Intermediaries reduce reputational information costs in extralegal markets.

Evidence

Brokers are able to gather information about individuals’ reputations for trustworthiness at a lower effective cost than individual buyers and sellers because a broker’s investment is less transaction specific. When a buyer and a seller invest in acquiring information about their respective reputations only to find that the buyer needs a particular size stone that the seller does not have, the parties have lost part of their investment. While the information acquired may be useful to them in the future, its value diminishes over time as its accuracy decreases. In contrast, a broker who has this information can shop around immediately for new trading partners for either party. — Lisa Bernestein, Opting out of the Legal System, 133

Categorization

  • XREF: Connects to Coleman-style social capital theory—brokers as weak-tie bridges in dense networks, and parallels the reader’s interest in how reputation information flows (or is blocked) in closed communities like the Sicilian piazza. — connects to: Bourses move reputational information as efficiently as goods — Lisa Bernestein, Opting out of the Legal System, 49; Insider reputation monitoring is cheaper than bank credit checking — Lisa Bernestein, Opting out of the Legal System, 119; Extralegal reputation-based contracting can work in large markets when information flows cheaply. — Lisa Bernestein, Opting out of the Legal System, 178 (+10 more)
  • DEFINE: Clarifies why broker intermediation is efficient: their reputation-info investment is repeatable across many transactions, unlike one-off buyer-seller matches.

Broader Connections