A Theory of Crowdfunding — A Mechanism Design Approach with Demand Uncertainty and Moral Hazard: Comment

M. Ellman, Sjaak Hurkens
{"title":"A Theory of Crowdfunding — A Mechanism Design Approach with Demand Uncertainty and Moral Hazard: Comment","authors":"M. Ellman, Sjaak Hurkens","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3094034","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Strausz (2017) claims that crowdfunding implements the optimal mechanism design outcome in an environment with entrepreneurial moral hazard and private cost information. Unfortunately, his analysis, solution and claim depend critically on imposing an untenable condition (29) that he had explicitly discarded from his weak feasibility concept.1 This condition is essentially equivalent to ex post participation. We explain why it is inconsistent to assume consumers can opt out after learning the entrepreneur's cost structure in a model of fraud. We then study weak feasibility without the corresponding ex post participation constraint. We provide a simple example of a crowdfunding design that raises profit and welfare by tolerating some fraud risk. This shows how cross-subsidizing between cost states relaxes the most restrictive moral hazard constraints and generates better outcomes. We then characterize the optimal mechanism in the case of one consumer and two cost states. In general, this must hide information, including prices, from consumers. So crowdfunding cannot implement these optima.","PeriodicalId":409712,"journal":{"name":"ERPN: Entrepreneurs (Finance) (Topic)","volume":"46 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-12-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"6","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ERPN: Entrepreneurs (Finance) (Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3094034","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

Abstract

Strausz (2017) claims that crowdfunding implements the optimal mechanism design outcome in an environment with entrepreneurial moral hazard and private cost information. Unfortunately, his analysis, solution and claim depend critically on imposing an untenable condition (29) that he had explicitly discarded from his weak feasibility concept.1 This condition is essentially equivalent to ex post participation. We explain why it is inconsistent to assume consumers can opt out after learning the entrepreneur's cost structure in a model of fraud. We then study weak feasibility without the corresponding ex post participation constraint. We provide a simple example of a crowdfunding design that raises profit and welfare by tolerating some fraud risk. This shows how cross-subsidizing between cost states relaxes the most restrictive moral hazard constraints and generates better outcomes. We then characterize the optimal mechanism in the case of one consumer and two cost states. In general, this must hide information, including prices, from consumers. So crowdfunding cannot implement these optima.
众筹理论——考虑需求不确定性和道德风险的机制设计方法评论
strauss(2017)认为众筹在存在企业家道德风险和私人成本信息的环境下实现了最优的机制设计结果。不幸的是,他的分析、解决方案和主张严重依赖于强加一个站不住脚的条件(29),而他已经从他薄弱的可行性概念中明确地抛弃了这个条件这种情况实质上相当于事后参与。我们解释了为什么在欺诈模型中假设消费者在了解企业家的成本结构后可以选择退出是不一致的。然后,我们研究了在没有相应事后参与约束的情况下的弱可行性。我们提供了一个简单的众筹设计例子,通过容忍一些欺诈风险来提高利润和福利。这表明,成本州之间的交叉补贴如何放宽最严格的道德风险约束,并产生更好的结果。然后,我们描述了一个消费者和两个成本状态下的最优机制。一般来说,这必须对消费者隐藏包括价格在内的信息。所以众筹无法实现这些优化。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信