When facing repeated interactions, firms in an oligopoly can engage in tacit collusion,
using the threat of a price war in future periods to sustain higher prices and industry profits
in the current period. This paper explores how strategic voluntary disclosures can play
an important role as part of a tacit collusion. In each period, one firm receives a signal
on market size and must decide whether or not to publicly disclose the information before
engaging in price competition in the product market. Two main forces in play are (1) nodisclosure
makes it easier for the oligopoly to sustain higher prices because the uninformed
firms are uncertain about the market size (and therefore the benefit of deviating from collusion
is lower than otherwise); and (2) disclosure makes it easier to coordinate prices if
and when the oligopoly wishes to condition equilibrium prices on the market size. We find
that, when firms are sufficiently patient such that monopoly prices can be sustained as an
equilibrium, no-disclosure is (weakly) preferable to any other disclosure policy. Otherwise
and in contrast to the static model, a simple form of partial disclosure can be optimal: the
informed firm does not disclose when market size is either too high or too low but discloses
for intermediate market sizes, undercutting its competitors when its information is good.