Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Optimal Dynamic Pricing in an Oligopolistic Market: a Survey

  • Conference paper
Dynamic Games and Applications in Economics

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Economics and Mathematical Systems ((LNE,volume 265))

Abstract

The article deals with some important issues in relation to the determination of optimal pricing policies in an oligopolistic market. This problem has been approached by using different bodies of research, e.g. economic theory, marketing science and game theory. However, many models are still inadequate in their treatment of the dynamics of pricing as well as the problems of competitive interactions.

We give a statement of the actual and potential contributions from the different areas of research mentioned and review a series of models which offerS prescriptions for the pricing manager in a dynamic, oligopolistic environment.

“OZigopoly theory began with Cournot, more than 140 years ago. Judging from many intermediate textbooks on price theory, one might think it ended with him too” James W. Friedman “Oligopoly Theory”

This work was supported by NATO Research Grant No. 121/84.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aizenman, J. (1984), “Optimal Price Adjustment with Time Dependent Costs,” Working Paper No. 1319, National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, MA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bain, J. (1949), “A Note on Pricing in Monopoly and Oligopoly,” American Economic Review, vol. 39, pp. 448–464.

    Google Scholar 

  • Basar, T. (1973), “On the Relative Leadership Property of Stackel-berg Strategies,” Journal of Optimization Theory and Applications, vol. 11, pp. 655–661.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bass, F.M. (1969), “A New Product Growth Model for Consumer Durables,” Management Science, vol. 15, pp. 215–227.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bass, F.M. (1980), “The Relationship Between Diffusion Rates, Experience Curves and Demand Elasticities for Consumer Durable Technological Innovations,” Journal of Business, vol. 53, No. 3, Part 2, pp. 51–67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bass, F.M. and A.V. Bultez (1982), “A Note on Optimal Strategic Pricing of Technological Innovations,” Marketing Science, vol. 1, No. 4, pp. 371–378.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bass, F.M. and R.C. Rao (1983), “Equilibrium Dynamic Pricing of New Products in Oligopolies: Theory and Evidence,” Working Paper No. 10-8-83, University of Texas at Dallas.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bourguignon, F. and S.P. Sethi (19.81), “Dynamic Optimal Pricing and (Possibly) Advertising in the Face of Various Kinds of Potential Entrants,” Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, vol. 3, No. 2, pp. 119–140.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bondt, R.R. de (1977), “On the Effects of Retarded Entry,” European Economic Review, vol. 9, pp. 361–371.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bürk, R. (1976), “A Note on Dynamic Duopoly and the Amoroso-Robinson Relation,” Zeitschrift für Nationalökonomie, vol. 36, pp. 389–395.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clarke, D.G. and R.J. Dolan (1984), “A Simulation Analysis of Alternative Pricing Strategies for Dynamic Environments,” Journal of Business, vol. 57, No. 1, Part 2, pp. 179–209.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clarke, F.H., M.N. Darrough and J.M. Heineke (1982), “Optimal Pricing Policy in the Presence of Experience Effects,” Journal of Business, vol. 55, pp. 517–530.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chow, G.C. (1967), “Technological Change and the Demand for Computers,” American Economic Review, vol. 57, pp. 1117–1130.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clemhout, S. and H.Y. Wan (1974), “Pricing Dynamics: An Intertemporal Oligopoly Model and Limit Pricing,” Paper presented at the Econometric Society North America Winter Meeting, San Francisco.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cremer, J. and M.L. Weizman (1976), “OPEC and the Monopoly Price of World Oil,” European Economic Review, vol. 8, pp. 155–164.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dixit, A. (1980), “The Role of Investment in Entry-Deterrence,” The Economic Journal, vol. 90, March, pp. 95–106.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dockner, E. (1984a), “Optimale Preisbildung unter Dynamischer Nachfrage: Die Nash-Lösung eines Differentialspiels,” in Operations Research Proceedings 1983, H. Steckhan et al. (Eds.), Springer-Verlag, Berlin, pp. 592–598.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dockner, E. (1984b), “Optimal Pricing of a Monopoly Against a Competitive Producer,” Optimal Control Applications & Methods, vol. 5, No. 4, pp. 345–352.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dockner, E. (1985), “Optimal Pricing in a Dynamic Duopoly Game Model,” Zeitschrift für Operations Research, vol. 29, Issue 2, Series B, pp. 1–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dockner, E. and G. Feichtinger (1985), “Dynamic Advertising and Pricing in an Oligopoly: A Nash Equilibrium Approach,” Paper presented at the 7th Annual Conference on Economic Dynamics and Control, London, June.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dockner, E. and S. Jørgensen (1984a), “Cooperative and Non-cooperative Differential Game Solutions to an Investment and Pricing Problem,” Journal of the Operational Research Society, vol. 35, No. 8, pp. 731–739.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dockner, E. and S. Jørgensen (1985), “Optimal Pricing Strategies for New Products in Dynamic Oligopolies,” Working Paper, University of Economics, Vienna/Copenhagen School of Economics and Business Administration, Copenhagen.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dockner, E., G. Feichtinger and G. Sorger (1985), “Interaction of Price and Advertising under Dynamic Conditions”, Working Paper, University of: Economics and Technical University, Vienna.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dolan, R.J. and A.P. Jeuland (1981), “Experience Curves and Dynamic Demand Models: Implications for Optimal Pricing Strategies”, Journal of Marketing, vol. 45, pp. 52–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dorfman, R. and P.O. Steiner (1954), “Optimal Advertising and Optimal Quality”, American Economic Review, Vol. XLIV, pp. 826–836.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duncan, D.J., S.C. Hollander and R. Savitt (1983), Modern Retailing Management, R. Irwin, Homewood, 111.

