:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
題名:商品組合、產品品質與相容程度
作者:潘仕剛
作者(外文):Shih-Kang Pan
校院名稱:國立中正大學
系所名稱:國際經濟研究所
指導教授:崔曉倩
學位類別:博士
出版日期:2012
主題關鍵詞:商品組合參入策略產品品質相容程度
原始連結:連回原系統網址new window
相關次數:
  • 被引用次數被引用次數:期刊(0) 博士論文(0) 專書(0) 專書論文(0)
  • 排除自我引用排除自我引用:0
  • 共同引用共同引用:0
  • 點閱點閱:40
本文以探討「不同廠商的商品組合」為核心,共分三個研究主題,分別是「商品組合的參入與阻止參入」、「商品組合與產品品質」以及「商品組合與深化相容程度」三部份。
第二章為「商品組合的參入與阻止參入」,本章嘗試從參入者的角度出發 (以臺灣的行動電信產業為對象),探討參入廠商在參入之際,是否可以考慮選擇以商品組合的方式 (手機搭配門號的行銷方式) 作為其參入的策略?既存廠商在面對參入廠商的參入時,能否利用商品組合作為阻止參入的策略?以及參入廠商是否可能利用商品組合將既存廠商趕出市場?研究結果顯示,參入廠商於參入之際若能選擇一互補性的商品並與互補性商品的廠商從事組合商品組合 (台灣大哥大以手機搭配門號的策略參入行動電信市場),不論就其本身的利潤或被搭售財貨廠商的利潤而言,參入廠商採取商品組合策略較不採取為佳,因此,參入廠商可以利用商品組合做為參入的策略。另外,既存廠商 (中華電信) 無法利用商品組合阻止參入廠商的參入,同樣的,參入廠商亦無法利用商品組合將既存廠商趕出市場。
第三章為「商品組合與產品品質」,本章嘗試將商品組合與財貨品質的決定放在一起討論,探討廠商之間在決定從事商品組合時,商品組合是否一定會影響財貨的品質水準?如果是,政府在考量消費者剩餘與整體社會福利水準之下,是否需要對不同廠商的商品組合行為加以限制?研究結果顯示,若不考慮合作廠商的因素,商品組合將降低財貨的品質水準;若考慮合作廠商的因素,商品組合則不一定會降低財貨的品質水準,如果兩財貨的替代性較低時,商品組合會降低財貨的品質水準;如果兩財貨約略屬於中等替代的程度時,商品組合不會改變財貨的品質水準。在消費者剩餘與整體社會福利水準方面,我們證明了,在商品組合可行的範圍之下,無論商品組合是否會導致品質水準的改變,都將提高消費者剩餘與整體社會福利水準。
第四章為「商品組合與深化相容程度」,本章嘗試將商品組合與相容程度結合起來討論,探討這兩種特徵之間有何關聯存在?若把另一財貨的市場結構考慮進來,商品組合對深化相容程度的影響為何?另外,存在系統相容性之下,商品組合對消費者剩餘與社會福利水準的影響為何?最後,政府在考量社會福利最大時,是否需要獎勵具系統相容性的廠商?研究結果顯示,若另一財貨的廠商為獨佔廠商,則採取商品組合為具系統相容性廠商的優勢策略,但最終均衡會隨獨佔廠商的價格與獨佔廠商的成本之間的差距而有所不同,此時若兩家具系統相容性的廠商皆採取商品組合,將有助於深化 (提高) 系統相容的程度。其次,若另一財貨的廠商為完全競爭廠商,則具系統相容性的廠商是否有採取商品組合,其所得到的利潤幾近相同,此時若兩家具系統相容性的廠商仍皆採取商品組合,對於系統相容程度的影響微乎其微。接著,不論另一財貨的廠商為何種市場的廠商,在商品組合可行之下,商品組合並不會減少消費者剩餘與整體社會福利水準。最後,在所有可能的最終均衡之下,具系統相容性的廠商其最適的系統相容程度皆低於社會福利最大的系統相容程度,倘若政府想要給予獎勵以提高相容程度,則最適的獎勵比例需因情況不同而有所不同。
參考文獻


中文部分
石以欣 (2002),《我國行動通信市場占有率決定因素之研究》,國立台北大學經濟學研究所碩士論文。
行政院公平交易委員會網站 http://www.ftc.gov.tw/internet/main/index.aspx。
邱永和 (2004),《網路資訊經濟學》,台北:雙葉書廊。
陳正倉、林惠玲、陳忠榮、莊春發 (2007),《產業經濟學》,台北:雙葉書廊。
陳信宏、陳佳珍與劉孟俊 (2004),「臺灣電信自由化效益之產業經濟定量分析 -以行動電話與國際電話市場為例」,《經社法制論叢》,34,199-230。
楊宏暉 (2004),「搭售行為之法律分析」,《公平交易季刊》,12,99-168。new window
廖俊雄與許心怡 (2003),「寡占電信市場行銷組合訂價策略之研究」,《公平交易季刊》,11,111-148。
廖俊雄與許心怡 (2004),「Stackelberg 競爭下行銷組合定價策略之福利分析」,《經濟研究》,40,97-129。
鍾暳陵、林燕淑與黃鴻 (2011),「進口競爭、廠商搭售與研發」,《經濟論文》,39,279-305。new window


英文部分
