the demographic transition and the position of women a marriage market perspective we present international evidence on the marriage market implications of cohort size growth and set out a theoretical model of how marriage markets adjust to imbalances since men marry younger women secular growth in cohort size in the second phase of the demographic transition worsens the position of women this e ect has been substantial in many asian countries earlier and continues to be true in sub saharan africa with fertility decline cohort are now shrinking in east asia improves the position of women these demographic trends can explain the increase and spread in dowries in south asia and the persistence of polygyny in sub saharan africa we show that the age gap at marriage will not adjust in order to equilibrate the marriage market in response to persistent imbalances even though it accommodates transitory shocks jel categories j12 j13 j16

an experimental examination of competitor based price matching guarantees we use experimental methods to demonstrate the anti competitive potential of price matching guarantees in both symmetric and asymmetric cost duopolies our findings establish that when costs are symmetric price matching guarantees significantly increase market prices in markets with cost asymmetries guaranteed prices remain high relative to prices without the use of guarantees but the overall ability of price guarantees to act as a collusion facilitating device becomes contingent on the relative cost difference lesser use of guarantees combined with lower average prices and slower convergence to the collusive level suggest that the mere presence of cost asymmetries may curtail collusive behavior

price discrimination through offers to match price in this paper a firm discriminates between two classes of customer who have a different cost of information by coupling a list price with an offer to match the pr ice of any other shop if the list price elsewhere is lower the firm will be successful in discrimination the list price of each firm is increasing in the number of sellers and the total sales are decreasi ng in the number of sellers furthermore if sellers coordinate they discriminate more efficaciously and increase their profits by increa sing their total sales copyright 1987 by the university of chicago

an experimental and theoretical analysis of price matching refund policies abstract price matching refund policies or offers by firms to match competitor s prices are common in both consumer and industrial marketing much of the previous theoretical work in economics suggests that price matching refunds are associated with higher prices in contrast the trade press postulates that price matching policies are associated with lower prices given these inconsistent views regarding price matching policies the authors experimentally examine how consumers view and interpret such policies and then develop a model that incorporates these consumer interpretations as well as asymmetries across stores in the model the asymmetry across stores is the key to deriving the conditions under which a signaling equilibrium exists in the presence of price matching policies the critical point is that the competition reducing and price discrimination effects which seem to form the basis of most of the previous theoretical literature can be counteracted by the presence of differentiated firms

guaranteed lowest prices do they facilitate collusion abstract the effects of a policy guaranteeing lowest price are analyzed in a two stage game where firms first decide whether to adopt such a policy and then choose prices symmetric and asymmetric games are solved to examine the extent to which prices can rise to collusive levels

price matching policy and the principle of minimum differentiation this paper shows that if duopolists are allowed to choose their product locations a price matching policy and their prices sequentially and independently both tacit collusion and minimum differentiation occur copyright 1995 by blackwell publishing ltd

on the competitive effects of price matching policies abstract this paper challenges the conventional wisdom that price matching policies lead to supracompetitive prices by reducing firms incentives to undercut rivals i argue that price matching and price beating policies are more appropriately viewed as a means of price discrimination and develop a model that demonstrates their use as such analysis of this model shows that in contrast to the results of the existing literature price matching and price beating may raise or lower equilibrium prices relative to the equilibrium in which firms may not adopt such policies

price matching guarantees are price matching guarantees anticompetitive we examine the incentives for price matching guarantees in markets where information about prices is costly the conventional explanation of price matching as facilitating cartel pricing finds some theoretical support but our model provides an additional explanation a price matching guarantee may be a credible and easily understood means of communicating to uninformed consumers that a firm is low priced the credibility of the signal is assured by the behavior of informed consumers we contrast the testable implications of our model with those arising from two theories of price matching as anticompetitive and show that available evidence supports the signalling theory

price match announcements in a consumer search duopoly using a model of sequential search we show that announcements to price match raise prices by altering consumer search behavior first price matching diminishes firms incentives to lower prices to attract consumers who have no search costs second for consumers with positive search costs price matching lowers the marginal benefit of search inducing them to accept higher prices finally price matching can lead to asymmetric equilibria where one firm runs fewer sales and both firms tend to offer smaller discounts than in a symmetric equilibrium price increases grow in the proportion of consumers who invoke price matching guarantees and in the level of equilibrium asymmetry