    Google Scholar 

  • Easingwood, C.J., V. Mahajan and E. Muller (1983), “A Nonuniform Influence Innovation Diffusion Model of New Product Acceptance”, Marketing Science, vol. 2, pp. 273–296.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eliashberg, J. and A.P. Jeuland (1982), “New Product Pricing Strategies Over Time in a Developing Market: How Does Entry Affect Prices”, Working Paper 82-021, Center for Research in Marketing, University of Chicago.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eliashberg, J. and A.P. Jeuland (1983), “The Impact of Competitive Entry in a Developing Market Upon Dynamic Pricing Strategies”, Working Paper, University of Pennsylvania.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eliashberg, J. and R. Steinberg (1984), “Marketing-production Decisions in Industrial Channels of Distribution”, Working Paper, The Wharton School and Columbia University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Erickson, G.M. (1983a), “Dynamic Pricing in Oligopolistic New Product Markets”, Working Paper, University of Washington, Seattle.

    Google Scholar 

  • Erickson, G.M. (1983b), “The Separate Effects of Competitive Entry, Price Sensitivity and the Learning Curve on the Dynamic Pricing of New Durable Products”, Working Paper, University of Washington, Seattle.

    Google Scholar 

  • Erickson, G.M. (1983c), “Market Entry and Optimal Price Reaction: A Differential Game Approach”, Working Paper, University of Washington, Seattle.

    Google Scholar 

  • Erskin, G.J. and P.H. Baron (1977), “Effects of Price and Advertising in Test-market Experiments”, Journal of Marketing Research, vol. 14, pp. 499–508.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Evans, G.C. (1924), “The Dynamics of Monopoly”, American Mathematical Monthly, vol. 31, pp. 77–83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Feichtinger, G. (1982a), “Optimal Pricing in a Diffusion Model With Concave Price-dependent Market Potential”, Operations Research Letters, vol. 1, pp. 236–240.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Feichtinger, G. (1982b), “Saddle Point Analysis in a Price-advertising Model”, Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, vol. 4, pp. 319–340.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Feichtinger, G. (1982c), “Ein Differentialspiel für den Markteintritt einer Firma”, in Operations Research Proceedings, B. Fleischmann et al. (Eds.), Springer, Berlin, pp. 636–644.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feichtinger, G. (1983), “Optimale Dynamische Preispolitik bei Drohender Konkurrenz”, Zeitschrift für Betriebswirtschaft, vol. 53, PP. 156–171.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feichtinger, G. and E. Dockner (1985), “Optimal Pricing in a Duopoly: A Non-cooperative Differential Games Solution”, Journal of Optimization Theory and Applications, vol. 45, pp. 199–218.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Feichtinger, G. and R. Hartl (1985), “Optimal Pricing and Production in an Inventory Model”, European Journal of Operational Research, vol. 19, pp. 45–56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Feichtinger, G. and S. Jørgensen (1983), “Differential Game Models in Management Science”, European Journal of Operational Research, vol. 14, pp. 137–155.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Feichtinger, G., A. Luhmer and G. Sorger (1985), “Price Image Strategy: An Optimal Control Problem”, Research Report No. 74, Institute for Econometrics and Operations Research, Technical University, Vienna.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fershtman, C. (1985), “Identification of Classes of Differential Games for which the Open Loop is a Degenerated Feedback Nash Equilibrium”, Working Paper, Economics Department, The Hebrew University, Jerusalem.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fershtman, C. and M.I. Kamien (1984), “Price Adjustment Speed and Dynamic Duopolistic Competitors”, Working Paper, Northwestern University, Evanston, 111.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fershtman, C., V. Mahajan and E. Müller (1983), “Advertising, Pricing and Stability in Oligopolistic Markets for New Products”, Working Paper No. 83-804, Southern Methodist University, Dallas, Tx.

