Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cca/wpaper/312.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Bargaining over a Divisible Good in the Market for Lemons

Author

Listed:
  • Dino Gerardi
  • Lucas Maestri
Abstract
A seller dynamically sells a divisible good to a buyer. It is common knowledge that there are gains from trade and that the gains per unit are decreasing. Payoffs are interdependent as in Akerlof's market for lemons. The seller is informed about the good's quality. The buyer makes an offer in every period and learns about the good's quality only through the seller's behavior. We characterize the stationary equilibrium when the time between offers is small. The owner of a high-quality good sells it in dribs and drabs, whereas the owner of a low-quality good constantly randomizes between selling small pieces and accepting an offer for all the remaining units. We use this characterization to analyze the limiting equilibrium outcome as the good becomes more divisible. We prove that there is slow trading: a valuable good is smoothly sold over time. In contrast, the good is never partially sold when gains per unit are increasing.

Suggested Citation

  • Dino Gerardi & Lucas Maestri, 2013. "Bargaining over a Divisible Good in the Market for Lemons," Carlo Alberto Notebooks 312, Collegio Carlo Alberto.
    • Handle: RePEc:cca:wpaper:312
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.carloalberto.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/no.312.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Fuchs, William & Öry, Aniko & Skrzypacz, Andrzej, 2016. "Transparency and distressed sales under asymmetric information," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 11(3), September.
    2. Diego Moreno & John Wooders, 2010. "Decentralized Trade Mitigates The Lemons Problem," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 51(2), pages 383-399, May.
    3. Vincent, Daniel R., 1989. "Bargaining with common values," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 47-62, June.
    4. Camargo, Braz & Lester, Benjamin, 2014. "Trading dynamics in decentralized markets with adverse selection," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 153(C), pages 534-568.
    5. Drew Fudenberg & Jean Tirole, 1991. "Game Theory," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262061414, April.
    6. William Fuchs & Andrzej Skrzypacz, 2019. "Costs and benefits of dynamic trading in a lemons market," Review of Economic Dynamics, Elsevier for the Society for Economic Dynamics, vol. 33, pages 105-127, July.
    7. Kim, Kyungmin, 2017. "Information about sellers' past behavior in the market for lemons," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 169(C), pages 365-399.
    8. Gerardi, Dino & Hörner, Johannes & Maestri, Lucas, 2014. "The role of commitment in bilateral trade," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 154(C), pages 578-603.
    9. Johannes Hörner & Nicolas Vieille, 2009. "Public vs. Private Offers in the Market for Lemons," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 77(1), pages 29-69, January.
    10. Robert Evans, 1989. "Sequential Bargaining with Correlated Values," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 56(4), pages 499-510.
    11. Raymond Deneckere & Meng-Yu Liang, 2006. "Bargaining with Interdependent Values," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 74(5), pages 1309-1364, September.
    12. Thomas Philippon & Vasiliki Skreta, 2012. "Optimal Interventions in Markets with Adverse Selection," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 102(1), pages 1-28, February.
    13. Samuelson, William F, 1984. "Bargaining under Asymmetric Information," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 52(4), pages 995-1005, July.
    14. Anat R. Admati & Motty Perry, 1991. "Joint Projects without Commitment," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 58(2), pages 259-276.
    15. Gul, Faruk & Sonnenschein, Hugo & Wilson, Robert, 1986. "Foundations of dynamic monopoly and the coase conjecture," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 155-190, June.
    16. Inderst, Roman, 2005. "Matching markets with adverse selection," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 121(2), pages 145-166, April.
    17. Gul, Faruk & Sonnenschein, Hugo, 1988. "On Delay in Bargaining with One-Sided Uncertainty," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 56(3), pages 601-611, May.
    18. Moreno, Diego & Wooders, John, 2016. "Dynamic markets for lemons: performance, liquidity, and policy intervention," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 11(2), May.
    19. Ausubel, Lawrence M & Deneckere, Raymond J, 1992. "Bargaining and the Right to Remain Silent," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 60(3), pages 597-625, May.
    20. Fuchs, William & Skrzypacz, Andrzej, 2013. "Bridging the gap: Bargaining with interdependent values," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 148(3), pages 1226-1236.
    21. Olivier Compte & Philippe Jehiel, 2004. "Gradualism in Bargaining and Contribution Games," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 71(4), pages 975-1000.
    22. Ayça Kaya & Kyungmin Kim, 2018. "Trading Dynamics with Private Buyer Signals in the Market for Lemons," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 85(4), pages 2318-2352.
