IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/net/wpaper/1612.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Entry into complementary good markets with network effects

Author

Listed:
  • Gaston Llanes

    (Pontificia Universidad Catolica de Chile, Escuela de Administracion, Vicuna Mackenna 4860, Macul, Santiago, Chile)

  • Andrea Mantovani

    (Department of Economics, University of Bologna, Strada Maggiore 45, 40125 Bologna, Italy)

  • Francisco Ruiz-Aliseda

    (Pontificia Universidad Catolica de Chile, Escuela de Administracion, Vicuna Mackenna 4860, Macul, Santiago, Chile)

Abstract

We examine whether an incumbent active in a market with strong network effects can be challenged by an entrant already active in the market of a complementary good. When only the entrant benefits from such a complementarity in the network market, we find that it can conquer such a market if and only if the degree of complementarity is large enough. In such cases, the entrant may use the network good as a loss-leader so as to expand the market of the complementary good. When the incumbent's network good is enhanced too by the existence of the complementary good, we study if the entrant is better or worse off. Finally, we argue that, even though pure bundling may be an effective entry strategy and it may be socially desirable, it may be harmful for the entrant to use it.

Suggested Citation

  • Gaston Llanes & Andrea Mantovani & Francisco Ruiz-Aliseda, 2016. "Entry into complementary good markets with network effects," Working Papers 16-12, NET Institute.
  • Handle: RePEc:net:wpaper:1612
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.netinst.org/Llanes_16-12.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    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. 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.
    3. Nicholas Economides, 1997. "The Economics of Networks," Brazilian Electronic Journal of Economics, Department of Economics, Universidade Federal de Pernambuco, vol. 1(0), December.
    4. Zhijun Chen & Patrick Rey, 2012. "Loss Leading as an Exploitative Practice," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 102(7), pages 3462-3482, December.
    5. Schmalensee, Richard, 1984. "Gaussian Demand and Commodity Bundling," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 57(1), pages 211-230, January.
    6. Marvin B. Lieberman & David B. Montgomery, 1988. "First‐mover advantages," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 9(S1), pages 41-58, June.
    7. 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.
    8. Grilo, Isabel & Shy, Oz & Thisse, Jacques-Francois, 2001. "Price competition when consumer behavior is characterized by conformity or vanity," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 80(3), pages 385-408, June.
    9. Ramon Casadesus-Masanell & Francisco Ruiz-Aliseda, 2008. "Platform Competition, Compatibility, and Social Efficiency," Working Papers 08-32, NET Institute.
    10. Whinston, Michael D, 1990. "Tying, Foreclosure, and Exclusion," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 80(4), pages 837-859, September.
    11. Gary Biglaiser & Jacques Crémer, 2016. "The Value of Incumbency in Heterogeneous Platforms," CESifo Working Paper Series 5829, CESifo.
    12. Jay Pil Choi, 2010. "Tying In Two‐Sided Markets With Multi‐Homing," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 58(3), pages 607-626, September.
    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. Farrell, Joseph & Klemperer, Paul, 2007. "Coordination and Lock-In: Competition with Switching Costs and Network Effects," Handbook of Industrial Organization, in: Mark Armstrong & Robert Porter (ed.), Handbook of Industrial Organization, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 31, pages 1967-2072, Elsevier.
    15. Jullien, Bruno & Halaburda, Hanna & Yehezkel, Yaron, 2016. "Dynamic Competition with Network Externalities: Why History Matters," CEPR Discussion Papers 11205, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    16. Crémer, Jacques & Biglaiser, Gary, 2016. "The value of incumbency in heterogeneous platforms," CEPR Discussion Papers 11207, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    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. Dennis W. Carlton & Michael Waldman, 2002. "The Strategic Use of Tying to Preserve and Create Market Power in Evolving Industries," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 33(2), pages 194-220, Summer.
    19. Carmen Matutes & Pierre Regibeau, 1988. ""Mix and Match": Product Compatibility without Network Externalities," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 19(2), pages 221-234, Summer.
    20. Andrei Hagiu & Daniel Spulber, 2013. "First-Party Content and Coordination in Two-Sided Markets," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 59(4), pages 933-949, April.
    21. Matutes, Carmen & Regibeau, Pierre, 1992. "Compatibility and Bundling of Complementary Goods in a Duopoly," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 40(1), pages 37-54, March.
    22. Economides, Nicholas, 1989. "Desirability of Compatibility in the Absence of Network Externalities," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 79(5), pages 1165-1181, December.
    23. Katz, Michael L & Shapiro, Carl, 1985. "Network Externalities, Competition, and Compatibility," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 75(3), pages 424-440, June.
    24. R. Preston McAfee & John McMillan & Michael D. Whinston, 1989. "Multiproduct Monopoly, Commodity Bundling, and Correlation of Values," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 104(2), pages 371-383.
    25. Feng Zhu & Marco Iansiti, 2012. "Entry into platform‐based markets," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(1), pages 88-106, January.