    Google Scholar 

  • Flaherty, M.T. (1980), “Dynamic Limit Pricing, Barriers to Entry, and Rational Firms”, Journal of Economic Theory, vol. 23, pp. 160–182.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Friedman, J.W. (1977), Oligopoly and the Theory of Games, North-Holland, Amsterdam.

    Google Scholar 

  • Friedman, J.W. (1979), “On Entry Preventing Behavior and Limit Price Models of Entry” in Applied Game Theory, S.J. Brans et al. (Eds.), Physica-Verlag, Würzburg, pp. 236–253.

    Google Scholar 

  • Friedman, J.W. (1982), “Oligopoly Theory” in Handbook of Mathematical Economics, Vol. II, K.J. Arrow and M.D. Intriligator (Eds.), North-Holland, Amsterdam, pp. 491–534.

    Google Scholar 

  • Friedman, J.W. (1983a), Oligopoly Theory, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Friedman, J.W. (1983b), “Advertising and Oligopolistic Equilibrium”, Bell Journal of Economics, vol. 14, pp. 464–473.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fudenberg, D. and J. Tirole (1983a), “Learning by-doing and Market Performance”, Bell Journal of Economics, vol. 14, pp. 522–530.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fudenberg, D. and J. Tirole (1983b). “Capital as a Commitment: Strategic Investments to Deter Mobility”, Journal of Economic Theory, vol. 31, pp. 227–250.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gaskins, D.W. (1971), “Dynamic Limit Pricing: Optimal Pricing Under Threat of Entry”, Journal of Economic Theory, vol. 3, pp. 306–322.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gaugusch, J. (1984), “The Non-cooperative Solution of a Differential Game: Advertising versus Pricing”, Optimal Control Applications and Methods, vol. 5, pp. 353–360.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gilbert, R.J. and S.M. Goldman (1978), “Potential Competition and the Monopoly Price of an Exhaustible Resource”, Journal of Economic Theory, vol. 17, pp. 319–331.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glaister, S. (1974), “Advertising Policy and Returns to Scale in Markets Where Information is Passed between Individuals”, Economica, vol. 41, pp. 139–156.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grubbström, R.W. (1972), Economic Decisions in Space and Time, Business Administration Studies, Gothenburg.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hague, D.C. (1971), Pricing in Business, George Allen and Unwin, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Häuser, J.R. and S.M. Shugan (1983), “Defensive Marketing Strategies”, Marketing Science, vol. 2, pp. 319–360.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hnyilicza, E. and R.S. Pindyck (1976), “Pricing Policies for a Two-part Exhaustible Resource Cartel”, European Economic Review, vol. 8, pp. 139–154.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoel, M. (1983), “Resource Extraction when there is a Limit on the Level of Investment in Substitute Capacity”, Memorandum No. 11, Institute of Economics, University of Oslo.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jacquemin, A.P. and J. Thisse (1972), “Strategy of the Firm and Market Structure: An Application of Optimal Control Theory” in K. Cowling (Ed.) Market Structure and Corporate Behavior, Gray-Mills, London, pp. 63–84

