Multiasset Derivatives and Joint Distributions of Asset Prices

Several of multiasset derivatives like basket options or options on the weighted maximum of assets exhibit the property that their prices determine uniquely the underlying asset distribution. Related to that the question how to retrieve this distributions from the corresponding derivatives quotes will be discussed. On the contrary, the prices of exchange options do not uniquely determine the underlying distributions of asset prices and the extent of this non-uniqueness can be characterised. The discussion is related to a geometric interpretation of multiasset derivatives as support functions of convex sets. Following this, various symmetry properties for basket, maximum and exchange options are discussed alongside with their geometric interpretations and some decomposition results for more general payoff functions.

Three essays on prices and selection

Competitive Market Segmentation Abstract In a two-firm model where each firm sells a high-quality and a low-quality version of a product, customers differ with respect to their brand preferences and their attitudes towards quality. We show that the standard result of quality-independent markups crucially depends on the assumption that the customers' valuation of quality is identical across firms. Once we relax this assumption, competition across qualities leads to second-degree price discrimination. We find that markups on low-quality products are higher if consuming a low-quality product involves a firm-specific disutility. Likewise, markups on high-quality products are higher if consuming a high-quality product creates a firm-specific surplus. Selection upon Wage Posting Abstract We discuss a model of a job market where firms announce salaries. Thereupon, they decide through the evaluation of a productivity test whether to hire applicants. Candidates for a job are locked in once they have applied at a given employer. Hence, such a market exhibits a specific form of the bargain-then-ripoff principle. With a single firm, the outcome is efficient. Under competition, what might be called "positive selection" leads to market failure. Thus our model provides a rationale for very small employment probabilities in some sectors. Exclusivity Clauses: Enhancing Competition, Raising Prices Abstract In a setting where retailers and suppliers compete for each other by offering binding contracts, exclusivity clauses serve as a competitive device. As a result of these clauses, firms addressed by contracts only accept the most favorable deal. Thus the contract-issuing parties have to squeeze their final customers and transfer the surplus within the vertical supply chain. We elaborate to what extent the resulting allocation depends on the sequence of play and discuss the implications of a ban on exclusivity clauses.

Minimum carbon payment along an aridity gradient for dryland afforestation in non annex I countries with stochastic weather and prices

Recent findings demonstrate that trees in deserts are efficient carbon sinks. It remains however unknown whether the Clean Development Mechanism will accelerate the planting of trees in Non Annex I dryland countries. We estimated the price of carbon at which a farmer would be indifferent between his customary activity and the planting of trees to trade carbon credits, along an aridity gradient. Carbon yields were simulated by means of the CO2FIX v3.1 model for Pinus halepensis with its respective yield classes along the gradient (Arid – 100mm to Dry Sub Humid conditions – 900mm). Wheat and pasture yields were predicted on somewhat similar nitrogen-based quadratic models, using 30 years of weather data to simulate moisture stress. Stochastic production, input and output prices were afterwards simulated on a Monte Carlo matrix. Results show that, despite the high levels of carbon uptake, carbon trading by afforesting is unprofitable anywhere along the gradient. Indeed, the price of carbon would have to raise unrealistically high, and the certification costs would have to drop significantly, to make the Clean Development Mechanism worthwhile for non annex I dryland countries farmers. From a government agency's point of view the Clean Development Mechanism is attractive. However, such agencies will find it difficult to demonstrate “additionality”, even if the rule may be somewhat flexible. Based on these findings, we will further discuss why the Clean Development Mechanism, a supposedly pro-poor instrument, fails to assist farmers in Non Annex I dryland countries living at minimum subsistence level.