Monopolization with Must-Haves

Abstract

An increasing number of monopolization cases have been constructed around the notion of “must-have” items: products that distributors must carry to “compete effectively.” Motivated by these cases, we consider a multiproduct setting where upstream suppliers sell their products through competing distributors offering one-stop-shopping convenience to consumers. We show the emergence of products that distributors cannot afford not to carry if their rivals do. A supplier of such products can exploit this must-have property, along with tying and exclusivity provisions, to monopolize adjacent, otherwise-competitive markets. Policy interventions that ban tying or exclusivity provisions may prove ineffective or even backfire. (JEL D43, K21, L13, L14, L42, L81)