Bundling and Line Extensions in Distribution Channels

References

• Adams WJ, Yellen JL (1976) Commodity bundling and the burden of monopoly. Quart. J. Econom. 90(3):475–498.Crossref, Google Scholar
• American Bar Association (2007) Antitrust Law Developments, 6th ed. (Section of Antitrust Law, American Bar Association, Chicago).Google Scholar
• Armstrong M, Vickers J (2018) Multiproduct pricing made simple. J. Political Econom. 126(4):1444–1471.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bakos Y, Brynjolfsson E (1999) Bundling information goods: Pricing, profits and efficiency. Management Sci. 45(12):1613–1630.Link, Google Scholar
• Bandyopadhyay S, Paul A (2010) Equilibrium returns policies in the presence of supplier competition. Marketing Sci. 29(5):846–857.Link, Google Scholar
• Bayus B, Putsis W Jr (1999) Product proliferation: An empirical analysis of product line determinants and market outcomes. Marketing Sci. 18(2):137–153.Link, Google Scholar
• Bhargava H (2012) Retailer-driven product bundling in a distribution channel. Marketing Sci. 31(6):1014–1021.Link, Google Scholar
• Boiteux M (1956) On the management of public monopolies subject to budgetary constraints. Econometrica 24(1):22–40.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cao Q, Geng X, Zhang J (2015) Strategic role of retailer bundling in a distribution channel. J. Retailing 91(1):50–67.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Carbajo J, de Meza D, Seidmann D (1990) A strategic motivation for commodity bundling. J. Indust. Econom. 38(3):283–298.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Carlton D, Waldman M (2002) The strategic use of tying to preserve and create market power in evolving industries. RAND J. Econom. 33(2):194–220.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Carlton D, Gans J, Waldman M (2010) Why tie a product consumers do not use. Amer. Econom. J. Microeconom. 2(3):85–105.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chambolle C, Molina H (2018) Full-line forcing and product assortment in vertically related markets. Working paper, CREST, Ecole Polytechnique, Ivry-sur-Seine, France.Google Scholar
• Chen Y (1997) Equilibrium product bundling. J. Bus. 70(1):85–103.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chen Y, Riordan M (2013) Profitability of product bundling. Internat. Econom. Rev. 54(1):35–57.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Choi J, Stefanadis C (2001) Tying, investment, and the dynamic leverage theory. RAND J. Econom. 32(1):52–71.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chu C, Leslie P, Sorensen A (2011) Bundle-size pricing as an approximation to mixed bundling. Amer. Econom. Rev. 100(1):263–303.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cui T, Raju J, Zhang Z (2007) Fairness and channel coordination. Management Sci. 53(8):1303–1314.Link, Google Scholar
• de Corniere A, Taylor G (2021) Upstream bundling and leverage of market power. Econom. J. 131(640):3122–3144.Google Scholar
• DeGraba P (1990) Input market price discrimination and the choice of technology. Amer. Econom. Rev. 80(5):1246–1253.Google Scholar
• Dertwinkel-Kalt M, Wey C (2020) Multi-product bargaining, bundling, and buyer power. Econom. Lett. 188:108936.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dierker E (1991) The optimality of Boiteux-Ramsey pricing. Econometrica 59(1):99–121.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dukes A, Gal-Or E, Srinivasan K (2006) Channel bargaining with retailer asymmetry. J. Marketing Res. 43(1):84–97.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Elhauge E (2009) Tying, bundled discounts, and the death of the single monopoly profit theory. Harvard Law Rev. 123(2):399–481.Google Scholar
• Elhauge E, Nalebuff B (2017) The welfare effects of metering ties. J. Law Econom. Organ. 33(1):68–104.Google Scholar
• European Commission (2022) Guidelines on Vertical Restraints (European Commission, Brussels).Google Scholar
• Fang H, Norman P (2006) To bundle or not to bundle. RAND J. Econom. 37(4):946–963.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fumagalli C, Motta M (2017) On the use of price-cost tests in loyalty discounts and exclusive dealing arrangements: Which implications from economic theory should be drawn? Antitrust Law J. 81(2):537–586.Google Scholar
• Gerstner E, Hess J (1995) Pull promotions and channel coordination. Marketing Sci. 14(1):43–60.Link, Google Scholar
• Gilbert RJ (2015) E-books: A tale of digital disruption. J. Econom. Perspect. 29(3):165–184.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Girju M, Prasad A, Ratchford B (2013) Pure components vs. pure bundling in a marketing channel. J. Retailing 89(4):423–437.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Greenlee P, Reitman D (2005) Distinguishing competitive and exclusionary uses of loyalty discounts. Antitrust Bull. 50(3):441–463.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Grennan M (2013) Price discrimination and bargaining: Empirical evidence from medical devices. Amer. Econom. Rev. 103(1):145–177.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Grennan M (2014) Bargaining ability and competitive advantage: Empirical evidence from medical devices. Management Sci. 60(12):3011–3025.Link, Google Scholar
