| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Rev Fin 1993; 6:733-764
© 1993 the Society for Financial Studies
Article |
Auctions of divisible goods: on the rationale for the treasury experiment
1 Olin School of Business, Washington University in St. Louis, St Louis, MO 63130, USA
2 University of Utah, USA
z Corresponding author
Abstract
We compare a sealed-bid uniform-price auction (the Treasury's experimental format) with a sealed bid discriminatory auction (the Treasury's format heretofore), assuming the good is perfectly divisible. We show that the auction theory that prompted the experiment, which assumes single-unit demands, does not adequately describe the bidding game for Treasury securities. Collusive strategies are self-enforcing in uniform-price divisible-good auctions. In these equilibria, the seller's expected revenue is lower than in equilibria of discriminatory auctions.
![]()
CiteULike
Connotea
Del.icio.us What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
O. Sade, C. Schnitzlein, and J. F. Zender Competition and Cooperation in Divisible Good Auctions: An Experimental Examination Rev. Financ. Stud., March 1, 2006; 19(1): 195 - 235. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
I. Kremer and K. G. Nyborg Underpricing and Market Power in Uniform Price Auctions Rev. Financ. Stud., July 1, 2004; 17(3): 849 - 877. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
K. G. Nyborg and I. A. Strebulaev Multiple Unit Auctions and Short Squeezes Rev. Financ. Stud., April 1, 2004; 17(2): 545 - 580. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
