[‘An efficient as cending-bid auction for multiple objects’]"> [‘An efficient as cending-bid auction for multiple objects’]"> [‘An efficient as cending-bid a">
[go: up one dir, main page]
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/ecpoli/v18y2003i36p269-308..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

An economic perspective on auctions
[‘An efficient as cending-bid auction for multiple objects’]

Author

Listed:
  • Philippe Jehiel
  • Benny Moldovanu
Abstract
The recent spectrum auctions in Europe have shown that serious problems can arise in auctions where multiple complementary objects are being sold (such as blocks of radio spectrum) that will subsequently be used by the winning bidders to compete against each other in downstream markets. Other important instances of such situations include take-off and landing slots at airports and rights for electricity and gas transmission. We first review some of the theory describing multi-object auctions. We next outline the importance of strategic effects arising in auctions that are followed by competition between the bidders, and the tension arising between various goals such as efficiency and revenue maximization. Although more flexible auction formats can have virtues (particularly in taking into account complementarities), they can also be manipulated by bidders to build market power to the detriment of consumers. We next apply these insights to the recent European UMTS licence auctions. Finally we draw the main conclusions and policy implications.— Philippe Jehiel and Benny Moldovanu

Suggested Citation

  • Philippe Jehiel & Benny Moldovanu, 2003. "An economic perspective on auctions [‘An efficient as cending-bid auction for multiple objects’]," Economic Policy, CEPR, CESifo, Sciences Po;CES;MSH, vol. 18(36), pages 269-308.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:ecpoli:v:18:y:2003:i:36:p:269-308.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1111/1468-0327.00107
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:ecpoli:v:18:y:2003:i:36:p:269-308.. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cebruuk.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.