163–1178.Crossref, Google Scholar