on the incidence and variety of low price guarantees abstract this paper provides evidence of the incidence and variety of low price guarantees promises to match or beat a rival s price using data obtained from newspaper advertisements in 37 metropolitan areas in the united states we have a total of 515 low price guarantees in our sample we document their features and we infer firms motives and effects from these features the evidence suggests that the majority of low price guarantees are not consistent with their use as a facilitating device because they tend to apply only to rival firms advertised prices or they are associated with high hassle costs the evidence also suggests that price beating and price matching guarantees differ significantly in their features the former are associated with higher hassle costs apply disproportionately to rival firms advertised prices and are more likely to allow postsale search than are price matching guarantees

underreaction to fundamental information and asymmetry in mispricing between bullish and bearish markets an experimental study abstract in contrast to existing literature we implement experimental asset markets with fluctuating fundamental values following a stochastic process therefore we can measure traders behavior in both bullish and bearish markets we observe underreaction of price changes to changes in fundamental value which induces overvaluation in bearish and undervaluation in bullish markets we also find an asymmetry between markets with bullish fundamental values and those with bearish ones as the former markets show a higher degree of informational efficiency the reason for the observed underreaction lies in the relatively large volatility of the underlying fundamental value process

how low is a guaranteed lowest price a game based on the bertrand duopoly model is constructed to study the effects of price guarantee policies before it chooses a list price a firm can make a binding commitment to match or beat its competitor s price the effectiveness of these price guarantee policies in facilitating price collusion depends on the solution concept used furthermore there exists an equilibrium in which neither firm offers any price guarantees and each firm sets price equal to marginal cost

can low price guarantees deter entry abstract this paper examines the strategic use of low price guarantees lpgs as an entry deterrent the entire space of contemporaneous lpg messages is partitioned according to their ability to deter entry and or increase the incumbent s profits while most price matching and price beating guarantees cannot deter entry into a perfectly contestable market there do exist special classes of price beating guarantees that enable the incumbent to prevent entry interestingly both price matching and price beating can be a part of the incumbent s strategy in subgame perfect equilibria of the game where the firms choose lpgs from 14 classes defined in the paper

effective price matching a comment abstract corts economic lett 47 1995 417 showed that when allowing for price beating policies in addition to price matching policies the competitive outcome prevails in lieu of monopoly pricing i show by expanding the strategy set further to include effective price strategies the possibility of monopoly pricing is restored

on the use of low price guarantees to discourage price cutting abstract this paper formulates a novel test to assess whether and to what extent firms might be using low price guarantees to discourage their rivals from cutting prices the test is based on a comparison of paired observations of advertised prices that are set by competing firms at the same point in time on similar items where one price is set by a firm that has a low price guarantee and the other by a firm that does not have a low price guarantee using data on retail tire prices we find that the majority of paired observations involving firms that have price matching guarantees are consistent with what one would expect if firms were using them to discourage price cutting whereas the majority of paired observations involving firms that have price beating guarantees are not this suggests that price matching and price beating guarantees may be serving different purposes the evidence also suggests that guarantees that apply to advertised prices only may be serving different purposes than guarantees that apply to both advertised and selling prices

experimental duopolies under price guarantees in a symmetric differentiated experimental duopoly we test the ability of price guarantees pgs to raise prices above the competitive levels different types of pgs aggressive and soft price beating and price matching are implemented either as an exogenously imposed market rule or as a business strategy our results show that pgs may lead close to the collusive outcome depending on whether the interaction between duopolists is repeated and provided that the guarantee is not of the aggressive price beating type

different selling strategies in bertrand oligopoly abstract i analyse a bertrand oligopoly game where firms can choose between selling strategies i price announcements ii price announcements and offers to price match i establish the set of nash equilibria and show that only the monopoly price nash equilibrium satisfies iterative dominance

matching own prices rivals prices or both many retailers promise that they will not be undersold by rivals and extend their promise to include their own future prices that is many retailers combine elements of both price matching guarantees and retroactive most favored customer clauses this is puzzling because the extant literature has shown that each practice independently has the potential to facilitate supracompetitive prices and thus one might think the two practices are substitutes in this paper we show that price matching guarantees and most favored customer clauses complement each other when offered unilaterally by a single firm and can lead to higher prices than either one could have facilitated by itself

on the robustness of the argument that price matching is anti competitive abstract the existing literature suggests that price matching leads to monopoly prices i show that this argument relies on an arbitrary and unrealistic restriction of the firms strategies in particular if firms may adopt price beating policies the competitive outcome prevails

