IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/halshs-00111166.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Vertical differentiation, network externalities and compatibility decisions: an alternative approach

Author

Listed:
  • Hend Ghazzai

    (CES - Centre d'économie de la Sorbonne - UP1 - Université Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, LEGI - Laboratoire d'Économie et de Gestion Industrielle [Tunis] - Ecole Polytechnique de Tunisie - UCAR - Université de Carthage (Tunisie))

  • Rim Lahmandi-Ayed

    (LEGI - Laboratoire d'Économie et de Gestion Industrielle [Tunis] - Ecole Polytechnique de Tunisie - UCAR - Université de Carthage (Tunisie))

Abstract

We characterize the equilibrium of a game in vertically differentiated market which exhibits network externalities. There are two firms, an incumbent and a potential entrant. Compatibility means in our model that the inherent qualities of the goods are close enough. By choosing its quality, the entrant chooses in the same time to be compatible or not. The maximal quality difference that allows compatibility i.e the compatibility interval is chosen by the incumbent which involves costs increasing with the width of that interval. We show that in order to have two active firms at price equilibrium, the sufficient condition on the market size of a standard vertical differentiation model remains valid under compatibility. However, an additional condition on the firms' qualities is needed under incompatibility. For a small quality segment, the incumbent can block entry choosing an empty compatibility interval. At the subgame perfect equilibrium, incompatibility prevails if the quality segment is large and the compatibility costs are high. Compatibility prevails for sufficiently large quality segments and low costs of compatibility. Finally there is no entry if the quality segment is small and the compatibility costs are high.

Suggested Citation

  • Hend Ghazzai & Rim Lahmandi-Ayed, 2006. "Vertical differentiation, network externalities and compatibility decisions: an alternative approach," Post-Print halshs-00111166, HAL.
  • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:halshs-00111166
    Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://shs.hal.science/halshs-00111166
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://shs.hal.science/halshs-00111166/document
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Baake, Pio & Boom, Anette, 2001. "Vertical product differentiation, network externalities, and compatibility decisions," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 19(1-2), pages 267-284, January.
    2. Navon, Ami & Shy, Oz & Thisse, Jacques-François, 1995. "Product Differentiation in the Presence of Positive and Negative Network Effects," CEPR Discussion Papers 1306, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    3. ANDERSON, Simon P. & de PALMA, André & THISSE, Jacques-François, 1992. "Interpretations of the logit discrete choice models and the theory of product differentiation," LIDAM Reprints CORE 1017, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
    4. Nicolas Jonard & Eric Schenk, 2004. "A note on compatibility and entry in a circular model of product differentiation," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 12(1), pages 1-9.
    5. repec:ebl:ecbull:v:12:y:2004:i:1:p:1-9 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. Jeanneret, Marie-Helene & Verdier, Thierry, 1996. "Standardization and protection in a vertical differentiation model," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 12(2), pages 253-271, September.
    7. Nocholas Economides & Frederick Flyer, 1998. "Equilibrium Coalition Structures in Markets for Network Goods," Annals of Economics and Statistics, GENES, issue 49-50, pages 361-380.
    8. repec:adr:anecst:y:1998:i:49-50:p:13 is not listed on IDEAS
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Ghazzai Hend & Lahmandi-Ayed Rim, 2009. "Vertical Differentiation, Social Networks and Compatibility Decisions," The B.E. Journal of Theoretical Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 9(1), pages 1-23, June.
    2. Baake, Pio & Boom, Anette, 2001. "Vertical product differentiation, network externalities, and compatibility decisions," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 19(1-2), pages 267-284, January.
    3. Andreea Cosnita‐Langlais & Alexander Rasch, 2023. "Horizontal mergers, cost savings, and network effects," Bulletin of Economic Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 75(1), pages 65-82, January.
    4. Griva, Krina & Vettas, Nikolaos, 2011. "Price competition in a differentiated products duopoly under network effects," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 23(1), pages 85-97, March.
    5. Simon P. Anderson & André de Palma, 2012. "Competition for attention in the Information (overload) Age," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 43(1), pages 1-25, March.
    6. Stennek, Johan & Tangerås, Thomas, 2006. "Competition vs. Regulation in Mobile Telecommunications," Working Paper Series 685, Research Institute of Industrial Economics.
    7. Ariu, Andrea & Breinlich, Holger & Corcos, Gregory & Mion, Giordano, 2019. "The interconnections between services and goods trade at the firm-level," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 173-188.
    8. Pierre Picard & Takatoshi Tabuchi, 2010. "Self-organized agglomerations and transport costs," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 42(3), pages 565-589, March.
    9. Stefan Buehler & Daniel Halbheer, 2011. "Selling when Brand Image Matters," Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics (JITE), Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 167(1), pages 102-118, March.
    10. Bita Hajihashemi & Amin Sayedi & Jeffrey D. Shulman, 2022. "The Perils of Personalized Pricing with Network Effects," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 41(3), pages 477-500, May.
    11. Reme Bjørn-Atle, 2019. "Competition in Markets with Quality Uncertainty and Network Effects," Review of Network Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 18(4), pages 205-242, December.
    12. José A. Novo‐Peteiro, 2023. "Product design with attribute dependence," Manchester School, University of Manchester, vol. 91(4), pages 361-385, July.
    13. De Palma, Andre & Motamedi, Kiarash & Picard, Nathalie & Waddell, Paul, 2007. "Accessibility and environmental quality: inequality in the Paris housing market," European Transport \ Trasporti Europei, ISTIEE, Institute for the Study of Transport within the European Economic Integration, issue 36, pages 47-74.
    14. Carpentier, Alain & Letort, Elodie, 2009. "Modeling acreage decisions within the multinomial Logit framework," Working Papers 211011, Institut National de la recherche Agronomique (INRA), Departement Sciences Sociales, Agriculture et Alimentation, Espace et Environnement (SAE2).
    15. Gary-Bobo, Robert J. & Larribeau, Sophie, 2002. "A Structural Econometric Model of Price Discrimination in the Mortgage Lending Industry," CEPR Discussion Papers 3302, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    16. de Grauwe, Paul & Gerba, Eddie, 2015. "Stock market cycles and supply side dynamics," FinMaP-Working Papers 45, Collaborative EU Project FinMaP - Financial Distortions and Macroeconomic Performance: Expectations, Constraints and Interaction of Agents.
    17. Biing‐Shiunn Yang & Chao‐Cheng Mai, 2009. "Löschian competition under demand uncertainty," Papers in Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 88(4), pages 765-784, November.
    18. Aguirregabiria, Victor & Ho, Chun-Yu, 2012. "A dynamic oligopoly game of the US airline industry: Estimation and policy experiments," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 168(1), pages 156-173.
    19. Toshihiro Matsumura & Daisuke Shimizu, 2015. "Endogenous Flexibility In The Flexible Manufacturing System," Bulletin of Economic Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 67(1), pages 1-13, January.
    20. Andre De Palma & Fay Dunkerley & Stef Proost, 2010. "Trip Chaining: Who Wins Who Loses?," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 19(1), pages 223-258, March.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Vertical differentiation; compatibility; network externalities; Différenciation verticale; effets de réseaux; compatibilité;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • L13 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Oligopoly and Other Imperfect Markets
    • L15 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Information and Product Quality
    • D43 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design - - - Oligopoly and Other Forms of Market Imperfection

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:hal:journl:halshs-00111166. 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: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    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.