    23. Brendan Daley & Brett Green, 2012. "Waiting for News in the Market for Lemons," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 80(4), pages 1433-1504, July.
    24. Ashcraft, Adam B. & Schuermann, Til, 2008. "Understanding the Securitization of Subprime Mortgage Credit," Foundations and Trends(R) in Finance, now publishers, vol. 2(3), pages 191-309, June.
    25. Drew Fudenberg & David K. Levine & Jean Tirole, 1985. "Infinite-Horizon Models of Bargaining with One-Sided Incomplete Information," Levine's Working Paper Archive 1098, David K. Levine.
    26. Ortner, Juan, 2017. "Durable goods monopoly with stochastic costs," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 12(2), May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Jean Tirole, 2016. "From Bottom of the Barrel to Cream of the Crop: Sequential Screening With Positive Selection," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 84(4), pages 1291-1343, July.
    2. Guillaume Rocheteau & Lucie Lebeau & Tai-Wei Hu & Younghwan In, 2018. "Gradual Bargaining in Decentralized Asset Markets," Working Papers 181904, University of California-Irvine, Department of Economics.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Camargo, Braz & Lester, Benjamin, 2014. "Trading dynamics in decentralized markets with adverse selection," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 153(C), pages 534-568.
    2. Barsanetti, Bruno & Camargo, Braz, 2022. "Signaling in dynamic markets with adverse selection," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 206(C).
    3. Bilancini, Ennio & Boncinelli, Leonardo, 2016. "Dynamic adverse selection and the supply size," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 233-242.
    4. Hwang, Ilwoo, 2018. "Dynamic trading with developing adverse selection," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 176(C), pages 761-802.
    5. Tsoy, Anton, 2018. "Alternating-offer bargaining with the global games information structure," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 13(2), May.
    6. Heng Liu, 2020. "Deadlines in the market for lemons," Economic Theory Bulletin, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 8(2), pages 305-323, October.
    7. Kim, Kyungmin, 2017. "Information about sellers' past behavior in the market for lemons," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 169(C), pages 365-399.
    8. Hwang, Ilwoo & Li, Fei, 2017. "Transparency of outside options in bargaining," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 167(C), pages 116-147.
    9. Fuchs, William & Skrzypacz, Andrzej, 2015. "Government interventions in a dynamic market with adverse selection," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 158(PA), pages 371-406.
    10. William Fuchs & Andrzej Skrzypacz, 2019. "Costs and benefits of dynamic trading in a lemons market," Review of Economic Dynamics, Elsevier for the Society for Economic Dynamics, vol. 33, pages 105-127, July.
    11. Vincent Maurin, 2016. "Liquidity Fluctuations in Over the Counter Markets," 2016 Meeting Papers 218, Society for Economic Dynamics.
    12. Abreu, Dilip & Pearce, David G. & Stacchetti, Ennio, 2015. "One-sided uncertainty and delay in reputational bargaining," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 10(3), September.
    13. Hwang, Ilwoo, 2018. "A theory of bargaining deadlock," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 501-522.
    14. Manuel Adelino & Kristopher Gerardi & Barney Hartman-Glaser, 2016. "Are Lemons Sold First? Dynamic Signaling in the Mortgage Market," FRB Atlanta Working Paper 2016-8, Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta.
    15. Ortner, Juan, 2023. "Bargaining with evolving private information," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 18(3), July.
    16. Vincent Maurin, 2022. "Liquidity Fluctuations in Over‐the‐Counter Markets," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 77(2), pages 1325-1369, April.
    17. Marilyn Pease & Kyungmin Kim, 2014. "Costly Search with Adverse Selection: Solicitation Curse vs. Accelerating Blessing," 2014 Meeting Papers 816, Society for Economic Dynamics.
    18. Palazzo, Francesco, 2017. "Search costs and the severity of adverse selection," Research in Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(1), pages 171-197.
    19. Kaya, Ayça & Roy, Santanu, 2022. "Market screening with limited records," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 106-132.
    20. Jean Tirole, 2016. "From Bottom of the Barrel to Cream of the Crop: Sequential Screening With Positive Selection," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 84(4), pages 1291-1343, July.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    bargaining; divisible objects; interdependent valuations; market for lemons.;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C78 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Bargaining Theory; Matching Theory
    • D82 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Asymmetric and Private Information; Mechanism Design

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:cca:wpaper:312. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Giovanni Bert (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/fccaait.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.