IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/net/wpaper/0820.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Ad-sponsored Business Models and Compatibility Incentives of Social Networks

Author

Abstract

This paper examines social networks' incentives to establish compatibility under fee and ad-sponsored business models. I analyze the competition between two social networks and show that compatibility is only possible when the two networks are ad-sponsored. I also find that even when both networks are ad-sponsored, a network with a significant installed-base advantage may choose not to be compatible when the cost from sharing the market outweighs the benefit from additional ad profits. Finally, compatibility also requires a significant number of single-homing users. The results are consistent with empirical observations of social networks and suggest that increased adoption of ad-sponsored business models may lead to many de-facto standards in high-technology industries.

Suggested Citation

  • Feng Zhu, 2008. "Ad-sponsored Business Models and Compatibility Incentives of Social Networks," Working Papers 08-20, NET Institute, revised Sep 2008.
    • Handle: RePEc:net:wpaper:0820
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.netinst.org/Zhu_08-20.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Joseph Farrell & Garth Saloner, 1985. "Standardization, Compatibility, and Innovation," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 16(1), pages 70-83, Spring.
    2. Claude Crampes & Carole Haritchabalet & Bruno Jullien, 2009. "Advertising, Competition And Entry In Media Industries," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 57(1), pages 7-31, March.
    3. Doganoglu, Toker & Wright, Julian, 2006. "Multihoming and compatibility," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 24(1), pages 45-67, January.
    4. Jean Gabszewicz & Didier Laussel & Nathalie Sonnac, 1999. "TV-Broadcasting Competition and Advertising," Working Papers 99-72, Center for Research in Economics and Statistics.
    5. 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.
    6. Geoffrey G. Parker & Marshall W. Van Alstyne, 2005. "Two-Sided Network Effects: A Theory of Information Product Design," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 51(10), pages 1494-1504, October.
    7. Esther Gal‐Or & Anthony Dukes, 2003. "Minimum Differentiation in Commercial Media Markets," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 12(3), pages 291-325, September.
    8. Jack H. Beebe, 1977. "Institutional Structure and Program Choices in Television Markets," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 91(1), pages 15-37.
    9. Farrell, Joseph & Saloner, Garth, 1992. "Converters, Compatibility, and the Control of Interfaces," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 40(1), pages 9-35, March.
    10. Jean J. Gabszewicz & Didier Laussel & Nathalie Sonnac, 2006. "Competition In The Media And Advertising Markets," Manchester School, University of Manchester, vol. 74(1), pages 1-22, January.
    11. Jiawei Chen & Ulrich Doraszelski & Joseph E. Harrington, Jr., 2009. "Avoiding market dominance: product compatibility in markets with network effects," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 40(3), pages 455-485, September.
    12. Clements, Matthew T., 2004. "Direct and indirect network effects: are they equivalent?," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 22(5), pages 633-645, May.
    13. 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.
    14. Nicholas Economides & Fredrick Flyer, 1997. "Compatibility and Market Structure for Network Goods," Working Papers 98-02, New York University, Leonard N. Stern School of Business, Department of Economics.
    15. Economides, Nicholas & White, Lawrence J., 1994. "Networks and compatibility: Implications for antitrust," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 38(3-4), pages 651-662, April.
    16. Jacques Crémer & Patrick Rey & Jean Tirole, 2000. "Connectivity in the Commercial Internet," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 48(4), pages 433-472, December.
    17. Farrell, Joseph & Saloner, Garth, 1986. "Installed Base and Compatibility: Innovation, Product Preannouncements, and Predation," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 76(5), pages 940-955, December.
    18. Doyle, Chris, 1998. "Programming in a competitive broadcasting market: entry, welfare and regulation," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 10(1), pages 23-39, March.
    19. Simon P. Anderson & Stephen Coate, 2005. "Market Provision of Broadcasting: A Welfare Analysis," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 72(4), pages 947-972.
    20. David A. Malueg & Marius Schwartz, 2006. "Compatibility Incentives Of A Large Network Facing Multiple Rivals," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 54(4), pages 527-567, December.
    21. Jean J. Gabszewicz & Didier Laussel & Nathalie Sonnac, 2004. "Programming and Advertising Competition in the Broadcasting Industry," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 13(4), pages 657-669, December.
    22. Katz, Michael L & Shapiro, Carl, 1985. "Network Externalities, Competition, and Compatibility," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 75(3), pages 424-440, June.
    23. Michael Spence & Bruce Owen, 1977. "Television Programming, Monopolistic Competition, and Welfare," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 91(1), pages 103-126.
    24. Ulrich Kaiser, 2007. "Do Media Consumers Really Dislike Advertising? An Empirical Assessment of a Popular Assumption in Economic Theory," CIE Discussion Papers 2007-08, University of Copenhagen. Department of Economics. Centre for Industrial Economics.
    25. Lerner, Josh & Zhu, Feng, 2007. "What is the impact of software patent shifts? Evidence from Lotus v. Borland," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 25(3), pages 511-529, June.