    Google Scholar 

  • Jeuland, A.P. (1981), “Parsimonious Models of Diffusion of Innovation, Part B: Incorporating the Variable of Price”, Working Paper, University of Chicago, Graduate School of Business.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jeuland, A.P. and R.J. Dolan (1982), “An Aspect of New Product Planning: Dynamic Pricing” in Market Planning Models, A.A. Zoltners (Ed.), North-Holland, Amsterdam.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jørgensen, S. (1978), “Optimal Price and Advertising Policies for a New Product”, Paper presented at a workshop on “Model Building and Operations Research Applications in Marketing”, European Institute for Advanced Studies in Management, Brussels.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jørgensen, S. (198I), “En Note om Dorfman-Steiner Teoremet”, National-Økonomisk Tidsskrift, vol. 119, pp. 409–4l3.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jørgensen, S. (1982a), “A Differential Game Solution to an Investment and Pricing Problem”, Paper presented at “Tenth Optimization Days”, Montreal.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jørgensen, S. (1982b), “A Survey of Some Differential Games in Advertising”, Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, vol. 4, pp. 341–369.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jørgensen, S. (1983), “Optimal Control of a Diffusion Model of New Product Acceptance with Price-dependent Total Market Potential”, Optimal Control Applications and Methods, vol. 4, pp. 269–276.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jørgensen, S. (1986), “Optimal Production, Purchasing and Pricing: A Differential Game Approach”, European Journal of Operational Research, vol. 23, pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kalish, S. (1983), “Monopolist Pricing with Dynamic Demand and Production Cost”, Marketing Science, vol. 2, pp. 135–160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kalish, S. (1984), “A New Product Adoption Model with Price, Advertising and Uncertainty”, Working Paper, University of Rochester.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kalish, S. and S.K. Sen (1985), “Diffusion Models and the Marketing Mix for Single Products” in Advances in Product and Marketing Strategy, lII, Innovation Diffusion and Growth Models, J. Wind and V. Mahajan (Eds.), pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kamien, M.I. and N.L. Schwartz (1971), “Limit Pricing and Uncertain Entry”, Econometrica, vol. 39, pp. 441–454.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kamien, M.I. and N.L. Schwartz (1981), Dynamic Optimization: The Calculus of Variations and Optimal Control in Economics and Management, North-Holland, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lambin, J.J., P.A. Naert and A. Bultez (1975), “Optimal Marketing Behavior in Oligopoly”, European Economic Review, vol. 6, pp. 105–128.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lieber, Z. and A. Barnea (1977), “Dynamic Optimal Pricing to Deter Entry under Constrained Supply”, Operations Research, vol. 25, pp. 696–705.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lewis, T.R. and R. Schmalensee (1980a), “On Oligopolistic Markets for Nonrenewable Natural Resources” Quarterly Journal of Economics, Vol. XCV, pp. 475–491.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lewis, T.R. and R. Schmalensee (1980b), “Cartel and Oligopoly Pricing of Non-replenishable Natural Resources” in Dynamic Optimization and Mathematical Economics, P.T. Liu (Ed.), Plenum Press, New York, pp. 133–156.

    Google Scholar 

  • Luptacik, M. (1982), “Optimal Price and Advertising Policy under Atomistic Competition”, Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, vol. 4, pp. 57–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mahajan, V. and E. Müller (1979), “Innovation Diffusion and New Product Growth Models in Marketing”, Journal of Marketing, vol. 43, pp. 55–68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mahajan, V. and R.A. Peterson (1978), “Innovation Diffusion in a Dynamic Potential Adopter Population”, Management Science, vol. 24, pp. 1589–1597.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mahajan, V. and R.A. Peterson (1982), “Erratum to: Innovation Diffusion in a Dynamic Potential Adopter Population”, Management Science, vol. 28, p. 1087.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mahajan, V. and R..A. Peterson (1984), “Innovation Diffusion: Models and Applications”, Working Paper No. 84-112, Southern Methodist University, Dallas, Tx.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mahajan, V., E. Muller and R.A. Kerin (1984), “Introduction Strategy for New Products with Positive and Negative Word-of-Mouth” Management Science, vol. 30, pp. 1389–1404.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mahajan, V., S. Sharma and J. Wind (1983), “An Approach to Repeat-Purchase Diffusion Analysis”, Working Paper No. 83-106, Southern Methodist University, Dallas, Tx.