price matching guarantees as a direct signal of low prices if consumers believe that stores offering price matching guarantees pmgs charge low prices high search cost consumers will purchase from pmg stores this leads pmg stores demand to be less pric

the welfare losses from price matching policies several recent papers argue that price matching policies raise equilibrium prices we add to this literature by considering potential welfare losses which have two sources harberger triangles from high prices and posner rectangles from over entry we compare price matching markets with entry to monopoly and price matching markets without entry and find that price matching with entry creates greater welfare losses than monopoly in markets with a low ratio of fixed to marginal cost we illustrate this result using parameters from the us wholesale gasoline and air travel markets and relate our model to price matching among nasdaq market makers

do low price guarantees guarantee low prices evidence from competition between amazon and big box stores it has long been understood in theory that price match guarantees can be anticompetitive but to date scant empirical evidence is available outside of some narrow markets this paper broadens the scope of empirical analysis studying a wide range of products sold on a national online market using an algorithm that extracts data from charts i obtain a novel source of data from online price trackers i examine prices of goods sold on amazon before and after two big box stores target and best buy announced a guarantee to match amazon s prices employing both difference in difference and regression discontinuity approaches i robustly estimate a positive causal effect of six percentage points the effect was heterogeneous with larger price increases for initially lower priced items my results support anticompetitive theories which predict price increases for amazon a firm that did not adopt the guarantee and are consistent with plausible mechanisms for the heterogeneous impact

research note consumer heterogeneity and competitive price matching guarantees price matching guarantees are widely used in consumer and industrial markets previous studies argue that they are a marketing tactic that facilitates implicit price collusion this is because once a store adopts this marketing tactic its rivals can no longer steal its customers by undercutting its price and hence they have little incentive to initiate price cuts while a store with price matching guarantees has no fear of losing customers to rivals price cuts it has every incentive to raise its own price to charge a higher price to its loyal consumers a growing body of legal literature uses this argument today to justify calls for antitrust actions against stores employing this marketing tactic however this theoretical conclusion baffles practitioners and industry experts in practice sellers typically embrace this marketing tactic in response to heavier competition and a growing bargain consciousness among shoppers the introduction of price matching guarantees by a store is frequently interpreted by industry observers as the initiation of a price war rather than a signal of price collusion this assertion is supported in many instances by the fact that stores that introduce price matching guarantees also roll back their prices and typically suffer subsequent loss of profits most ironically the favorite examples used by researchers to illustrate how price matching guarantees can enforce price collusion crazy eddie and nobody beats the wiz have subsequently either gone bankrupt or filed for federal bankruptcy protection in this study we show that price matching guarantees can indeed facilitate competition the expected prices and profits can be strictly lower when all stores adopt price matching guarantees than when they are not allowed to this is because the adoption of price matching guarantees generates not only a competition dampening effect which has been recognized in the literature but also a competition enhancing effect this latter effect comes from the fact that price matching guarantees encourage price search by those consumers who prefer to shop at a particular store but are mindful of saving opportunities these consumers will have incentives to obtain the rival store s price when their favorite store offers price matching guarantees to avail themselves of the lowest possible price at their favorite store as a result price matching guarantees reduce the number of purchases at the store from those consumers who would have paid the full price and thus prompt a store to price more aggressively to bid for more incremental sales this competition enhancing effect can more than offset the competition dampening effect in markets where consumers differ in their price search costs and store loyalty thus our study casts doubt on the advisability of blanket prohibition on price matching guarantees our argument relies only on consumer segmentation and on the phenomenon of periodic sales both of which are common in retail markets we arrive at our conclusion by incorporating bargain shoppers and opportunistic loyals into the standard sales promotion models in contrast the past literature on price matching guarantees ignores the ubiquitous phenomenon of sales in retail markets and overlooks those consumers who prefer to shop at a particular store but are alert to saving opportunities as a result it is troubled by two awkward conclusions on the one hand price matching guarantees simply remove rivals incentives to undercut in price and hence also their incentives to run sales this implies that the adoption of price matching guarantees in a market will eliminate the phenomenon of sales which is obviously counterfactual on the other hand in equilibrium no consumer actually invokes price matching guarantees as each player has incentives to close any price gap in the market this is obviously false based on our casual observations and our conversations with store managers theoretical research on the subject thus far has been overwhelmingly one sided and empirical or experimental studies are conspicuously lacking we hope that our conclusion will spark further research in both directions a healthy debate will broaden our perspective on an issue of great importance in formulating public policies and in managerial decision making