Market competition between duopolists can result in stable coexistence rather than bankruptcy
the verdict
SUPPORTED
the evidence backs this
refutedsupported
the weight of evidence
2 sources for · 0 against
Economic models demonstrate that competing duopolists can achieve stable market equilibria and avoid bankruptcy under various conditions or regulatory frameworks.
This paper focuses on the interaction between regulation and competition in an industrial organisation model. We analyse how capital requirements affect the profitability of two banks that compete as Cournot duopolists on a market for loans. Bank management of both banks choose optimal levels of loans provided, equity ratio and effort to reduce loan losses so as to maximise profits. It is shown that the introduction of a just binding capital constraint improves the profitability of the constrained bank, whereas the profitability of its unrestricted competitor declines. Especially, if an inefficient bank chooses a strategy that might result in bankruptcy, capital requirements are welfare improving. However, also under conditions that both banks would also never default in the absence of regulation, mild capital requirements can be beneficial as they stimulate banks to provide more loans. Too high requirements on the other hand relatively favour the inefficient bank, and result in welfare losses.
This paper focuses on the interaction between regulation and competition in an industrial organisation model. We analyse how capital requirements affect the profitability of two banks that compete as Cournet duopolists on a market for loans. Bank management of both banks choose optimal levels of loans provided, equity ratio and effort to reduce loan losses so as to maximise profits. From the regulator's point of view, the free market solution is not optimal as private banks do not take into account the consumer surplus and the social cost of bankruptcy (financial stability aspects). It is shown that capital requirements may improve welfare, even under conditions that both banks would never default. Moreover, we find that higher capital requirements impose a higher burden on the inefficient bank than on the efficient one, even though the requirement may only be binding for the efficient bank. If the inefficient bank chooses a strategy that might result in bankrutpcy, capital requirements are particularly welfare improving.
Everything we examined (2)
This check searched the claim as stated. It did not run a separate search for evidence against it.