    Google Scholar 

  • Milgrom, P. and J. Roberts (1982), “Limit Pricing and Entry under Incomplete Information: An Equilibrium Analysis”, Econometrica, vol. 50, pp. 443–459.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller, R.E. (1979), Dynamic Optimization and Economic Applications, McGraw-Hill, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Monroe, K.B. and A.J. Delia Bitta (1978), “Models for Pricing Decisions”, Journal of Marketing Research, vol. 15, pp. 413–428.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moorthy, K.S. (1984), “Using Game Theory to Model Competition”, Working Paper, Yale School of Management, New Haven, CT.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nagle, T. (1984), “Economic Foundations for Pricing”, Journal of Business, vol. 57, pp. 3–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nerlove, M. and K.J. Arrow (1962), “Optimal Advertising Policy under Dynamic Conditions”, Economica, vol. 39, pp. 129–142.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pashigian, B.P. (1968), “Limit Price and the Market Share of the Leading Firm”, journal of Industrial Economics, vol. 16, pp. 165–177.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pekelman, D. (1974), “Simultaneous Price-production Decisions”, Operations Research, vol. 22, pp. 788–794.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Phelps, E.S. and S.G. Winter (1971), “Optimal Price Policy under Atomistic Competition” in Microeconomic Foundations of Employment and Inflation Theory, E.S. Phelps et al. (Eds.), MacMillan, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rao, V.R. (1984), “Pricing Research in Marketing: The State of the Art”, Journal of Business, vol. 57, pp. 39–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reinganum, J.F. (1982), “A Class of Differential Games for Which the Closed-loop and Open-loop Nash Equilibria Coincide”, Journal of Optimization Theory and Applications, vol. 36, pp. 253–262.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reinganum, J.F. and N.L. Stokey (1985), “Oligopoly Extraction of a Common Property Natural Resource: The Importance of the Period of Commitment in Dynamic Games”, International Economic Review, vol. 26, pp. 161–173.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reynolds, S.S. (1985), “A Differential Game Approach to Oligopolistic Interdependence”, Working Paper, Department of Economics, University of Arizona, Tucson, Az.

    Google Scholar 

  • Robinson, V. and C. Lakhani (1975), “Dynamic Price Models for New Product Planning”, Management Science, vol. 21, pp. 1113–1132.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roos, C.F. (1925), “A Mathematical Theory of Competition”, American Journal of Mathematics, vol. 47, pp. 163–175.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Salop, S.C. (1939), “Strategic Entry Deterrence”, American Economic Review, vol. 69, No. 2, pp. 335–338.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmalensee, R. (1972), The Economics of Advertising, North-Holland, Amsterdam.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seglin, L. (1963), “How to Price New Products”, Chemical Engineering, September, pp. 181–184.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sethi, S.P. (1977), “Dynamic Optimal Control Models in Advertising: A Survey”, SIAM Review, vol. 19, pp. 685–725.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sheshinski, E. and Y. Weiss (1977), “Inflation and Costs of Price Adjustment”, Review of Economic Studies, Vol. XLIV(2), No. 137, pp. 287–303.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shubik, M. (1980), Market Structure and Behavior, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shubik, M. (1982), “Game Theory Models and Methods”, in Handbook of Mathematical Economics, Vol. I, K.J. Arrow and M.D. Intriligator (Eds.), North-Holland, Amsterdam, pp. 285–330.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shubik, M. (1982a), Game Theory in the Social Sciences. Concepts and Solutions, The MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shubik, M. and M.J. Sobel (1980), “Stochastic Games, Oligopoly Theory, and Competitive Resource Allocation”, in Dynamic Optimization and Mathematical Economics, P.T. Liu (Ed.), Plenum Press, New York, pp. 89–100.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shupp, F.R. (1977), “Dynamic Limit Pricing in a Mature Market”, in Mathematical Economics and Game Theory, Essays in Honor of Oskar Morgenstern, Springer Lecture Notes in Economics and Mathematical Systems, l4l, pp. 435–445.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shupp, F.R. (1985), “Limit Pricing in a Mature Market: A Dynamic Game Approach”, Paper presented at the 7th Annual Conference on Economic Dynamics and Control, London, June.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simaan, M. and J.B. Cruz (1973), “On the Stackelberg Strategy in Nonzero-sum Games”, Journal of Optimization Theory and Applications, vol. 11, pp. 613–626.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simon, H. (1982), “Pricestrat — An Applied Strategic Pricing Model for Nondurables”, in Marketing Planning Models, A.A. Zoltners (Ed.), North-Holland, Amsterdam, pp. 23–41.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spence, A.M. (1977), “Entry, Capacity, Investment and Oligopolistic Pricing”, Bell Journal of Economics, vol. 8, pp. 534–544.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spence, A.M. (198I), “The Learning Curve and Competition”, Bell Journal of Economics, vol. 12, No. 1, pp. 49–70.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spremann, K. (1975), “Optimale Preispolitik bei Dynamischen Deterministischen Absatzmodellen”, Zeitschrift für Nationalökonomie, vol. 35, pp. 63–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spremann, K. (1981), “Hybrid Product Life Cycles and the Nerlove-Arrow Theorem”, Working Paper, University of Ulm, W. Germany.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spremann, K. (1985), “The Signalling of Quality by Reputation”, in Optimal Control Theory and Economic Analysis 2, G. Feichtinger (Ed.), North-Holland, Amsterdam, pp. 235–252.

