This file is part of IDEAS, which uses RePEc data


[ Papers | Articles | Software | Books | Chapters | Authors | Institutions | JEL Classification | NEP reports | Search | New papers by email | Author registration | Rankings | Volunteers | FAQ | Blog | Help! ]

Market Segmentation and the Sources of Rents from Innovation: Personal Computers in the Late 1980's

Author info | Abstract | Publisher info | Download info | Related research | Statistics
Author Info
Timothy F. Bresnahan
Scott Stern
Manuel Trajtenberg

Additional information is available for the following registered author(s):

Abstract

This paper evaluates the sources of transitory market power in the market for personal computers (PCs) during the late 1980's. Our analysis is motivated by the coexistence of low entry barriers into the PC industry and high rates of innovative investment by a small number of PC manufacturers. We attempt to understand these phenomena by measuring the role that different principles of product differentiation (PDs) played in segmenting this dynamic market. Our first PD measures the substitutability between Frontier (386-based) and Non- Frontier products, while the second PD measures the advantage of a brand-name reputation (e.g., by IBM). Building on advances in the measurement of product differentiation, we measure the separate roles that these PDs played in contributing to transitory market power. In so doing, this paper attempts to account for the market origins of innovative rents in the PC industry. Our principal finding is that, during the late 1980's, the PC market was highly segmented along both the Branded (B versus NB) and Frontier (F versusNF) dimensions. The effects of competitive events in any one cluster were confined mostly to that particular cluster, with little effect on other clusters. For example, less than 5% of the market share achieved by a hypothetical entrant would be market-stealing from other clusters. In addition, the product diffe- rentiation advantages of B and F were qualitatively different. The main advantage of F was limited to the isolation from NF competitors it provided; Brandedness both shifted out the product demand curve as well as segmenting B products from NB competition. These results help explain how transitory market power (arising from market segmentation) shaped the underlying incen- tives for innovation in the PC industry during the mid to late 1980s.

Download Info
To download:

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. Information about this may be contained in the File-Format links below. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: http://www.nber.org/papers/w5726.pdf
File Format: application/pdf
File Function:
Download Restriction: Access to the full text is generally limited to series subscribers, however if the top level domain of the client browser is in a developing country or transition economy free access is provided. More information about subscriptions and free access is available at http://www.nber.org/wwphelp.html.

As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

Publisher Info
Paper provided by National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc in its series NBER Working Papers with number 5726.

Download reference. The following formats are available: HTML (with abstract), plain text (with abstract), BibTeX, RIS (EndNote, RefMan, ProCite), ReDIF
Length:
Date of creation: Aug 1996
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:nbr:nberwo:5726

Note: IO PR
Contact details of provider:
Postal: National Bureau of Economic Research, 1050 Massachusetts Avenue Cambridge, MA 02138, U.S.A.
Phone: 617-868-3900
Email:
Web page: http://www.nber.org
More information through EDIRC

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its listing, contact: ().

Related research
Keywords:

Other versions of this item:

Find related papers by JEL classification:
L1 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

  1. Jerry A. Hausman, 1994. "Valuation of New Goods under Perfect and Imperfect Competition," NBER Working Papers 4970, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  2. Richard C. Levin & Alvin K. Klevorick & Richard R. Nelson & Sidney G. Winter, 1987. "Appropriating the Returns from Industrial Research and Development," Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Economic Studies Program, The Brookings Institution, vol. 18(1987-3), pages 783-832. [Downloadable!]
  3. Richard Gilbert & Carl Shapiro, 1990. "Optimal Patent Length and Breadth," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 21(1), pages 106-112, Spring. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
    Other versions:
  4. Ernst R. Berndt & Zvi Griliches, 1993. "Price Indexes for Microcomputers: An Exploratory Study," NBER Chapters, in: Price Measurements and Their Uses, pages 63-100 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc. [Downloadable!]
    Other versions:
  5. Steven T. Berry, 1994. "Estimating Discrete-Choice Models of Product Differentiation," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 25(2), pages 242-262, Summer. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  6. Hausman, J.A., 1994. "Valuation of New Goods Under Perfect and Imperfect Competition," Working papers 94-21, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Department of Economics.
  7. Kenneth Arrow, 1962. "Economic Welfare and the Allocation of Resources for Invention," NBER Chapters, in: The Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity: Economic and Social Factors, pages 609-626 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc. [Downloadable!]
  8. Richard C. Levin & Alvin K. Klevorick & Richard R. Nelson & Sidney G. Winter, 1988. "Appropriating the Returns from Industrial R&D," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 862, Cowles Foundation, Yale University. [Downloadable!]
  9. Small, Kenneth A, 1987. "A Discrete Choice Model for Ordered Alternatives," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 55(2), pages 409-24, March. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  10. Joanna Stavins, 1995. "Estimating demand elasticities in a differentiated product industry: the personal computer market," Working Papers 95-9, Federal Reserve Bank of Boston. [Downloadable!]
  11. Baker, Jonathan B. & Bresnahan, Timothy F., 1988. "Estimating the residual demand curve facing a single firm," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 6(3), pages 283-300. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  12. Jerry A. Hausman, 1996. "Valuation of New Goods under Perfect and Imperfect Competition," NBER Chapters, in: The Economics of New Goods, pages 207-248 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc. [Downloadable!]
  13. Chamberlain, Gary, 1987. "Asymptotic efficiency in estimation with conditional moment restrictions," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 305-334, March. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  14. Daniel McFadden, 1977. "Modelling the Choice of Residential Location," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 477, Cowles Foundation, Yale University. [Downloadable!]
  15. Berry, Steven & Levinsohn, James & Pakes, Ariel, 1995. "Automobile Prices in Market Equilibrium," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 63(4), pages 841-90, July. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  16. Timothy F. Bresnahan & Robert J. Gordon, 1996. "The Economics of New Goods," NBER Books, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc, number bres96-1.
Full references

Statistics
Access and download statistics

Did you know? Citation analysis on IDEAS includes online papers that are freely accessible and whose text could be automatically analyzed, currently about 210000 papers.

This page was last updated on 2009-11-7.


This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Department of Economics, College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, University of Connecticut using RePEc data on a server sponsored by the Society for Economic Dynamics.