IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/annopr/v199y2012i1p3-2210.1007-s10479-011-0914-3.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Competition among providers in loss networks

Author

Listed:
  • Patrick Maillé
  • Bruno Tuffin

Abstract

Communication networks are becoming ubiquitous and more and more competitive among revenue-maximizing providers, operating on potentially different technologies. In this paper, we propose to analyze thanks to game theory the competition of providers playing with access prices and fighting for customers. Considering a slotted-time model, the part of demand exceeding capacity is lost and has to be resent. We consider an access price for submitted packets, thus inducing a congestion pricing through losses. Customers therefore choose the provider with the cheapest average price per correctly transmitted unit of traffic. The model is a two-level game, the lower level for the distribution of customers among providers, and the upper level for the competition on prices among providers, taking into account what the subsequent repartition at the lower level will be. We prove that the upper level has a unique Nash equilibrium, for which the user repartition among different available providers is also unique, and, remarkably, efficient in the sense of social welfare (with a so-called price of anarchy equal to one). Moreover, even when adding a higher level game on capacity disclosure with a possibility of lying for providers, providers are better off being truthful, and the unique Nash equilibrium is thus unchanged. Copyright Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2012

Suggested Citation

  • Patrick Maillé & Bruno Tuffin, 2012. "Competition among providers in loss networks," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 199(1), pages 3-22, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:annopr:v:199:y:2012:i:1:p:3-22:10.1007/s10479-011-0914-3
    DOI: 10.1007/s10479-011-0914-3
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s10479-011-0914-3
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10479-011-0914-3?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gibbens, R. & Mason, R. & Steinberg, Richard, 2000. "Internet service classes under competition," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 23577, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    2. Burkhard Stiller & Peter Reichl & Simon Leinen, 2001. "Pricing and Cost Recovery for Internet Services: Practical Review, Classification, and Application of Relevant Models," Netnomics, Springer, vol. 3(2), pages 149-171, September.
    3. Hélène Le Cadre & Mustapha Bouhtou & Bruno Tuffin, 2009. "Consumers’ preference modeling to price bundle offers in the telecommunications industry: a game with competition among operators," Netnomics, Springer, vol. 10(2), pages 171-208, October.
    4. Xavier Vives, 2001. "Oligopoly Pricing: Old Ideas and New Tools," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 026272040x, December.
    5. José R. Correa & Nicolás Figueroa & Nicolás E. Stier-Moses, 2008. "Pricing with markups in industries with increasing marginal costs," Documentos de Trabajo 256, Centro de Economía Aplicada, Universidad de Chile.
    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. Nihat Kasap & Hasan Hüseyin Turan & Hüseyin Savran & Berna Tektas-Sivrikaya & Dursun Delen, 2018. "Provider selection and task allocation in telecommunications with QoS degradation policy," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 263(1), pages 311-337, April.

    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. Patrick Maillé & Bruno Tuffin, 2011. "Competition among providers in loss networks," Post-Print hal-00724665, HAL.
    2. Retsef Levi & Georgia Perakis & Gonzalo Romero, 2017. "On the Effectiveness of Uniform Subsidies in Increasing Market Consumption," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 63(1), pages 40-57, January.
    3. Rodney Beard, 2015. "N-Firm Oligopoly With General Iso-Elastic Demand," Bulletin of Economic Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 67(4), pages 336-345, October.
    4. Ciwei Dong & Liu Yang & Chi To Ng, 2020. "Quantity Leadership for a Dual-Channel Supply Chain with Retail Service," Asia-Pacific Journal of Operational Research (APJOR), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 37(02), pages 1-32, March.
    5. Kaplow, Louis & Shapiro, Carl, 2007. "Antitrust," Handbook of Law and Economics, in: A. Mitchell Polinsky & Steven Shavell (ed.), Handbook of Law and Economics, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 15, pages 1073-1225, Elsevier.
    6. McCarthy, Ian M., 2016. "Advertising intensity and welfare in an equilibrium search model," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 20-26.
    7. Rodrigo J. Harrison & Roberto Munoz, 2003. "Stability and Equilibrium Selection in a Link Formation Game," Game Theory and Information 0306004, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    8. Leandro Arozamena & Estelle Cantillon, 2004. "Investment Incentives in Procurement Auctions," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 71(1), pages 1-18.
    9. Joseph E. Harrington, Jr., 2004. "Cartel Pricing Dynamics in the Presence of an Antitrust Authority," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 35(4), pages 651-673, Winter.
    10. Lapo Filistrucchi & Tobias J. Klein, 2013. "Price Competition in Two-Sided Markets with Heterogeneous Consumers and Network Effects," Working Papers 13-20, NET Institute.
    11. MITRAILLE Sébastien & MOREAUX Michel, 2007. "Inventories and Endogenous Stackelberg Hierarchy in Two-period Cournot Oligopoly," LERNA Working Papers 07.02.223, LERNA, University of Toulouse.
    12. Alexandre de Corniere, 2013. "Search Advertising," Economics Series Working Papers 649, University of Oxford, Department of Economics.
    13. Nocke, Volker & White, Lucy, 2010. "Vertical merger, collusion, and disruptive buyers," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 28(4), pages 350-354, July.
    14. Narine Badasyan & Subhadip Chakrabarti, 2003. "Private Peering Among Internet Backbone Providers," Industrial Organization 0301002, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 20 Jan 2003.
    15. Sen, Debapriya & Stamatopoulos, Giorgos, 2016. "Licensing under general demand and cost functions," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 253(3), pages 673-680.
    16. Alex Dickson & Roger Hartley, 2006. "On a foundation for Cournot equilibrium," Economics Discussion Paper Series 0638, Economics, The University of Manchester.
    17. Sudipta Sarangi & Pascal Billand & Christophe Bravard & S. Chakrabarti, 2009. "Spying in Multi-market Oligopolies," Departmental Working Papers 2009-11, Department of Economics, Louisiana State University.
    18. Jingsong Cui, 2005. "The Demand for International Message Telephone Services: A Two-Stage Budgeting Model," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 27(2), pages 167-183, September.
    19. Léautier, Thomas-Olivier & Rochet, Jean-Charles, 2014. "On the strategic value of risk management," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 153-169.
    20. Ludovic Julien & Olivier Musy & Aurélien Saïdi, 2011. "Do Followers Really Matter in Stackelberg Competition?," Lecturas de Economía, Universidad de Antioquia, Departamento de Economía, issue 75, pages 11-27.

    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:spr:annopr:v:199:y:2012:i:1:p:3-22:10.1007/s10479-011-0914-3. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.