    26. Katz, Michael L & Shapiro, Carl, 1992. "Product Introduction with Network Externalities," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 40(1), pages 55-83, March.
    27. William James Adams & Janet L. Yellen, 1976. "Commodity Bundling and the Burden of Monopoly," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 90(3), pages 475-498.
    28. Barry Nalebuff, 2004. "Bundling as an Entry Barrier," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 119(1), pages 159-187.
    29. Yannis Bakos & Erik Brynjolfsson, 2000. "Bundling and Competition on the Internet," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 19(1), pages 63-82, May.
    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. Daniel A. Levinthal, 2019. "Special Issue on Strategy in the Digital Era," Strategy Science, INFORMS, vol. 4(4), pages 251-252, December.
    2. Constance E. Helfat & Aseem Kaul & David J. Ketchen & Jay B. Barney & Olivier Chatain & Harbir Singh, 2023. "Renewing the resource‐based view: New contexts, new concepts, and new methods," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 44(6), pages 1357-1390, June.
    3. Li, Quan & Zha, Yong & Dong, Yu, 2023. "Subsidize or Not: The Competition of Credit Card and Online Credit in Platform-based Supply Chain System," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 305(2), pages 644-658.
    4. Keran Zhao & Yingda Lu & Yuheng Hu & Yili Hong, 2023. "Direct and Indirect Spillovers from Content Providers’ Switching: Evidence from Online Livestreaming," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 34(3), pages 847-866, 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. Belleflamme,Paul & Peitz,Martin, 2015. "Industrial Organization," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9781107687899, January.
    2. 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.
    3. Stole, Lars A., 2007. "Price Discrimination and Competition," Handbook of Industrial Organization, in: Mark Armstrong & Robert Porter (ed.), Handbook of Industrial Organization, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 34, pages 2221-2299, Elsevier.
    4. Etro, Federico, 2016. "Research in economics and industrial organization," Research in Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(4), pages 511-517.
    5. Zhou, Jidong, 2021. "Mixed bundling in oligopoly markets," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 194(C).
    6. Jullien, Bruno & Pavan, Alessandro & Rysman, Marc, 2021. "Two-sided Markets, Pricing, and Network Effects," TSE Working Papers 21-1238, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE).
    7. Jidong Zhou, 2017. "Competitive Bundling," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 85, pages 145-172, January.
    8. Andrea Mantovani, 2013. "The Strategic Effect of Bundling: A New Perspective," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 42(1), pages 25-43, February.
    9. Matutes, Carmen & Regibeau, Pierre, 1996. "A selective review of the economics of standardization. Entry deterrence, technological progress and international competition," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 12(2), pages 183-209, September.
    10. Sang‐Hyun Kim & Jong‐Hee Hahn, 2022. "On the profitability of interfirm bundling in oligopolies," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(3), pages 657-673, August.
    11. Gayer, Amit & Shy, Oz, 2016. "A welfare evaluation of tying strategies," Research in Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(4), pages 623-637.
    12. Bartelt, Nadja, 2018. "Bundling in Internetmärkten: Ökonomische Besonderheiten, Wettbewerbseffekte und Regulierungsimplikationen," Ilmenau Economics Discussion Papers 120, Ilmenau University of Technology, Institute of Economics.
    13. Shuai, Jie & Yang, Huanxing & Zhang, Lan, 2022. "Dominant firm and competitive bundling in oligopoly markets," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 421-447.
    14. Alexei Alexandrov, 2015. "Anti-Competitive Interconnection: the effects of the elasticity of consumers' expectations and the shape of the network effects function," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 63(1), pages 74-99, March.
    15. Banerji, A. & Dutta, Bhaskar, 2009. "Local network externalities and market segmentation," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 27(5), pages 605-614, September.
    16. Mark Armstrong, 2016. "Nonlinear Pricing," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 8(1), pages 583-614, October.
    17. Nicholas Economides, 1997. "The Economics of Networks," Brazilian Electronic Journal of Economics, Department of Economics, Universidade Federal de Pernambuco, vol. 1(0), December.
    18. Akifumi Ishihara & Noriyuki Yanagawa, 2013. "Dark Sides of Patent Pools with Compulsory Independent Licensing," CARF F-Series CARF-F-318, Center for Advanced Research in Finance, Faculty of Economics, The University of Tokyo.
    19. 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.
    20. Bong‐Ju Kim & Inho Chung, 2010. "Inter‐Market Competition Through Bundling In The Presence Of Cost Advantage," The Japanese Economic Review, Japanese Economic Association, vol. 61(1), pages 116-132, March.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    network effects; complementarities; bundling; incumbency advantage; entry;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • L13 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Oligopoly and Other Imperfect Markets
    • L14 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Transactional Relationships; Contracts and Reputation
    • L41 - Industrial Organization - - Antitrust Issues and Policies - - - Monopolization; Horizontal Anticompetitive Practices

    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:1612. 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.