The Better Half of Selling Separately

Sergiu Hart,Philip J. Reny

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1145/3369927

2018-10-27

Abstract:Separate selling of two independent goods is shown to yield at least 62% of the optimal revenue, and at least 73% when the goods satisfy the Myerson regularity condition. This improves the 50% result of Hart and Nisan (2017, originally circulated in 2012).

Computer Science and Game Theory,Theoretical Economics

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

A Note on Approximate Revenue Maximization with Two Items

Ron Kupfer

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1712.03518

2017-12-10

Abstract:We consider the problem of maximizing revenue when selling 2 items to a single buyer with known valuation distributions. Hart and Nisan showed that selling each item separately using the optimal Myerson's price, gains at least half of the revenue attainable by optimal auction for two items. We show that in case the items have different revenues when sold separately the bound can be tightened.

Computer Science and Game Theory
On Revenue Maximization for Selling Multiple Independently Distributed Items.

Xinye Li,Andrew Chi-Chih Yao

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1309533110

IF: 11.1

2013-01-01

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences

Abstract:Consider the revenue-maximizing problem in which a single seller wants to sell k different items to a single buyer, who has independently distributed values for the items with additive valuation. The k = 1 case was completely resolved by Myerson's classical work in 1981, whereas for larger k the problem has been the subject of much research efforts ever since. Recently, Hart and Nisan analyzed two simple mechanisms: selling the items separately, or selling them as a single bundle. They showed that selling separately guarantees at least a c/log2 k fraction of the optimal revenue; and for identically distributed items, bundling yields at least a c/log k fraction of the optimal revenue. In this paper, we prove that selling separately guarantees at least c/log k fraction of the optimal revenue, whereas for identically distributed items, bundling yields at least a constant fraction of the optimal revenue. These bounds are tight (up to a constant factor), settling the open questions raised by Hart and Nisan. The results are valid for arbitrary probability distributions without restrictions. Our results also have implications on other interesting issues, such as monotonicity and randomization of selling mechanisms.
Approximate Revenue Maximization with Multiple Items

Sergiu Hart,Noam Nisan

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jet.2017.09.001

2017-12-25

Abstract:Maximizing the revenue from selling _more than one_ good (or item) to a single buyer is a notoriously difficult problem, in stark contrast to the one-good case. For two goods, we show that simple "one-dimensional" mechanisms, such as selling the goods separately, _guarantee_ at least 73% of the optimal revenue when the valuations of the two goods are independent and identically distributed, and at least $50\%$ when they are independent. For the case of $k>2$ independent goods, we show that selling them separately guarantees at least a $c/\log^2 k$ fraction of the optimal revenue; and, for independent and identically distributed goods, we show that selling them as one bundle guarantees at least a $c/\log k$ fraction of the optimal revenue. Additional results compare the revenues from the two simple mechanisms of selling the goods separately and bundled, identify situations where bundling is optimal, and extend the analysis to multiple buyers.

Computer Science and Game Theory,Theoretical Economics
A Note on the Ratio of Revenues Between Selling in a Bundle and Separately

Ron Kupfer

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1611.09613

2016-11-29

Abstract:We consider the problem of maximizing revenue when selling k items to a single buyer with known valuation distributions. We show that for a single, additive buyer whose valuations for for the items are distributed according to i.i.d. distributions which are known to the seller, the ratio of revenue from selling in a bundle to selling separately is at least 55.9% and this gap is attainable.

Computer Science and Game Theory
Bounding the Optimal Revenue of Selling Multiple Goods

Yiannis Giannakopoulos

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tcs.2015.03.010

2015-10-13

Abstract:Using duality theory techniques we derive simple, closed-form formulas for bounding the optimal revenue of a monopolist selling many heterogeneous goods, in the case where the buyer's valuations for the items come i.i.d. from a uniform distribution and in the case where they follow independent (but not necessarily identical) exponential distributions. We apply this in order to get in both these settings specific performance guarantees, as functions of the number of items $m$, for the simple deterministic selling mechanisms studied by Hart and Nisan [EC 2012], namely the one that sells the items separately and the one that offers them all in a single bundle. We also propose and study the performance of a natural randomized mechanism for exponential valuations, called Proportional. As an interesting corollary, for the special case where the exponential distributions are also identical, we can derive that offering the goods in a single full bundle is the optimal selling mechanism for any number of items. To our knowledge, this is the first result of its kind: finding a revenue-maximizing auction in an additive setting with arbitrarily many goods.

