IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ormnsc/v57y2011i11p1913-1925.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Competing Matchmakers: An Experimental Analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Tanjim Hossain

    (Rotman School of Management, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario M5S 3E6, Canada)

  • Dylan Minor

    (Kellogg School of Management, Northwestern University, Evanston, Illinois 60208)

  • John Morgan

    (Haas School of Business, University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, California 94720)

Abstract

Platform competition is ubiquitous, yet platform market structure is little understood. Theory models typically suffer from equilibrium multiplicity--platforms might coexist or the market might tip to either platform. We use laboratory experiments to study the outcomes of platform competition. When platforms are primarily vertically differentiated, we find that even when platform coexistence is theoretically possible, markets inevitably tip to the more efficient platform. When platforms are primarily horizontally differentiated, so there is no single efficient platform, we find strong evidence of equilibrium coexistence. This paper was accepted by Peter Wakker, decision analysis.

Suggested Citation

  • Tanjim Hossain & Dylan Minor & John Morgan, 2011. "Competing Matchmakers: An Experimental Analysis," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 57(11), pages 1913-1925, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:inm:ormnsc:v:57:y:2011:i:11:p:1913-1925
    DOI: 10.1287/mnsc.1110.1407
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.1110.1407
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/mnsc.1110.1407?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Attila Ambrus & Rossella Argenziano, 2009. "Asymmetric Networks in Two-Sided Markets," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 1(1), pages 17-52, February.
    2. Ettore Damiano & Li Hao, 2008. "Competing Matchmaking," Journal of the European Economic Association, MIT Press, vol. 6(4), pages 789-818, June.
    3. Jennifer Brown & John Morgan, 2009. "How Much Is a Dollar Worth? Tipping versus Equilibrium Coexistence on Competing Online Auction Sites," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 117(4), pages 668-700, August.
    4. Huck, Steffen & Normann, Hans-Theo & Oechssler, Jorg, 2004. "Two are few and four are many: number effects in experimental oligopolies," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 53(4), pages 435-446, April.
    5. Van Huyck, John B & Battalio, Raymond C & Beil, Richard O, 1990. "Tacit Coordination Games, Strategic Uncertainty, and Coordination Failure," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 80(1), pages 234-248, March.
    6. Glenn Ellison & Drew Fudenberg, 2003. "Knife-Edge or Plateau: When Do Market Models Tip?," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 118(4), pages 1249-1278.
    7. Caillaud, Bernard & Jullien, Bruno, 2003. "Chicken & Egg: Competition among Intermediation Service Providers," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 34(2), pages 309-328, Summer.
    8. Glenn Ellison & Drew Fudenberg & Markus Möbius, 2004. "Competing Auctions," Journal of the European Economic Association, MIT Press, vol. 2(1), pages 30-66, March.
    9. Young, H Peyton, 1993. "The Evolution of Conventions," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 61(1), pages 57-84, January.
    10. Liebowitz, S J & Margolis, Stephen E, 1990. "The Fable of the Keys," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 33(1), pages 1-25, April.
    11. Morgan, John & Orzen, Henrik & Sefton, Martin, 2009. "Network architecture and traffic flows: Experiments on the Pigou-Knight-Downs and Braess Paradoxes," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 66(1), pages 348-372, May.
    12. Tanjim Hossain & John Morgan, 2009. "The Quest for QWERTY," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 99(2), pages 435-440, May.
    13. Nicholas Economides & Evangelos Katsamakas, 2006. "Two-Sided Competition of Proprietary vs. Open Source Technology Platforms and the Implications for the Software Industry," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(7), pages 1057-1071, July.
    14. Selten, R. & Chmura, T. & Pitz, T. & Kube, S. & Schreckenberg, M., 2007. "Commuters route choice behaviour," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 58(2), pages 394-406, February.
    15. repec:hrv:faseco:4589709 is not listed on IDEAS
    16. David, Paul A, 1985. "Clio and the Economics of QWERTY," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 75(2), pages 332-337, May.