    Google Scholar 

  • Takayama, A. (1974), Mathematical Economics, Dryden Press, Hinsdale, 111.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tapiero, C.S. (1974), “Optimum Price Switching”, International Journal of Systems Science, vol. 5, pp. 83–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Telser, L.G. (1972), Competition, Collusion and Game Theory, MacMillan, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Telser, L.G. and R.L. Graves (1972), Functional Analysis in Mathematical Economics, The University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Teng, J.T. and G.L. Thompson (1985), “Optimal Strategies for General Price-advertising Models”, in Optimal Control Theory and Economic Analysis 2, G. Feichtinger (Ed.), North-Holland, Amsterdam, pp. 183–195.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thépot, J. (1983), “Marketingand Investment Policies of Duopolists in a Growing Industry”, Journal of Economic Dynamics & Control, vol. 5, No. 4, pp. 387–404

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, G.L. and J.-T. Teng (1984), “Optimal Pricing and Advertising Policies for New Product Oligopoly Models”, Marketing Science, vol. 3, No. 2, pp. 148–168.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tintner, G. (19 37), “Monopoly Over Time”, Econometrica, vol. 5, pp. 160–170.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wernerfeit, B. (1984), “Consumers with Differing Reaction Speeds, Scale Advantages and Industry Structure”, European Economic Review, vol. 24, pp. 257–270.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wirl, F. (1985), “Stable and Volatile Prices: An Explanation by Dynamic Demand”, in Optimal Control Theory and Economic Analysis 2, G. Feichtinger (Ed.), North-Holland, Amsterdam, pp. 263–278.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wolf, G. and M. Shubik (1978), “Market Structure, Opponent Behavior and Information in a Market Game”, Decision Sciences, vol. 9, pp. 421–428.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yoon, E. and G.L. Lilien (1985), “New Product Pricing Strategies in Monopoly-duopoly Markets: An Extension of the Eliashberg-Jeuland Model”, Working Paper, College of Business Administration, Pennsylvania State University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Geroski, P.A., L. Philips and A. Ulph (1985), “Oligopoly, Competition and Welfare: Some Recent Developments”, Journal of Industrial Economics, vol. 33, No. 4, 369–386.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute of Theoretical Statistics, Copenhagen School of Economics and Business Administration, 10 Julius Thomsens Plads, DK-1925, Frederiksberg C, Copenhagen, Denmark

    Steffen Jørgensen

Authors
  1. Steffen Jørgensen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering and Coordinated Science Laboratory, University of Illinois, 1101 W. Springfield Avenue, Urbana, Illinois, 61801, USA

    Tamer Başar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1986 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Jørgensen, S. (1986). Optimal Dynamic Pricing in an Oligopolistic Market: a Survey. In: Başar, T. (eds) Dynamic Games and Applications in Economics. Lecture Notes in Economics and Mathematical Systems, vol 265. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-61636-5_8

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-61636-5_8

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-16435-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-642-61636-5

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation