Question A:
Amazon has monopsony power in the market for books that is significantly reducing the supply of books.
Responses
Responses weighted by each expert's confidence
Question B:
Amazon has sufficient monopsony power that regulatory intervention is likely to make consumers of books better off, taking into account implementation costs and the effect of intervention on incentives.
Responses
Responses weighted by each expert's confidence
Question A Participant Responses
| Participant | University | Vote | Confidence | Bio/Vote History |
|---|---|---|---|---|
 Daron Acemoglu |
MIT | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
 Alberto Alesina |
Harvard | Did Not Answer | Bio/Vote History | |
|
|
||||
 Joseph Altonji |
Yale | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
Amazon has some monopsony power but its platform is probably making author access easier.
|
||||
 Alan Auerbach |
Berkeley | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
 David Autor |
MIT | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
In general, Amazon is not using its monopsony to reduce supply. But in the case of Hachette books, it certainly is.
|
||||
 Katherine Baicker |
University of Chicago | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
 Abhijit Banerjee |
MIT | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
 Marianne Bertrand |
Chicago | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
 Markus Brunnermeier |
Princeton | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
 Raj Chetty |
Harvard | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
 Judith Chevalier |
Yale | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
It seems likely that Amazon is on net raising author income in the part of the distribution where the supply restriction would be.
|
||||
 Janet Currie |
Princeton | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
 David Cutler |
Harvard | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
 Angus Deaton |
Princeton | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
Seems like a matter of public record!
|
||||
 Darrell Duffie |
Stanford | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
Amazon might instead use its market power to reduce its costs, or to limit entry by other suppliers. I need to know more to be confident.
|
||||
 Aaron Edlin |
Berkeley | Did Not Answer | Bio/Vote History | |
|
|
||||
 Barry Eichengreen |
Berkeley | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
 Liran Einav |
Stanford | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
 Ray Fair |
Yale | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
 Amy Finkelstein |
MIT | Did Not Answer | Bio/Vote History | |
|
|
||||
 Pinelopi Goldberg |
Yale | Did Not Answer | Bio/Vote History | |
|
|
||||
 Austan Goolsbee |
Chicago | Bio/Vote History | ||
 Michael Greenstone |
University of Chicago | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
 Robert Hall |
Stanford | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
Complicated issue. The main bone of contention so far has been its policy of low pricing for ebooks. Not sure of the effects on authors.
|
||||
 Oliver Hart |
Harvard | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
Classic monopsonists reduce supply; final prices rise. This doesn't describe Amazon.I don't know evidence that book supply is lower.
|
||||
 Bengt Holmström |
MIT | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
 Caroline Hoxby |
Stanford | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
There appears to be no soundly derived empirical evidence for this claim. I read every article related to this and its just not there.
|
||||
 Hilary Hoynes |
Berkeley | Did Not Answer | Bio/Vote History | |
|
|
||||
 Kenneth Judd |
Stanford | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
Too many alternatives, too much potential entry.
|
||||
 Steven Kaplan |
Chicago Booth | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
 Anil Kashyap |
Chicago Booth | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
 Pete Klenow |
Stanford | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
 Jonathan Levin |
Stanford | Did Not Answer | Bio/Vote History | |
|
|
||||
 Eric Maskin |
Harvard | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
This follows from standard textbook analysis.
|
||||
 William Nordhaus |
Yale | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
Unclear what counterfactual is. Without Amazon? Or with Amazon and no market power?
|
||||
 Emmanuel Saez |
Berkeley | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
 Larry Samuelson |
Yale | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
Compared to no electronic market, Amazon has probably increased supply. Compared to a "competitive electronic market," probably not.
|
||||
 José Scheinkman |
Columbia University | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
Amazon's policies are probably reducing the supply of ebooks.
|
||||
 Richard Schmalensee |
MIT | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
Some monopsony power, sure; significant impact on supply, possible but not especially likely.
|
||||
 Carl Shapiro |
Berkeley | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
 Robert Shimer |
University of Chicago | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
Maybe in the future, certainly not now.
|
||||
 Richard Thaler |
Chicago Booth | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
Amazon greatly increases the availability of most books, esp academic books, but is making it hard to get some books. So how to answer?
|
||||
 Christopher Udry |
Northwestern | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
Amazon has some monopsony power, but weak. And lower transaction costs of books on balance positive.
