To make high-quality research more accessible and easier to explore.

Fields:
7 results

Unlimited Liability as a Barrier to Entry

Journal of Political Economy 1988 96(4), 766-784
Many but not all firms have the freedom to choose liability rules. In some countries, service professions have unlimited liability rules imposed by government; historically, banks in some countries faced unlimited liability. Why do governments impose unlimited liability? This is the question we address. With a simple model, we illustrate the agency conflicts in firms. Limited liability solves these conflicts efficiently. Unlimited liability raises the cost of capital; inefficiently small firms result. But under some conditions, selectively applied unlimited liability rules protect rents. We test several propositions with data on Scottish banking and U.S. law firms

Unlimited Liability as a Barrier to Entry

Journal of Political Economy 1988 96(4), 766-784
Many, but not all, firms have the freedom to choose liability rules. In some countries, service professions have unlimited liability rules imposed by government; historically, banks in some countries faced unlimited liability. Why do governments impose unlimited liability? This is the question the authors address. With a simple model, they illustrate the agency conflicts in firms. Limited liability solves these conflicts efficiently. Unlimited liability raises the cost of capital; inefficiently small firms result. But under some conditions, selectively-applied unlimited liability rules protect rents. The authors test several propositions with data on Scottish banking and U.S. law firms.

The Competitive Effects of Vertical Agreements: Comment

American Economic Review 2016
Recent economic analyses of vertical restraints and integration emphasize the circumstances under which these arrangements are socially efficient. Efficiency claims have proven contentious, however, for exclusive dealing, a vertical restraint that prohibits any outlet carrying a manufacturer's product from stocking substitute brands. This paper analyzes the impact of exclusive dealing on competition and allocative efficiency. Opinions expressed on the impact of exclusive dealing range from the extreme view that it is invariably anticompetitive, to the view that it is always procompetitive. The U.S. Supreme Court has concluded that in hundreds if not thousands of communities where there is a single retailer for a product,