Kentucky Milk Case问题的分析结果.pdfVIP

Making Business Decisions: The Kentucky Milk Case (To accompany Chapters 1 and 2) There are many things that could be included in a report about the possibility of collusion. I have concentrated on the incumbency rates, bid levels and dispersion, and average winning bids. With the data available, no comparison of market share can be made since there was so much missing data. Actually, with the data available, the exact analysis cannot be made, since only the winning bid information is provided. Thus, we have no idea what the losing bids were. I will present what I think is a reasonable solution. This is by no means the only solution to the case. Many other presentations could also be used. Incumbency Rates The incumbency rate is the percent of the school districts that are won by the same vendor who won the previous year. A table containing the incumbency rates is included as well as a plot. Notice in the plot that the incumbency rates in the Tri-county market is higher than that in the Surrounding market. From 1985 through 1988, the incumbency rate for the Tri-county market was never lower than .923, while in the same period in the Surrounding market, the incumbency rate was never higher than .730. This implies the possibility of collusion in the Tri-county market. Surrounding Market Tri-county Market Year Number of Same Incumbency Number of Same Incumbency Districts Vendors Rate Districts Vendors Rate 1984 26 16 .615 10 8 .800 1985 27 19 .704 12 12 1.000 1986 32 19 .594 13 13 1.000 1987