    17. Caillaud, Bernard & Jullien, Bruno, 2001. "Competing cybermediaries," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 45(4-6), pages 797-808, May.
    18. Jean-Charles Rochet & Jean Tirole, 2003. "Platform Competition in Two-Sided Markets," Journal of the European Economic Association, MIT Press, vol. 1(4), pages 990-1029, June.
    19. Michael L. Katz & Carl Shapiro, 1994. "Systems Competition and Network Effects," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 8(2), pages 93-115, Spring.
    20. Urs Fischbacher, 2007. "z-Tree: Zurich toolbox for ready-made economic experiments," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 10(2), pages 171-178, June.
    21. S. J. Liebowitz & Stephen E. Margolis, 1994. "Network Externality: An Uncommon Tragedy," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 8(2), pages 133-150, Spring.
    22. Jean-Charles Rochet & Jean Tirole, 2002. "Cooperation Among Competitors: Some Economics Of Payment Card Associations," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 33(4), pages 549-570, Winter.
    23. Rapoport, Amnon & Mak, Vincent & Zwick, Rami, 2006. "Navigating congested networks with variable demand: Experimental evidence," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 27(5), pages 648-666, October.
    24. Rapoport, Amnon & Kugler, Tamar & Dugar, Subhasish & Gisches, Eyran J., 2009. "Choice of routes in congested traffic networks: Experimental tests of the Braess Paradox," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 65(2), pages 538-571, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Wiebke Roß & Jens Weghake, 2018. "Wa(h)re Liebe: Was Online-Dating-Plattformen über zweiseitige Märkte lehren," TUC Working Papers in Economics 0017, Abteilung für Volkswirtschaftslehre, Technische Universität Clausthal (Department of Economics, Technical University Clausthal).
    2. Hagiu, Andrei & Jullien, Bruno, 2014. "Search diversion and platform competition," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 33(C), pages 48-60.
    3. Maximilian Julius Krome & Ulrich Pidun, 2023. "Conceptualization of research themes and directions in business ecosystem strategies: a systematic literature review," Management Review Quarterly, Springer, vol. 73(2), pages 873-920, June.
    4. Lars Boerner & Daniel Quint, 2023. "Medieval Matching Markets," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 64(1), pages 23-56, February.
    5. Heggedal, Tom-Reiel & Helland, Leif, 2014. "Platform selection in the lab," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 168-177.
    6. Huotari, Pontus & Järvi, Kati & Kortelainen, Samuli & Huhtamäki, Jukka, 2017. "Winner does not take all: Selective attention and local bias in platform-based markets," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 313-326.
    7. Piolatto, A. & Schuett, Florian, 2022. "Information vs Competition : How Platform Design Affects Profits and Surplus," Other publications TiSEM 43e43ee1-c784-4b60-9d62-e, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    8. Janet Hua Jiang, 2020. "CBDC adoption and usage: some insights from field and laboratory experiments," Staff Analytical Notes 2020-12, Bank of Canada.
    9. Lester T. Chan, 2021. "Divide and conquer in two‐sided markets: A potential‐game approach," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 52(4), pages 839-858, December.
    10. Tanjim Hossain & John Morgan, 2013. "When Do Markets Tip? A Cognitive Hierarchy Approach," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(3), pages 431-453, May.
    11. Jullien, Bruno & Hagiu, Andrei, 2013. "Strategic Search Diversion, Product Affiliation and Platform Competition," CEPR Discussion Papers 9451, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    12. Shuilin Liu & Xudong Lin & Xiaoli Huang & Hanyang Luo & Sumin Yu, 2023. "Research on Service-Driven Benign Market with Platform Subsidy Strategy," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-21, January.
    13. Arifovic, Jasmina & Duffy, John & Jiang, Janet Hua, 2023. "Adoption of a new payment method: Experimental evidence," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 154(C).
    14. Avi Goldfarb & Teck-Hua Ho & Wilfred Amaldoss & Alexander Brown & Yan Chen & Tony Cui & Alberto Galasso & Tanjim Hossain & Ming Hsu & Noah Lim & Mo Xiao & Botao Yang, 2012. "Behavioral models of managerial decision-making," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 23(2), pages 405-421, June.