• Gumus M, Ray S, Yin S (2013) Returns policies between channel partners for durable products. Marketing Sci. 32(4):622–643.Link, Google Scholar
• Ho K, Lee RS (2017) Insurer competition in healthcare markets. Econometrica 85(2):379–417.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hovenkamp H (2006) Discounts and exclusion. Utah Law Rev. 2006(3):841–861.Google Scholar
• Ide E, Montero JP (2024) Monopolization with must-haves. Amer. Econom. J. Microeconomics 16(3):284–320.Google Scholar
• Inderst R, Valletti T (2009) Price discrimination in input markets. RAND J. Econom. 40(1):1–19.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Iyer G, Villas-Boas M (2003) A bargaining theory of distribution channels. J. Marketing Res. 40(1):80–100.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jerath K, Kim S, Swinney R (2017) Product quality in a distribution channel with inventory risk. Marketing Sci. 36(5):747–761.Link, Google Scholar
• Katz ML (1987) The welfare effects of third-degree price discrimination in intermediate good markets. Amer. Econom. Rev. 77(1):154–167.Google Scholar
• Kobayashi B (2005) The economics of loyalty discounts and antitrust law in the United States. Competition Policy Internat. 1(2):115–148.Google Scholar
• Kumar N, Steenkamp J-BEM (2007) Private Label Strategy: How to Meet the Store Brand Challenge (Harvard Business School Press, Boston).Google Scholar
• Lambert T (2005) Evaluating bundled discounts. Minnesota Law Rev. 89(6):1688–1757.Google Scholar
• Liu Y, Cui T (2010) The length of product line in distribution channels. Marketing Sci. 29(3):474–482.Link, Google Scholar
• Long JB (1984) Comments on “Gaussian demand and commodity bundling.” J. Bus. 57(1):S235–S246.Crossref, Google Scholar
• McAfee RP, McMillan J, Whinston MD (1989) Multiproduct monopoly, commodity bundling, and correlation of values. Quart. J. Econom. 104(2):371–383.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Nalebuff B (2004) Bundling as an entry barrier. Quart. J. Econom. 119(1):159–187.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Nasser S, Turcic D, Narasimhan C (2013) National brand’s response to store brands: Throw in the towel or fight back. Marketing Sci. 32(4):591–608.Link, Google Scholar
• O’Brien DP (2014) The welfare effects of third-degree price discrimination in intermediate good markets: The case of bargaining. RAND J. Econom. 45(1):92–115.Crossref, Google Scholar
• O’Brien DP, Shaffer G (2005) Bargaining, bundling, and clout: The portfolio effects of horizontal mergers. RAND J. Econom. 36(3):573–595.Google Scholar
• Padmanabhan V, Png I (1997) Manufacturer’s returns policies and retail competition. Marketing Sci. 16(1):81–94.Link, Google Scholar
• Ramsey FP (1927) A contribution to the theory of taxation. Econom. J. 37(145):47–61.Google Scholar
• Rey P, Tirole J (1986) The logic of vertical restraints. Amer. Econom. Rev. 76(5):921–939.Google Scholar
• Salop S (2017) The raising rivals’ cost foreclosure paradigm, conditional pricing practices and the flawed incremental price-cost test. Antitrust Law J. 81(2):371–421.Google Scholar
• Schmalensee R (1984) Gaussian demand and commodity bundling. J. Bus. 57(1):S211–S234.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Shaffer G (1991) Capturing strategic rent: Full-line forcing, brand discounts, aggregate rebates, and maximum resale price maintenance. J. Indust. Econom. 39(5):557–575.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Spengler J (1950) Vertical integration and antitrust policy. J. Political Econom. 58(4):347–352.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Telser L (1979) A theory of monopoly of complementary goods. J. Bus. 52(2):211–230.Crossref, Google Scholar
• U.S. Department of Justice, Federal Trade Commission (2020) Vertical merger guidelines. Accessed September 26, 2024, https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/documents/public_statements/1580003/vertical_merger_guidelines_6-30-20.pdf.Google Scholar
• U.S. Federal Trade Commission (2001) Report on the Federal Trade Commission workshop on slotting allowances and other marketing practices in the grocery industry, Washington, DC. Accessed September 26, 2024, https://www.ftc.gov/sites/default/files/documents/reports/report-federal-trade-commission-workshop-slotting-allowances-and-other-marketing-practices-grocery/slottingallowancesreportfinal_0.pdf.Google Scholar
• Verge T (2001) Multiproduct monopolist and full-line forcing: The efficiency argument revisited. Econom. Bull. 12(4):1–9.Google Scholar
• Villas-Boas JM (1998) Product line design for a distribution channel. Marketing Sci. 17(2):156–169.Link, Google Scholar
• Wang H (2004) Do returns policies intensify retail competition? Marketing Sci. 23(4):611–613.Link, Google Scholar
• Whinston M (1990) Tying, foreclosure, and exclusion. Amer. Econom. Rev. 80(4):837–859.Google Scholar
• Wong H, Kim K, Chhajed D (2021) Reducing channel inefficiency in product line design. Internat. J. Production Econom. 232:107964.Crossref, Google Scholar