Skip to main content
Log in

Cross-subsidization and cost misallocation by regulated monopolists

  • Published:
Journal of Regulatory Economics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

While cross-subsidization is understood theoretically as involving the sustainability of a cost allocation scheme, it is invoked in regulatory policy contexts, such as the divestiture of AT&T, where costs of serving unregulated markets may be borne by ratepayers of regulated monopolies. We analyze two cross-subsidization tactics—cost misallocation and distorted technological choice — under a spectrum of regulatory cost allocation policies. These tactics lead to higher prices in regulated markets and inefficient production in unregulated markets. Welfare effects are discussed; we conclude with observations on strategic behavior and regulatory policy.

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

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Averch, H. and L. Johnson, 1962. “Behavior of the Firm under Regulatory Constraint.” American Economic Review 52: 1052–69.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bailey, E. and A. Friedlander. 1982. “Market Structure and Multiproduct Industries.” Journal of Economic Literature 20: 1024–48.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baseman, K. 1981. “Open Entry and Cross-Subsidization in Regulated Markets.” In Studies in Public Regulation, edited by G. Fromm. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baseman, K. and S. Silberman. 1986. “The Economics of Bell Operating Company Diversification in the Post Divestiture Telecommunications Industry.” ICF Incorporated.

  • Baumol, W. 1982. “Contestable Markets: An Uprising in the Theory of Industry Structure.” American Economic Review 72: 1–15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baumol, W., E. Bailey and R. Willig. 1977. “Weak Invisible Hand Theorems on the Sustainability of Multiproduct Natural Monopoly.” American Economic Review 67: 350–65.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baumol, W. and A. Klevorick. 1970. “Input Choices and Rate-of-Return Regulation: An Overview of the Discussion.” Bell Journal of Economics and Management Science 1: 162–90.

    Google Scholar 

  • Becker, G. 1968. “Crime and Punishment: An Economic Approach.” Journal of Political Economy 76: 169–217.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berg, S. and J. Tschirhart. 1988. Natural Monopoly Regulation: Principles and Practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bittlingmayer, G. 1982. “Decreasing Average Costs and Competition: A New Look At the Addyston Pipe Case.” Journal of Law and Economics 25: 201–229.

    Google Scholar 

  • Breautigam, R. 1979. “Optimal Pricing with Intermodal Competition.” American Economic Review 69: 38–49.

    Google Scholar 

  • Braeutigam, R. and J. Panzar. 1988. “Diversification Incentives Under ‘Price-Based’ and Cost-Based' Regulation,” mimeo, Northwestern University.

  • Brennan, T. 1987a. “Why Regulated Firms Should Be Kept Out Of Unregulated Markets: Understanding the Divestiture in U. S. v. AT&T.” Antitrust Bulletin 32: 741–93.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brennan, T. 1987b. “Cross-Subsidization and Discrimination by Regulated Monopolists.” Economic Analysis Group discussion Paper 87-2, Antitrust Division, U.S. Dept. of Justice.

  • Brennan, T. 1989a. “Regulating by Capping Prices.” Journal of Regulatory Economics 1: 133–47.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brennan, T. 1989b. “Divestiture Policy Considerations in an Information Services World.” Telecommunications Policy, forthcoming.

  • Brock, W. 1983. “Pricing, Predation, and Entry Barriers in Regulated Industries.” In Breaking Up Bell: Essays in Industrial Organization and Regulation, edited by D. Evans. New York: North Holland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brock, W. and D. Evans. 1983. “Creamskimming.” In Breaking Up Bell: Essays in Industrial Organization and Regulation, edited by D. Evans. New York: North Holland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crew, M. and K. Crocker. 1987. “Diversification and Regulated Monopoly.” GSM Working Paper #87-001, Graduate School of Management, Rutgers University.

  • Department of Justice, Antitrust Division. 1982. “United States v. Western Electric Company, Inc., and American Telephone and Telegraph Company; Competitive Impact Statement in Connection With Proposed Modification of Final Judgment.” Federal Register 47: 7170–84.

    Google Scholar 

  • Faulhaber, G. 1975. “Cross-Subsidization: Pricing in Public Enterprise.” American Economic Review 65: 966–77.

    Google Scholar 

  • Faulhaber, G. 1987. Telecommunications in Turmoil. Cambridge, MA: Ballinger.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fowler, M., A. Halprin and J. Schlichting. 1986. “‘Back to the Future’: A Model for Telecommunications.” Federal Communications Law Journal 38: 145–200. FPC v. Hope Natural Gas Co., 320 U.S. 591 (1944).

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewis, T. and D. Sappington. 1989. “An Informational Effect When Regulated Firms Enter Unregulated Markets.” Journal of Regulatory Economics 1: 35–46.

    Google Scholar 

  • Panzar, J. 1986. “Economic Perspective on Regulated Integration.” Telecommunications Policy Research Conference.

  • Panzar, J. and R. Willig. 1977. “Free Entry and the Sustainability of Natural Monopoly.” Bell Journal of Economics 8: 1–22.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sappington, D. and J. Stiglitz. 1987. “Information and Regulation.” In Public Regulation: New Perspectives on Institutions and Policies, edited by E. Bailey. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sharkey, W. 1982. The Theory of Natural Monopoly. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spence, A. M. 1977. “Entry, Capacity, Investment, and Oligopolistic Pricing.” Bell Journal of Economics 8: 534–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sweeney, G. 1982. “Welfare Implications of Fully Distributed Cost Pricing Applied to Partially Regulated Firms.” Bell Journal of Economics 13: 525–33.

    Google Scholar 

  • Temin, P. 1987. The Fall of the Bell System. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • United States v. American Telephone & Telegraph, 552 F. Supp. 131 (1982).

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Brennan, T.J. Cross-subsidization and cost misallocation by regulated monopolists. J Regul Econ 2, 37–51 (1990). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00139361

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00139361

Keywords

Navigation