IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/nbr/nberwo/9761.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Differentiation Strategy and Market Deregulation: Local Telecommunication Entry in the Late 1990s

Author

Listed:
  • Shane Greenstein
  • Michael Mazzeo

Abstract

The authors examine the role of differentiation strategies for entry behavior in markets for local telecommunication services in the late 1990s. Whereas the prior literature has used models of interaction among homogenous firms, this research is motivated by the claim of entrants that they differ substantially in their product offerings and business strategies. Exploiting a new, detailed data set of Competitive Local Exchange Carriers (CLECs) entry into over 700 U.S. cities, the authors take advantage of recent developments in the analysis of entry and competition among differentiated firms. They test and reject the null hypothesis of homogeneous competitors. They also find strong evidence that CLECs account for both potential market demand and the business strategies of competitors when making their entry decisions. This suggests that firms' incentives to differentiate their services should shape the policy debate for competitive local telecommunications.

Suggested Citation

  • Shane Greenstein & Michael Mazzeo, 2003. "Differentiation Strategy and Market Deregulation: Local Telecommunication Entry in the Late 1990s," NBER Working Papers 9761, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    • Handle: RePEc:nbr:nberwo:9761
    Note: IO PR
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.nber.org/papers/w9761.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Berry, Steven T, 1992. "Estimation of a Model of Entry in the Airline Industry," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 60(4), pages 889-917, July.
    2. Abel, Jaison R, 2002. "Entry into Regulated Monopoly Markets: The Development of a Competitive Fringe in the Local Telephone Industry," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 45(2), pages 289-316, October.
    3. Federico Mini, 2001. "The Role of Incentives for Opening Monopoly Markets: Comparing GTE and BOC Cooperation with Local Entrants," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 49(3), pages 379-414, September.
    4. Susan Athey & Scott Stern, 1998. "An Empirical Framework for Testing Theories About Complimentarity in Organizational Design," NBER Working Papers 6600, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    5. Michael J. Mazzeo, 2002. "Product Choice and Oligopoly Market Structure," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 33(2), pages 221-242, Summer.
    6. Zolnierek, James & Eisner, James & Burton, Ellen, 2001. "An Empirical Examination of Entry Patterns in Local Telephone Markets," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 19(2), pages 143-159, March.
    7. Bresnahan, Timothy F & Reiss, Peter C, 1991. "Entry and Competition in Concentrated Markets," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 99(5), pages 977-1009, October.
    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. Qing Hu & C. Derrick Huang, 2006. "The rise and fall of the competitive local exchange carriers in the U.S.: An institutional perspective," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 8(3), pages 225-239, July.
    2. Shane Greenstein & Michael Mazzeo, 2006. "The Role Of Differentiation Strategy In Local Telecommunication Entry And Market Evolution: 1999–2002," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 54(3), pages 323-350, 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. Jeremy Fox & Natalia Lazzati, 2013. "Identification of discrete choice models for bundles and binary games," CeMMAP working papers 04/13, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
    2. Christos Genakos & Mario Pagliero, 2022. "Competition and Pass-Through: Evidence from Isolated Markets," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 14(4), pages 35-57, October.
    3. Christian Bontemps & Raquel Menezes Bezerra Sampaio, 2020. "Entry games for the airline industry," Post-Print hal-02137358, HAL.
    4. Bernstein, Shai & Colonnelli, Emanuele & Giroud, Xavier & Iverson, Benjamin, 2019. "Bankruptcy spillovers," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 133(3), pages 608-633.
    5. Wei Zhou & Zidong Wang, 2020. "Competing for Search Traffic in Query Markets: Entry Strategy, Platform Design, and Entrepreneurship," Working Papers 20-12, NET Institute.
    6. Ali Umut Guler, 2018. "Inferring the Economics of Store Density from Closures: The Starbucks Case," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 37(4), pages 611-630, August.
    7. Ariel Pakes & Michael Ostrovsky & Steven Berry, 2007. "Simple estimators for the parameters of discrete dynamic games (with entry/exit examples)," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 38(2), pages 373-399, June.
    8. Bontemps, Christian & Kumar, Rohit, 2020. "A geometric approach to inference in set-identified entry games," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 218(2), pages 373-389.
    9. Katja Seim & Joel Waldfogel, 2013. "Public Monopoly and Economic Efficiency: Evidence from the Pennsylvania Liquor Control Board's Entry Decisions," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 103(2), pages 831-862, April.
    10. Tobias Kretschmer & Eugenio J. Miravete & Jose C. Pernias, 2012. "Competitive Pressure and the Adoption of Complementary Innovations," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 102(4), pages 1540-1570, June.
    11. Martin Lábaj & Karol Morvay & Peter Silanič & Christoph Weiss & Biliana Yontcheva, 2018. "Market structure and competition in transition: results from a spatial analysis," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 50(15), pages 1694-1715, March.
    12. Navarro, Salvador & Takahashi, Yuya, 2012. "A Semiparametric Test of Agent's Information Sets for Games of Incomplete Information," Discussion Paper Series of SFB/TR 15 Governance and the Efficiency of Economic Systems 432, Free University of Berlin, Humboldt University of Berlin, University of Bonn, University of Mannheim, University of Munich.
    13. Victor Aguirregabiria & Margaret Slade, 2017. "Empirical models of firms and industries," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 50(5), pages 1445-1488, December.
    14. Pesendorfer, Martin & Schmidt-Dengler, Philipp, 2003. "Identification and Estimation of Dynamic Games," CEPR Discussion Papers 3965, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    15. Xiao, Mo & Orazem, Peter F., 2011. "Does the fourth entrant make any difference?: Entry and competition in the early U.S. broadband market," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 29(5), pages 547-561, September.
    16. Catherine Schaumans & Frank Verboven, 2015. "Entry and Competition in Differentiated Products Markets," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 97(1), pages 195-209, March.
    17. Liu, An-Hsiang & Siebert, Ralph B., 2022. "The competitive effects of declining entry costs over time: Evidence from the static random access memory market," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 80(C).
    18. Joel Waldfogel, 2010. "Who Benefits Whom in the Neighborhood? Demographics and Retail Product Geography," NBER Chapters, in: Agglomeration Economics, pages 181-209, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    19. Jeremy T. Fox, 2018. "Estimating matching games with transfers," Quantitative Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 9(1), pages 1-38, March.
    20. Jeremy T. Fox & David H. Hsu & Chenyu Yang, 2012. "Unobserved Heterogeneity in Matching Games with an Application to Venture Capital," NBER Working Papers 18168, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • L5 - Industrial Organization - - Regulation and Industrial Policy
    • L9 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Transportation and Utilities

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:nbr:nberwo:9761. 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/nberrus.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.