Abstract: This article investigates how the use of contracts that condition discounts on the share a supplier receives of a retailer’s total purchases (market-share contracts) may affect market outcomes. The case of a dominant supplier that distributes its product through retailers that also sell substitute products is considered. It is found that when the supplier’s contracts can only depend on how much a retailer purchases its product (own-supplier contracts), both intra- and inter-brand competition cannot simultaneously be dampened. However, competition on all goods can simultaneously be dampened when market-share contracts are feasible. Compared to ownsupplier contracts, the use of market-share contracts increases the dominant supplier’s profit and, if demand is linear, lowers consumer surplus and welfare.
