2012Unpublished venueRequires access

Strategic Brand Proliferation: Monopoly vs. Duopoly ∗

Kentaro Inomata

Open publisher page 2 citations

Abstract

This paper investigates the possibility that market competition may encourage a rm to proliferate its brand. To show this, using the multiproduct rm (MPF) model, we compare the incentive in monopoly with the one in duopoly. We nd that if rms compete in quantity and provide close substitutes, the incentive may be greater in duopoly than in monopoly. This is because the MPF brands may act as complements to each other in oligopoly, whereas they always act as substitutes in monopoly. This result is contrary to that of Judd [RAND J. Econ 16 (1985) 153].

About this research paper

What this paper is about

This paper investigates the possibility that market competition may encourage a rm to proliferate its brand. To show this, using the multiproduct rm (MPF) model, we compare the incentive in monopoly with the one in duopoly. We nd that if rms compete in quantity and provide close substitutes, the incentive may be greater in duopoly than in monopoly. This is because the MPF brands may act as complements to each other in oligopoly, whereas they always act as substitutes in monopoly. This result is contrary to that of Judd [RAND J. Econ 16 (1985) 153].

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 2 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

This paper investigates the possibility that market competition may encourage a rm to proliferate its brand. To show this, using the multiproduct rm (MPF) model, we compare the incentive in monopoly with the one in duopoly. We nd that if rms compete in quantity and provide close substitutes, the incentive may be greater in duopoly than in monopoly. This is because the MPF brands may act as complements to each other in oligopoly, whereas they always act as substitutes in monopoly. This result is contrary to that of Judd [RAND J. Econ 16 (1985) 153].

Key concepts: Duopoly, Monopoly, Oligopoly, Incentive, Competition (biology), Microeconomics, Economics, Strategic complements

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Strategic Brand Proliferation: Monopoly vs. Duopoly ∗ — Research Paper | ScholarLens