Computer Science and Game Theory
A Note on Selling Optimally Two Uniformly Distributed Goods

Yiannis Giannakopoulos

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1409.6925

2015-10-13

Abstract:We provide a new, much simplified and straightforward proof to a result of Pavlov [2011] regarding the revenue maximizing mechanism for selling two goods with uniformly i.i.d. valuations over intervals $[c,c+1]$, to an additive buyer. This is done by explicitly defining optimal dual solutions to a relaxed version of the problem, where the convexity requirement for the bidder's utility has been dropped. Their optimality comes directly from their structure, through the use of exact complementarity. For $c=0$ and $c\geq 0.092$ it turns out that the corresponding optimal primal solution is a feasible selling mechanism, thus the initial relaxation comes without a loss, and revenue maximality follows. However, for $0<c<0.092$ that's not the case, providing the first clear example where relaxing convexity provably does not come for free, even in a two-item regularly i.i.d. setting.

Computer Science and Game Theory
Selling Two Identical Objects

Sushil Bikhchandani,Debasis Mishra

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jet.2021.105397

2021-08-02

Abstract:It is well-known that optimal (i.e., revenue-maximizing) selling mechanisms in multidimensional type spaces may involve randomization. We obtain conditions under which deterministic mechanisms are optimal for selling two identical, indivisible objects to a single buyer. We analyze two settings: (i) decreasing marginal values (DMV) and (ii) increasing marginal values (IMV). Thus, the values of the buyer for the two units are not independent. We show that under a well-known condition on distributions~(due to McAfee and McMillan (1988)), (a) it is optimal to sell the first unit deterministically in the DMV model and (b) it is optimal to bundle (which is a deterministic mechanism) in the IMV model. Under a stronger sufficient condition on distributions, a deterministic mechanism is optimal in the DMV model. Our results apply to heterogeneous objects when there is a specified sequence in which the two objects must be sold.

Theoretical Economics,Computer Science and Game Theory
Bargaining Versus Posted-Price Selling

RQ Wang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0014-2921(95)90043-8

IF: 2.445

1995-01-01

European Economic Review

Abstract:Two popular selling methods - bargaining and posted-price selling - are compared here in a dynamic model. When bargaining costs no more than posted-price selling, we find that bargaining is always optimal. When bargaining costs more, however, bargaining is still preferred if and only if the common cost for both selling methods is large enough. We also find that an increase in the discount rate or the seller's bargaining power favors bargaining. Finally, we find that if the distribution becomes more dispersed and the increase in a buyer's valuation is sufficiently large, bargaining is more likely to be adopted.
Selling Complementary Goods: Dynamics, Efficiency and Revenue

Moshe Babaioff,Liad Blumrosen,Noam Nisan

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1706.00219

2017-06-01

Computer Science and Game Theory

Abstract:We consider a price competition between two sellers of perfect-complement goods. Each seller posts a price for the good it sells, but the demand is determined according to the sum of prices. This is a classic model by Cournot (1838), who showed that in this setting a monopoly that sells both goods is better for the society than two competing sellers. We show that non-trivial pure Nash equilibria always exist in this game. We also quantify Cournot's observation with respect to both the optimal welfare and the monopoly revenue. We then prove a series of mostly negative results regarding the convergence of best response dynamics to equilibria in such games.
A Simple and Approximately Optimal Mechanism for a Buyer with Complements

Alon Eden,Michal Feldman,Ophir Friedler,Inbal Talgam-Cohen,S. Matthew Weinberg

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1287/opre.2020.2039

IF: 2.7

2021-01-01

Operations Research

Abstract:Recent literature on approximately optimal revenue maximization has shown that in settings where agent valuations for items are complement free, the better of selling the items separately and bundling them together guarantees a constant fraction of the optimal revenue. However, most real-world settings involve some degree of complementarity among items. The role that complementarity plays in the trade-off of simplicity versus optimality has been an obvious missing piece of the puzzle. In “A Simple and Approximately Optimal Mechanism for a Buyer with Complements,” the authors show that the same simple selling mechanism—the better of selling separately and as a grand bundle—guarantees a $\Theta(d)$ fraction of the optimal revenue, where $d$ is a measure of the degree of complementarity. One key modeling contribution is a tractable notion of “degree of complementarity” that admits meaningful results and insights—they demonstrate that previous definitions fall short in this regard.

management,operations research & management science
Optimal mechanism design with resale via bargaining

Jun Zhang,Ruqu Wang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jet.2013.07.013

