The common wisdom is that a retailer suffers when its wholesale supplier encroaches on the retailer's operations by selling directly to final consumers. We demonstrate that the retailer can benefit from encroachment even when encroachment admits no synergies and does not facilitate product differentiation or price discrimination. The retailer benefits because encroachment induces the encroaching supplier to reduce the wholesale price in order not to diminish unduly the retailer's demand for the manufacturer's wholesale product. The lower wholesale price and increased downstream competition mitigate double marginalization problems and promote efficiency gains that can secure Pareto improvements.channels of distribution, encroachment, market entry, retailing and wholesaling

This article identifies some of the major issues that have been examined in the literature on incentives. The article begins by discussing the frictions that lie at the heart of incentive problems. Next, the principal's optimal response to these frictions is explored, taking as given the characteristics of the agents with whom the principal interacts in a nonrepeated setting. The design of individualized contracts, contests, and tournaments is analyzed. Then, the principal's task of selecting the best agent is addressed, and repeated agency relationships are considered.

The optimal strategy of the principal is examined in an enviro mLat there are (ex post) limitations on the maximum penalty that can be irpoedon a risk-neutral agent. Contrary to the case in which such limitaicons are not imposed, it is in the principal's interest to deliberately forego the opportunity to induce socially efficient behavior, and to insta-d design a contract that induces the agent to realize an efficient outcone only Ti the most productive state of nature and (perhaps) in certain very unproductive states. The properties of the contract are examined in detail, Journal of Economic Literature Classification Numbers: 022, 026, 610.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

In this paper, the choice between public and private provision of goods and services is considered. In practice, both modes of operation involve significant delegation of authority, and thus appear quite similar in some respects. The argument here is that the main difference between the two modes concerns the transactions costs faced by the government when attempting to intervene in the delegated production activities. Such intervention is generally less costly under public ownership than under private ownership. The greater ease of intervention under public ownership can have its advantages; but the tact that a promise not to intervene is more credible under private production can also have beneficial incentive effects, The Fundamental Privatization Theorem (analogous to The Fundamental Theorem of Welfare Economics) is presented, providing conditions under which government production cannot improve upon private production. The restrictiveness of these conditions is evaluated.

No abstract