This project will explore the impact of natural disasters on small businesses and whether effects differ depending on the demographics of the entrepreneurs running those businesses. Understanding how the composition of local economies changes after disasters because of the demise of some firms and the startup of others can explain a lot about what makes a particular place more or less resilient. Research shows that there is a lot of startup activity following a natural disaster, but this could be misleading if it is generated from rebuilding and doesn’t fully factor in displaced workers or shuttered businesses, which will have larger long-term effects. This project will look at the impact of natural disasters on firms’ entry/exit, survival, and financial performances. It will also look at whether these effects vary by entrepreneur demographics, their socioeconomic backgrounds, the types of firms and in which industries, market power, and competitive setting.

This project takes a macroeconomic approach to market power. The authors will use U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics microdata on monthly prices to study how market power affects prices for the whole U.S. economy, not just one sector. Past work has looked at mark-ups and concentration as a proxy for price, but in principle, this could help address the fundamental question of whether market power or efficiency is driving increased mark-ups. This project would provide new evidence on the linkage between market concentration and margins across industries and within industries. It would also provide evidence on how import cost shocks lead to the pass-through of those shocks to the prices paid by final consumers. The authors plan to infer market power from the degree of pass-through. A main innovation in this study is the use of novel data, which record price for different sectors.

This project aims to provide an exhaustive analysis of how pharmaceutical mergers and acquisitions affect market competition and prices of patent-protected branded drugs involved in the deal. So far, little direct evidence exists about the impact of mergers and acquisitions activity on pharmaceutical market outcomes, partly because reliable data on prices and ownership of drugs is very difficult to obtain. The scholars will assemble a comprehensive dataset tracking the ownership of new products. This will be one of the major contributions of this project since there are no data sources that systematically track the marketing rights of each pharmaceutical product. The project examines whether prices, sales, and formulary coverage of acquired products increase after acquisition and, if so, what types of acquisitions are more likely to lead to changes in these market outcomes. This project will be the first to examine the differences in how list and net prices of pharmaceuticals respond to changes in market structure and competition. It also asks why market outcomes change. Economic theory predicts that within-market (substitute products) mergers will lead to higher prices. More recent evidence suggests that cross-market (noncompeting products) mergers also may generate upward pricing pressure in markets. The project tests these theories in the context of the pharmaceutical market. It also explores alternative explanations, such as shifts in marketing strategy, by incorporating advertising data into the analysis. Finally, the project also investigates anticompetitive effects of acquisitions in the patent-protected branded drugs market and what types of deals are more likely to have an anticompetitive effect.

This project is looking at the effects of “infant acquisitions,” or firms acquiring startups, on the incentives for startups to innovate, and the amount of overall innovation in the technology sector. It will empirically study the impact of megafirms’ tech acquisitions on venture investment by calculating the number of ventures funded and total dollars raised, and patent activities. The effect of large incumbents' acquisitions of startups on innovation has been a major concern among policymakers partly because it may have a negative effect on future investment in venture capital and innovation. Restrictions on tech mergers and acquisitions have been proposed in Europe and in the United States, yet there is still no clear evidence on how they affect venture capital investment. The project will combine three data sources: S&P Global Market Intelligence on firm taxonomy; Crunchbase data on investment deals in tech ventures; and PatentViews open-source data on patents. The combined data sources allow the researchers to paint a fuller picture of each firm’s relative position in the business and technology spaces.

This project aims to provide a detailed, comprehensive analysis of the Amazon.com Inc. platform, its evolution, market power, and welfare implications. Gutierrez will utilize a massive dataset that has product information, alongside prices and sales ranks, for products sold on Amazon’s platform to produce three papers. The first will provide an overview of the Amazon platform and study the evolution and heterogeneity of fees in order to empirically test whether Amazon’s fees to sellers reflect market power. The second will consist of a structural analysis of reselling to test whether Amazon competing on its own platform is anticompetitive. And the third paper will analyze the impact of private label products. This research not only examines the Amazon platform but also provides empirical evidence on whether these types of activities can be anticompetitive.

This project seeks to answer two questions: What are the welfare effects of third-degree price discrimination, and what are the effects of third-degree price discrimination on the take-up of newer and better technologies? Goel will address this question in the context of a particular type of implantable medical device: defibrillators. The implantable medical device industry has three features that make it a compelling setting to study. First, manufacturers are able to prevent hospitals from disclosing prices, allowing them to charge different prices for the same device in different hospitals. Second, the industry is very concentrated, with more than 95 percent of the market share captured by just four firms. And third, there is a lot of product variety. On average, a manufacturer offers six brands of this particular device per year from 2014–2019. Goel will utilize a rich dataset with purchase volumes, prices, and characteristics of defibrillators, and will combine this with approval information from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. She will then estimate a model of supply and demand, and conduct a counterfactual analysis in which third-degree price discrimination is banned in order to understand the dynamics of price discrimination.