IF: 1.79

2013-01-01

Journal of Economic Theory

Abstract:In this paper, we examine the optimal mechanism design of selling an indivisible object to one regular buyer and one publicly known buyer, where inter-buyer resale cannot be prohibited. The resale market is modeled as a stochastic ultimatum bargaining game between the two buyers. We fully characterize an optimal mechanism under general conditions. Surprisingly, in this optimal mechanism, the seller never allocates the object to the regular buyer regardless of his bargaining power in the resale market. The seller sells only to the publicly known buyer, and reveals no additional information to the resale market. The possibility of resale causes the seller to sometimes hold back the object, which under our setup is never optimal if resale is prohibited. We find that the sellerʼs revenue is increasing in the publicly known buyerʼs bargaining power in the resale market. When the publicly known buyer has full bargaining power, Myersonʼs optimal revenue is achieved; when the publicly known buyer has no bargaining power, a conditionally efficient mechanism prevails.
Monotonic Mechanisms for Selling Multiple Goods

Ran Ben-Moshe,Sergiu Hart,Noam Nisan

2024-06-12

Abstract:Maximizing the revenue from selling two or more goods has been shown to require the use of $nonmonotonic$ mechanisms, where a higher-valuation buyer may pay less than a lower-valuation one. Here we show that the restriction to $monotonic$ mechanisms may not just lower the revenue, but may in fact yield only a $negligible$ $fraction$ of the maximal revenue; more precisely, the revenue from monotonic mechanisms is no more than k times the simple revenue obtainable by selling the goods separately, or bundled (where k is the number of goods), whereas the maximal revenue may be arbitrarily larger. We then study the class of monotonic mechanisms and its subclass of allocation-monotonic mechanisms, and obtain useful characterizations and revenue bounds.

Computer Science and Game Theory,Theoretical Economics
Simultaneous Auctions with Synergies and Common Values

Robert W. Rosenthal,Ruqu Wang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1006/game.1996.0093

IF: 1.265

1996-01-01

Games and Economic Behavior

Abstract:In this paper, we study a simultaneous-auction model with synergies, common values, and overlapping interests. We construct strategies in which bidders of different types randomize over different bid intervals and provide necessary and sufficient conditions for such strategies to form symmetric equilibria. Questions about seller's revenue and efficiency are addressed.Journal of Economic LiteratureClassification Number: D44.
Auctions Versus Posted-Price Selling

RQ WANG

IF: 10.7

1993-01-01

American Economic Review

Abstract:Two popular selling methods - posted-price selling and auctions - are compared here in an independent private-values model. Without auctioning costs, auctioning is always optimal. When auctioning is costly, auctions are still preferable if the marginal-revenue curve is sufficiently steep. The global steepness of the marginal-revenue curve is found to coincide with the dispersion around the mean for a number of standard distributions. Finally, the prices of the monopoly seller and of the social optimum are compared.
Equilibrium Selling Mechanisms

Yongmin Chen,Ruqu Wang

2004-01-01

Annals of economics and finance

Abstract:We consider the equilibrium choice of selling mechanisms by competing firms. For a model where a number of sellers choose sequentially between any two selling mechanisms, there is a unique (subgame perfect) equilibrium under fairly natural assumptions about the monotonicity and differences of the two mechanisms. All sellers choose the mechanism that has the higher per-seller surplus at a critical mass number of sellers. If a mechanism is efficient or is favored by the buyer in some strong sense, it will be selected as the equilibrium mechanism. Otherwise, the less efficient mechanism can emerge in equilibrium, even when the number of sellers is arbitrarily large. An increase in the number of sellers need not increase the buyer's surplus, and can sometimes lead to a less eiAcient equilibrium mechanism. When more than two selling mechanisms are available, however, the equilibrium may no long be unique; and there are usually multiple equilibria when sellers choose selling mechanisms simultaneously.
Optimal Mechanism Design with Speculation and Resale ∗

Jun Zhang,Ruqu Wang

2011-01-01

Abstract:In this paper, we examine the optimal mechanism design problem of selling an indivisible object to one regular buyer and one speculator, where inter-buyer resale cannot be prohibited. The resale market is modeled as a stochastic ultimatum bargaining game between the two buyers. We fully characterize the optimal mechanism under general conditions. Surprisingly, in the optimal mechanism, the seller never allocates the object to the regular buyer regardless of his bargaining power in the resale market. The seller sells only to the speculator, and reveals no additional information to the resale market. The possibility of resale causes the seller to sometimes hold back the object, which under our setup is never optimal if resale is prohibited. We find that the seller’s revenue is increasing in the speculator’s bargaining power in the resale market. When the speculator has full bargaining power, Myerson’s optimal revenue is achieved. When the speculator has no bargaining power, a conditional efficient mechanism prevails. Extension to the case of one speculator and many regular buyers is also discussed.
Separating Equilibria in a Continuous-Time Bargaining Model with Two-Sided Uncertainty

