TY - JOUR
T1 - Supply Chain Debt Financing in Competition
AU - Hu, Joice (Qiaohai)
AU - Su, Ping
N1 - Publication Date: 21 Dec 2017 Download extract Abstract The seminal paper of Brander and Lewis (1986) concludes that debt financing causes two firms that engage in a Cournot game to behave more aggressively in the product market. However, both firms are worse off than if they are purely equity financed, resulting in the so-called prisoner's dilemma.
PY - 2017/12/21
Y1 - 2017/12/21
N2 - The seminal paper of Brander and Lewis (1986) concludes that debt financing causes two firms that engage in a Cournot game to behave more aggressively in the product market. However, both firms are worse off than if they are purely equity financed, resulting in the so-called prisoner’s dilemma. Incorporating two supply chain structures, distributional and parallel, we explore the effect of supply chain upstream structure on the downstream retailers’ strategic use of debt. We find that this prisoner dilemma persists because the upstream benefits from the intensified downstream competition. Moreover, the supply expansion effect is more pronounced in the parallel structure than in the distributional one, because each dedicated supplier in the parallel structure abets its retailer to compete more aggressively against the competitor by lowering its wholesale price. Therefore, the strategic effect of debt financing not only deters the competitor but also “squeezes” its supplier. In contrast, the common supplier in the distributional structure adopts an inertia strategy, keeping the same price regardless of the downstream’s debt levels because overheated downstream competition may be detrimental to it.
AB - The seminal paper of Brander and Lewis (1986) concludes that debt financing causes two firms that engage in a Cournot game to behave more aggressively in the product market. However, both firms are worse off than if they are purely equity financed, resulting in the so-called prisoner’s dilemma. Incorporating two supply chain structures, distributional and parallel, we explore the effect of supply chain upstream structure on the downstream retailers’ strategic use of debt. We find that this prisoner dilemma persists because the upstream benefits from the intensified downstream competition. Moreover, the supply expansion effect is more pronounced in the parallel structure than in the distributional one, because each dedicated supplier in the parallel structure abets its retailer to compete more aggressively against the competitor by lowering its wholesale price. Therefore, the strategic effect of debt financing not only deters the competitor but also “squeezes” its supplier. In contrast, the common supplier in the distributional structure adopts an inertia strategy, keeping the same price regardless of the downstream’s debt levels because overheated downstream competition may be detrimental to it.
KW - Cost of capital
KW - G20 Financial Services
KW - G32 Financial Risk and Risk Management
KW - M11 Production management Supplier financing
KW - Supply chain finance
UR - https://www.nowpublishers.com/article/Details/TOM-070
U2 - Retrieving data. Wait a few seconds and try to cut or copy again.
DO - Retrieving data. Wait a few seconds and try to cut or copy again.
M3 - Article
VL - 10
JO - Foundations and Trends® in Technology, Information and Operations Management [15719545]
JF - Foundations and Trends® in Technology, Information and Operations Management [15719545]
ER -