    15. Kevin J. Boudreau, 2021. "Promoting Platform Takeoff and Self-Fulfilling Expectations: Field Experimental Evidence," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(9), pages 5953-5967, September.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Tanjim Hossain & John Morgan, 2013. "When Do Markets Tip? A Cognitive Hierarchy Approach," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(3), pages 431-453, May.
    2. Jullien, Bruno & Pavan, Alessandro & Rysman, Marc, 2021. "Two-sided Markets, Pricing, and Network Effects," TSE Working Papers 21-1238, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE).
    3. Attila Ambrus & Rosella Argenziano, 2004. "Network Markets and Consumer Coordination," CERS-IE WORKING PAPERS 0423, Institute of Economics, Centre for Economic and Regional Studies.
    4. Attila Ambrus & Rossella Argenziano, 2004. "Network Markets and Consumers Coordination," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 1481, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University.
    5. Attila Ambrus & Rossella Argenziano, 2009. "Asymmetric Networks in Two-Sided Markets," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 1(1), pages 17-52, February.
    6. Renato Gomes & Alessandro Pavan, 2013. "Cross-Subsidization and Matching Design," Discussion Papers 1559, Northwestern University, Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science.
    7. Paul Belleflamme & Martin Peitz, 2019. "Managing competition on a two‐sided platform," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(1), pages 5-22, January.
    8. Calvano, Emilio & Polo, Michele, 2021. "Market power, competition and innovation in digital markets: A survey," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 54(C).
    9. Hanna Halaburda & Mikołaj Jan Piskorski & Pınar Yıldırım, 2018. "Competing by Restricting Choice: The Case of Matching Platforms," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(8), pages 3574-3594, August.
    10. Wiebke Roß & Jens Weghake, 2018. "Wa(h)re Liebe: Was Online-Dating-Plattformen über zweiseitige Märkte lehren," TUC Working Papers in Economics 0017, Abteilung für Volkswirtschaftslehre, Technische Universität Clausthal (Department of Economics, Technical University Clausthal).
    11. Carlos Alós-Ferrer & Georg Kirchsteiger & Markus Walzl, 2010. "On the Evolution of Market Institutions: The Platform Design Paradox," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 120(543), pages 215-243, March.
    12. Kasun P Wijayaratna & Vinayak V Dixit & Laurent Denant-Boemont & S Travis Waller, 2017. "An experimental study of the Online Information Paradox: Does en-route information improve road network performance?," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(9), pages 1-17, September.
    13. Paul Belleflamme & Martin Peitz, 2018. "Platforms and network effects," Chapters, in: Luis C. Corchón & Marco A. Marini (ed.), Handbook of Game Theory and Industrial Organization, Volume II, chapter 11, pages 286-317, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    14. Gomes, Renato & Pavan, Alessandro, 2016. "Many-to-many matching and price discrimination," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 11(3), September.
    15. Jørgen Veisdal, 2020. "The dynamics of entry for digital platforms in two-sided markets: a multi-case study," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 30(3), pages 539-556, September.
    16. Rapoport, Amnon & Qi, Hang & Mak, Vincent & Gisches, Eyran J., 2019. "When a few undermine the whole: A class of social dilemmas in ridesharing," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 166(C), pages 125-137.
    17. Vincent Mak & Darryl A. Seale & Eyran J. Gisches & Amnon Rapoport & Meng Cheng & Myounghee Moon & Rui Yang, 2018. "A network ridesharing experiment with sequential choice of transportation mode," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 85(3), pages 407-433, October.
    18. Rodolphe Durand & Robert M. Grant & Tammy L. Madsen & David P. McIntyre & Arati Srinivasan, 2017. "Networks, platforms, and strategy: Emerging views and next steps," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(1), pages 141-160, January.
    19. Emmanuel Dechenaux & Shakun Mago & Laura Razzolini, 2014. "Traffic congestion: an experimental study of the Downs-Thomson paradox," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 17(3), pages 461-487, September.
    20. Reisinger, Markus, 2014. "Two-part tariff competition between two-sided platforms," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 168-180.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:inm:ormnsc:v:57:y:2011:i:11:p:1913-1925. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.