-see background information here |
||||
Question B Participant Responses
| Participant | University | Vote | Confidence | Bio/Vote History |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Daron Acemoglu |
MIT | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
Alberto Alesina |
Harvard | Did Not Answer | Bio/Vote History | |
|
|
||||
|
Joseph Altonji |
Yale | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
Intervention is costly and premature. So far, book consumers have probably benefited.
|
||||
|
Alan Auerbach |
Berkeley | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
David Autor |
MIT | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
Intervention could be as simple as a stern warning. At present, Amazon is heading towards a market position that is anti-competitive.
|
||||
|
Katherine Baicker |
University of Chicago | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
Abhijit Banerjee |
MIT | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
Marianne Bertrand |
Chicago | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
Markus Brunnermeier |
Princeton | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
Strategic delayed shipping of books from certain publishing houses and other measures can hurt consumers.
|
||||
|
Raj Chetty |
Harvard | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
Judith Chevalier |
Yale | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
Currently I cannot identify a specific practice that it would be sensible to address with a regulatory intervention.
|
||||
|
Janet Currie |
Princeton | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
David Cutler |
Harvard | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
Angus Deaton |
Princeton | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
Who knows what would happen, but seems unlikely to end well.
|
||||
|
Darrell Duffie |
Stanford | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
Maybe publishers and authors are those to most benefit from regulatory protection. I would need more information in order to better guess.
|
||||
|
Aaron Edlin |
Berkeley | Did Not Answer | Bio/Vote History | |
|
|
||||
|
Barry Eichengreen |
Berkeley | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
Liran Einav |
Stanford | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
Ray Fair |
Yale | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
Amy Finkelstein |
MIT | Did Not Answer | Bio/Vote History | |
|
|
||||
|
Pinelopi Goldberg |
Yale | Did Not Answer | Bio/Vote History | |
|
|
||||
|
Austan Goolsbee |
Chicago | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
Michael Greenstone |
University of Chicago | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
Robert Hall |
Stanford | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
Oliver Hart |
Harvard | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
I don't see evidence that consumers and authors are suffering. The market is fast-moving. Regulators should monitor but be cautious.
|
||||
|
Bengt Holmström |
MIT | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
Caroline Hoxby |
Stanford | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
There is evidence of higher diversity & price elasticity in online book retail so there would need to be serious evidence to offset this.
|
||||
|
Hilary Hoynes |
Berkeley | Did Not Answer | Bio/Vote History | |
|
|
||||
|
Kenneth Judd |
Stanford | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
Steven Kaplan |
Chicago Booth | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
Anil Kashyap |
Chicago Booth | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
Pete Klenow |
Stanford | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
Jonathan Levin |
Stanford | Did Not Answer | Bio/Vote History | |
|
|
||||
|
Eric Maskin |
Harvard | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
Monopsony power helps lower Amazon's costs, enabling then to set lower consumer prices.
|
||||
|
William Nordhaus |
Yale | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
Unclear question. If regulation = antitrust, yes. Otherwise, probably not but unclear what that might be.
|
||||
|
Emmanuel Saez |
Berkeley | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
Larry Samuelson |
Yale | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
Electronic markets are full of network externalities, which should be recognized as a form of natural monopoly.
|
||||
|
José Scheinkman |
Columbia University | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
Richard Schmalensee |
MIT | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
Just because there's monopsony (or monopoly) power doesn't mean there is a regulatory fix, and I don't see one here.
|
||||
|
Carl Shapiro |
Berkeley | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
The press reports I have seen have not yet identified any conduct by Amazon that appears to be an antitrust violation.
|
||||
|
Robert Shimer |
University of Chicago | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
Richard Thaler |
Chicago Booth | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
Too vague to answer. What sort of regulation? By whom?
|
||||
|
Christopher Udry |
Northwestern | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
