Vertical Mergers and Competition with a Regulated Bottleneck Monopoly

dc.contributor.authorAlexander Galetovic
dc.contributor.authorRicardo Sanhueza
dc.coverage.spatialBolivia
dc.date.accessioned2026-03-22T15:45:06Z
dc.date.available2026-03-22T15:45:06Z
dc.date.issued2009
dc.descriptionCitaciones: 5
dc.description.abstractAbstract Consider a bottleneck monopoly whose access charge is regulated above marginal cost and produces an essential input used by an oligopoly of downstream firms. Should the monopolist be allowed to vertically integrate into the downstream market? Policy makers often argue that the vertically integrated subsidiary enjoys an undue advantage, because it receives access at marginal cost. We show that there is no undue advantage.With perfect competition downstream vertical integration is irrelevant because the subsidiary substitutes downstream output one-to-one and faces a per-unit opportunity cost equal to the access charge.With an oligopoly consumers and the bottleneck monopoly gain with vertical integration. By contrast, competitors lose oligopolistic rents. Social welfare increases, unless output is redistributed towards a very inefficient vertically integrated firm.
dc.identifier.doi10.2202/1935-1682.2105
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.2202/1935-1682.2105
dc.identifier.urihttps://andeanlibrary.org/handle/123456789/54196
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherDe Gruyter
dc.relation.ispartofThe B E Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy
dc.sourceUniversidad de Los Andes
dc.subjectMonopoly
dc.subjectVertical integration
dc.subjectOligopoly
dc.subjectDownstream (manufacturing)
dc.subjectBottleneck
dc.subjectMarginal cost
dc.subjectEconomics
dc.subjectIndustrial organization
dc.subjectCompetition (biology)
dc.subjectEconomic rent
dc.titleVertical Mergers and Competition with a Regulated Bottleneck Monopoly
dc.typearticle

Files