Ruqu Wang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s001820000037

2001-01-01

Abstract:In this paper, we analyze the class of all smooth separating sequential equilibria in a continuous-time bargaining model with two-sided uncertainty. Trade between players occurs whenever there is surplus to be shared and delay is used to signal their valuations. When the buyer and the seller have a common discount rate, we show that the final outcome is unique among all these equilibria: the difference between the highest possible buyer's valuation and the lowest possible seller's valuation always narrows down at a rate exactly equal to the discount rate. When their discount rates differ, the more patient side always reveals his valuation first in the unique smooth separating equilibrium.
A model of competing selling mechanisms

Yongmin Chen,Ruqu Wang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econlet.2004.03.029

IF: 1.469

2004-01-01

Economics Letters

Abstract:A model where sellers choose sequentially between any two selling mechanisms is studied. With monotonicity and minimum mechanism difference, there exists a unique equilibrium where all sellers choose the mechanism of higher per-seller surplus at a critical number of sellers.
Semi-Separable Mechanisms in Multi-Item Robust Screening

Shixin Wang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2408.13580

2024-08-24

Abstract:It is generally challenging to characterize the optimal selling mechanism even when the seller knows the buyer's valuation distributions in multi-item screening. An insightful and significant result in robust mechanism design literature is that if the seller knows only marginal distributions of the buyer's valuation, then separable mechanisms, in which all items are sold independently, are robustly optimal under the maximin revenue objectives. While the separable mechanism is simple to implement, the literature also indicates that separate selling can not guarantee any substantial fraction of the potential optimal revenue for given distributions. To design a simple mechanism with a good performance guarantee, we introduce a novel class of mechanisms, termed "semi-separable mechanism". In these mechanisms, the allocation and payment rule of each item is a function solely of the corresponding item's valuation, which retains the separable mechanism's practical simplicity. However, the design of the allocation and payment function is enhanced by leveraging the joint distributional information, thereby improving the performance guarantee against the hindsight optimal revenue. We establish that a semi-separable mechanism achieves the optimal performance ratio among all incentive-compatible and individually rational mechanisms when only marginal support information is known. This result demonstrates that the semi-separable mechanisms ensure both the interpretation and implementation simplicity, and performance superiority. Our framework is also applicable to scenarios where the seller possesses information about the aggregate valuations of product bundles within any given partition of the product set. Furthermore, our results also provide guidelines for the multi-item screening problem with non-standard ambiguity sets.

Theoretical Economics,Computer Science and Game Theory,Optimization and Control
Pricing to Maximize Revenue and Welfare Simultaneously in Large Markets

Elliot Anshelevich,Koushik Kar,Shreyas Sekar

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1610.04071

2016-10-13

Abstract:We study large markets with a single seller which can produce many types of goods, and many multi-minded buyers. The seller chooses posted prices for its many items, and the buyers purchase bundles to maximize their utility. For this setting, we consider the following questions: What fraction of the optimum social welfare does a revenue maximizing solution achieve? Are there pricing mechanisms which achieve both good revenue and good welfare simultaneously? To address these questions, we give efficient pricing schemes which are guaranteed to result in both good revenue and welfare, as long as the buyer valuations for the goods they desire have a nice (although reasonable) structure, e.g., that the aggregate buyer demand has a monotone hazard rate or is not too convex. We also show that our pricing schemes have implications for any pricing which achieves high revenue: specifically that even if the seller cares only about revenue, they can still ensure that their prices result in good social welfare without sacrificing profit. Our results holds for general multi-minded buyers in large markets; we also provide improved guarantees for the important special case of unit-demand buyers.

Computer Science and Game Theory

The Better Half of Selling Separately

A Note on Approximate Revenue Maximization with Two Items

On Revenue Maximization for Selling Multiple Independently Distributed Items.

Approximate Revenue Maximization with Multiple Items

A Note on the Ratio of Revenues Between Selling in a Bundle and Separately

Bounding the Optimal Revenue of Selling Multiple Goods

A Note on Selling Optimally Two Uniformly Distributed Goods

Selling Two Identical Objects

Bargaining Versus Posted-Price Selling

Selling Complementary Goods: Dynamics, Efficiency and Revenue

A Simple and Approximately Optimal Mechanism for a Buyer with Complements

Optimal mechanism design with resale via bargaining

Monotonic Mechanisms for Selling Multiple Goods

Simultaneous Auctions with Synergies and Common Values

Auctions Versus Posted-Price Selling

Equilibrium Selling Mechanisms

Optimal Mechanism Design with Speculation and Resale ∗

Separating Equilibria in a Continuous-Time Bargaining Model with Two-Sided Uncertainty

A model of competing selling mechanisms

Semi-Separable Mechanisms in Multi-Item Robust Screening

Pricing to Maximize Revenue and Welfare Simultaneously in Large Markets