Adams, W. J., and J. L. Yellen (1976), “Commodity Bundling and the Burden of Monopoly,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, 90, 475-498.
Bagwell, G., and M. H. Riordan (1991), “High and Declining Prices Signal Product Quality,” American Economic Review, 81, 224-239.
Bakos, Y., and E. Brynjolfsson (1999), “Bundling Information Goods: Pricing, Profits, and Efficiency,” Management Science, 45, 1613-1630.
Carbajo, J. D., D. De Meza., and D. J. Seidmann (1990), “A Strategic Motivation for Commodity Bundling,” Journal of Industrial Economics, 38, 283-298.
Carlton, D. W., and M. Waldman (2002), “The Strategic Use of Tying to Preserve and Create Market Power in Evolving Industries,” RAND Journal of Economics, 33, 194–220.
Chae, S. (1992), “Bundling Subscription TV Shannels: A Case of Natural Bundling,” International Journal of Industrial Organization, 10, 213-230.
Chakraborty, I. (2006), “Bundle and Separate Sales in Auctions with Entry,” Games and Economic Behavior, 54, 31-46.
Chen, Y. M. (1997), “Equilibrium Product Bundling,” Journal of Business, 70, 85-103.
Choi, J. P. (2003), “Bundling New Products with Old to Signal Quality, with Application to the Sequencing of New Products,” International Journal of Industrial Organization, 21, 1179-1200.
Choi, J. P. (2004), “Tying and Innovation: A Dynamic Analysis of Tying Arrangements,” Economics Journal, 114, 83-101.
Choi, J. P. (2008), “Mergers with Bundling in Complementary Markets,” Journal of Industrial Economics, 56, 553-577.
Choi, J. P., G. Lee, and C. Stefanadis (2003), “The Effects of Integration on R&D Incentives in Systems Markets,” Netnomics, 5, 21-32.
Choi, J. P., and C. Stefanadis (2001), “Tying, Investment, and the Dynamic Leverage Theory,” RAND Journal of Economics, 32, 52-71.
Cremer, J., P. Rey, and J. Tirole (2000), “Connectivity in the Commercial Internet,” Journal of Industrial Economics, 48, 433-472.
Dansby, R. E., and C. Conrad (1984), “Commodity Bundling,” American Economic Reviews, 74, 377-381.
Dixit, A. (1979), “A Model of Duopoly Suggesting A Theory of Entry Barriers,” Bell Journal of Economics, 10, 20-32.
