  A durable good is a long-lasting good that can be consumed repeatedly over
time, and a duropolist is a monopolist in the market of a durable good. In
1972, Ronald Coase conjectured that a duropolist who lacks commitment power
cannot sell the good above the competitive price if the time between periods
approaches zero. Coase's counterintuitive conjecture was later proven by Gul et
al. (1986) under an infinite time horizon model with non-atomic consumers.
Remarkably, the situation changes dramatically for atomic consumers and an
infinite time horizon. Bagnoli et al. (1989) showed the existence of a
subgame-perfect Nash equilibrium where the duropolist extracts all the consumer
surplus. Observe that, in these cases, duropoly profits are either arbitrarily
smaller or arbitrarily larger than the corresponding static monopoly profits --
the profit a monopolist for an equivalent consumable good could generate. In
this paper we show that the result of Bagnoli et al. (1989) is in fact driven
by the infinite time horizon. Indeed, we prove that for finite time horizons
and atomic agents, in any equilibrium satisfying the standard skimming
property, duropoly profits are at most an additive factor more than static
monopoly profits. In particular, duropoly profits are always at least static
monopoly profits but never exceed twice the static monopoly profits.
  Finally we show that, for atomic consumers, equilibria may exist that do not
satisfy the skimming property. For two time periods, we prove that amongst all
equilibria that maximize duropoly profits, at least one of them satisfies the
skimming property. We conjecture that this is true for any number of time
period.