    26. Gabszewicz, Jean J. & Laussel, Didier & Sonnac, Nathalie, 2005. "Does advertising lower the price of newspapers to consumers? A theoretical appraisal," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 87(1), pages 127-134, April.
    27. Holden, Steinar, 1993. "Network or pay-per-view? : A welfare analysis," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 43(1), pages 59-64.
    28. Peter O. Steiner, 1952. "Program Patterns and Preferences, and the Workability of Competition in Radio Broadcasting," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 66(2), pages 194-223.
    29. Cremer, Jacques & Rey, Patrick & Tirole, Jean, 2000. "Connectivity in the Commercial Internet," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 48(4), pages 433-472, December.
    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. Konstantinos Serfes & Eleftherios Zacharias, 2012. "Location Decisions of Competing Networks," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 21(4), pages 989-1005, December.
    2. Ramon Casadesus-Masanell & Feng Zhu, 2010. "Strategies to Fight Ad-Sponsored Rivals," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 56(9), pages 1484-1499, 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. Ramon Casadesus-Masanell & Feng Zhu, 2010. "Strategies to Fight Ad-Sponsored Rivals," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 56(9), pages 1484-1499, September.
    2. Ramon Casadesus-Masanell & Feng Zhu, 2009. "Strategies to Fight Ad-sponsored Rivals," Working Papers 09-09, NET Institute, revised Sep 2009.
    3. Ron Adner & Jianqing Chen & Feng Zhu, 2020. "Frenemies in Platform Markets: Heterogeneous Profit Foci as Drivers of Compatibility Decisions," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 66(6), pages 2432-2451, June.
    4. Anderson, Simon P. & Gabszewicz, Jean J., 2006. "The Media and Advertising: A Tale of Two-Sided Markets," Handbook of the Economics of Art and Culture, in: V.A. Ginsburgh & D. Throsby (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Art and Culture, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 18, pages 567-614, Elsevier.
    5. María Fernanda Viecens, 2009. "Compatibility with Firm Dominance," Working Papers 2009-12, FEDEA.
    6. Marco Antonielli & Lapo Filistrucchi, 2011. "Collusion and the political differentiation of newspapers," Working Papers 11-26, NET Institute, revised Nov 2011.
    7. Doh-Shin Jeon & Nikrooz Nasr, 2016. "News Aggregators and Competition among Newspapers on the Internet," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 8(4), pages 91-114, November.
    8. Jullien, Bruno & Pavan, Alessandro & Rysman, Marc, 2021. "Two-sided Markets, Pricing, and Network Effects," TSE Working Papers 21-1238, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE).
    9. Behringer, Stefan & Filistrucchi, Lapo, 2015. "Hotelling competition and political differentiation with more than two newspapers," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(C), pages 36-49.
    10. Maruyama Masayoshi & Zennyo Yusuke, 2013. "Compatibility and the Product Life Cycle in Two-Sided Markets," Review of Network Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 12(2), pages 131-155, June.
    11. Athanasopoulos, Thanos, 2014. "Compatibility, Intellectual Property,Innovation and Welfare in Durable Goods Markets with Network Effects," The Warwick Economics Research Paper Series (TWERPS) 1043, University of Warwick, Department of Economics.
    12. Athanasopoulos, Thanos, 2015. "Compatibility, Intellectual Property, Innovation and Welfare in Durable Goods Markets with Network E§ects," Economic Research Papers 270241, University of Warwick - Department of Economics.
    13. Simon P. Anderson & Stephen Coate, 2005. "Market Provision of Broadcasting: A Welfare Analysis," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 72(4), pages 947-972.
    14. Jullien, Bruno & Sand-Zantman, Wilfried, 2021. "The Economics of Platforms: A Theory Guide for Competition Policy," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 54(C).
    15. Norbäck, Pehr-Johan & Persson, Lars & Tå̊g, Joacim, 2014. "Acquisitions, entry, and innovation in oligopolistic network industries," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 1-12.
    16. Simon P. Anderson & Bruno Jullien, 2015. "The advertising-financed business model in two-sided media markets," Post-Print hal-02866192, HAL.
    17. P. Dogan, "undated". "Vertical Networks, Integration, and Connectivity," Working Paper 33644, Harvard University OpenScholar.
    18. Liu, He & Li, Xuerong & Wang, Shouyang, 2021. "A bibliometric analysis of 30 years of platform research: Developing the research agenda for platforms, the associated technologies and social impacts," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 169(C).
    19. Edward G. Anderson & Geoffrey G. Parker & Burcu Tan, 2014. "Platform Performance Investment in the Presence of Network Externalities," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 25(1), pages 152-172, March.
    20. Simon P. Anderson, 2005. "Regulation of Television advertising," Virginia Economics Online Papers 363, University of Virginia, Department of Economics.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Ad-sponsored; Compatibility; Social networks; Business models;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • L15 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Information and Product Quality
    • L10 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - General
    • M21 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Business Economics - - - Business Economics

    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:net:wpaper:0820. 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: Nicholas Economides (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.NETinst.org/ .

    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.