Economides, N. (1993), “Mixed Bundling in Duopoly,” Working paper EC-93-29, Stern School of Business, New York University.
Foros, ., and B. Hansen (2001), “Competition and Compatibility among Internet Service Providers,” Information Economics and Policy, 13, 411-425.
Gabszewicz, J., and J. Thisse (1979), “Price Competition, Quality and Income Disparities,” Journal of Economics Theory, 20, 327-359.
Gans, J., and S. King (2006), “Paying for Loyalty: Product Bundling in Oligopoly,” Journal of Industrial Economics, 54, 43-62.
Garella, P. G.., and E. Petrakis (2008), “Minimum Quality Standards and Consumers' Information,” Economic Theory, 36, 283-302.
Ginsburgh, V., and I. Zang (2007), “Bundling by Competitors and the Sharing of Profits,” Economics Bulletin, 12, 1-9.
Grimes, W. S. (1994), “Antitrust Tie-In Analysis After Kodak : Understanding The Role of Market Information,” Antitrust Law Journal, 62, 263-325.
Guiltinan, J. P. (1987), “The Price Bundling of Services : A Normative Framework,” Journal of Marketing, 51, 74-85.
Ji, H. S., and I. Daitoh (2008), “Interconnection Agreement between Internet Service Providers and the Optimal Policy Intervention: The Case of Cournot-Type Competition Under Network Externalities,” Japanese Economic Review, 59, 228-240.
Katz, M. L., and C. Shapiro (1985), “Network Externalities, Competition and Compatibility,” American Economic Review, 75, 424-440.
Lewbel, A. (1985), “Bundling of Substitutes or Complement,” International Journal of Industrial Organization, 3, 101-107.
Martin, S. (1999), “Strategic and Welfare Implications of Bundling,” Economics Letters, 62, 371-376.
Maruyama, M., and K. Minamikawa (2009), “Vertical Integration, Bundled Discounts and Welfare,” Information Economics and Policy, 21, 62-71.
Matutes, C., and P. Regibeau (1988), “Mix and Match: Product Compatibility without Network Externalities,” RAND Journal of Economics, 19, 221-234.
Matutes, C., and P. Regibeau (1992), “Compatibility and Bundling of Complementary Goods in a Duopoly,” Journal of Industrial Economics, 40, 37-54.
McAfee, R. P., J. McMillan, and M. D. Whinston (1989), “Multiproduct Monopoly, Commodity Bundling and Correlation of Values,” Quarterly Journal of
Economics, 104, 371-383.
Nalebuff, B. (2004), “Bundling as an Entry Barrier” Quarterly Journal of
Economics, 119, 159-187.
Paroush, J., and Y. C. Peles (1981), “A Combined Monopoly and Optimal Packaging,” European Economic Review, 15, 373-383.
Peitz, M. (2008), “Bundling may Blockade Entry,” International Journal of Industrial Organization, 26, 41-58.
Rohlfs, J. (1974), “A Theory of Interdependent Demand for a Communications Service,”. Bell Journal of Economics, 5, 16-37.
Salinger, M. A. (1995), “A Graphical Analysis of Bundling,” Journal of Business, 68, 85-98.
Schmalensee, R. (1984), “Guassian Demand and Commodity Bundling,” Journal of Business, 57, 211-230.
Shy, O. (1995), Industrial Organization. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
Spector, D. (2007), “Bundling, Tying, and Collusion,” International Journal of Industrial Organization, 25, 575-581.
Spence, A. M. (1976), “Product Differentiation and Welfare,” American Economic Reviews, 66, 407-414.
Tirole, J. (1988), The Theory of Industrial Organization. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
Whinston, M.D. (1990), “Tying, Foreclosure, and Exclusion,” American Economic Reviews, 80, 837-869.
Wolinsky, A. (1983), “Price as Signals of Product Quality,” Reviews of Economics Studies, 50, 647-658.

 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
QR Code
QRCODE