IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/net/wpaper/1204.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Two-Sided Platform Competition in the Online Daily Deals Promotion Market

Author

Listed:
  • Byung-Cheol Kim

    (School of Economics, Georgia Institute of Technology)

  • Jeongsik Jay Lee

    (Scheller College of Business, Georgia Institute of Business)

  • Hyunwoo Park

    (School of Industrial and System Engineering)

Abstract

We empirically investigate the platform competition in the online daily deals promotion market that is characterized by intense rivalry between two leading promotion sites, Groupon and LivingSocial, that broker between merchants and consumers. We find that deals offered through Groupon, the incumbent, sell more and generate higher revenues than those offered by LivingSocial, the entrant. We show that the greater network size in the consumer side entirely explains the incumbent's lead in the merchant side performance, indicating the existence of cross-side network effects at the aggregated market level. However, this performance advantage is dampened by the entrant's competitive chasing at local markets through offers of greater discounts and lower prices. Moreover, the incumbent advantage quickly attenuates as the merchants repeat promotions over time. These countering forces appear to prevent this market from achieving a tipping equilibrium. Our findings thus help explain why different market structures arise in two-sided markets with network externalities.

Suggested Citation

  • Byung-Cheol Kim & Jeongsik Jay Lee & Hyunwoo Park, 2012. "Two-Sided Platform Competition in the Online Daily Deals Promotion Market," Working Papers 12-04, NET Institute.
    • Handle: RePEc:net:wpaper:1204
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.netinst.org/Kim_12-04.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. 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.
    2. Andrei Hagiu, 2006. "Pricing and Commitment by Two-Sided Platforms," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 37(3), pages 720-737, Autumn.
    3. Kenneth C. Wilbur, 2008. "A Two-Sided, Empirical Model of Television Advertising and Viewing Markets," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 27(3), pages 356-378, 05-06.
    4. Marc Rysman, 2004. "Competition Between Networks: A Study of the Market for Yellow Pages," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 71(2), pages 483-512.
    5. Roson Roberto, 2005. "Two-Sided Markets: A Tentative Survey," Review of Network Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 4(2), pages 1-19, June.
    6. Robert Seamans & Feng Zhu, 2010. "Technology Shocks in Multi-Sided Markets: The Impact of Craigslist on Local Newspapers," Working Papers 10-11, NET Institute.
    7. Mark Armstrong Author-Email: mark.armstrong@ucl.ac.uk Author-Workplace-Name: University College of London, 2006. "Competition in Two-Sided Markets," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 37(3), pages 668-691, Autumn.
    8. Xiaoquan (Michael) Zhang & Feng Zhu, 2011. "Group Size and Incentives to Contribute: A Natural Experiment at Chinese Wikipedia," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 101(4), pages 1601-1615, June.
    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. Jochen Reiner & Bernd Skiera, 2018. "Helping Merchants to Assess the Profitability of Deal-of-the-Day Promotions," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 48(3), pages 247-259, June.

    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. S. Sriram & Puneet Manchanda & Mercedes Bravo & Junhong Chu & Liye Ma & Minjae Song & Scott Shriver & Upender Subramanian, 2015. "Platforms: a multiplicity of research opportunities," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 26(2), pages 141-152, June.
    2. Dietl, Helmut & Lang, Markus & Lin, Panlang, 2013. "Advertising pricing models in media markets: Lump-sum versus per-consumer charges," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 25(4), pages 257-271.
    3. Alexander White & E. Glen Weyl, 2010. "Imperfect Platform Competition: A General Framework," Working Papers 10-17, NET Institute, revised Nov 2010.
    4. 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.
    5. Gawer, Annabelle, 2014. "Bridging differing perspectives on technological platforms: Toward an integrative framework," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(7), pages 1239-1249.
    6. Kim, Sung-min, 2014. "Policy on the media platform industry: The analysis of pricing policies of internet media with two-sided market theory," 25th European Regional ITS Conference, Brussels 2014 101395, International Telecommunications Society (ITS).
    7. Dong Choi & Jongeun Oh & Yeonbae Kim & Junseok Hwang, 2012. "Competition in the Korean Internet Portal Market: Network Effects, Profit, and Market Efficiency," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 40(1), pages 51-73, February.
    8. Galeotti, Andrea & Moraga-González, José Luis, 2009. "Platform intermediation in a market for differentiated products," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 53(4), pages 417-428, May.
    9. Van Cayseele, Patrick & Vanormelingen, Stijn, 2009. "Prices and Network Eects in Two-Sided Markets: the Belgian Newspaper Industry," Working Papers 2009/06, Hogeschool-Universiteit Brussel, Faculteit Economie en Management.
    10. Yong Chao & Timothy Derdenger, 2013. "Mixed Bundling in Two-Sided Markets in the Presence of Installed Base Effects," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 59(8), pages 1904-1926, August.
    11. Kim, Song-min, 2016. "How can we make a socially optimal large-scale media platform? Analysis of a monopolistic Internet media platform using two-sided market theory," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(9), pages 899-918.
    12. Øystein Foros & Hans Jarle Kind & Guttorm Schjelderup, 2012. "Ad Pricing by Multi-Channel Platforms: How to Make Viewers and Advertisers Prefer the Same Channel?," Journal of Media Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 25(3), pages 133-146, September.
    13. Budzinski, Oliver & Lindstädt-Dreusicke, Nadine, 2018. "The new media economics of video-on-demand markets: Lessons for competition policy," Ilmenau Economics Discussion Papers 116, Ilmenau University of Technology, Institute of Economics.
    14. Budzinski, Oliver & Lindstädt-Dreusicke, Nadine, 2019. "The new media economics of video-on-demand markets: Lessons for competition policy (updated version)," Ilmenau Economics Discussion Papers 125, Ilmenau University of Technology, Institute of Economics.
    15. E. Glen Weyl, 2010. "A Price Theory of Multi-sided Platforms," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 100(4), pages 1642-1672, September.
    16. David S. Evans & Richard Schmalensee, 2013. "The Antitrust Analysis of Multi-Sided Platform Businesses," NBER Working Papers 18783, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    17. Kevin J. Boudreau & Andrei Hagiu, 2009. "Platform Rules: Multi-Sided Platforms as Regulators," Chapters, in: Annabelle Gawer (ed.), Platforms, Markets and Innovation, chapter 7, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    18. Pinar Ozcan & Filipe M. Santos, 2015. "The market that never was: Turf wars and failed alliances in mobile payments," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(10), pages 1486-1512, October.
    19. Marco Antonielli & Lapo Filistrucchi, 2011. "Collusion and the political differentiation of newspapers," Working Papers 11-26, NET Institute, revised Nov 2011.
    20. Pierre ANDREOLETTI & Pierre GAZE & Maxime MENUET, 2015. "Can a Platform Make Profit with Consumers' Mobility? A Two-Sided Monopoly Model with Random Endogenous Side-Switching," LEO Working Papers / DR LEO 1969, Orleans Economics Laboratory / Laboratoire d'Economie d'Orleans (LEO), University of Orleans.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    two-sided market; platform competition; cross-side network effects; online daily deals; reputation effect;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D40 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design - - - General
    • L10 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - General
    • M20 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Business Economics - - - General

    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:1204. 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.