The monopoly benchmark on two-sided markets
AbstractThe literature on the effects of market concentration in platform industries or two-sided markets often compares the competitive outcome against a benchmark. This benchmark is either the “joint management” solution in which one decision maker runs all platforms or a “pure” monopoly with just one platform. Literature has not generally discussed, which benchmark is the appropriate one. We show that the appropriate benchmark, i.e. how many platforms the monopolist will operate, depends on whether agents multi- or singlehome, whether the externalities are positive or negative, and in some cases on the properties of the demand functions. Different situations require different benchmarks. Our results also help to anticipate the effects of proposed platform mergers, where the assessment might crucially depend on the number of platforms after a merger.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. 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.
Bibliographic InfoPaper provided by University Library of Munich, Germany in its series MPRA Paper with number 34987.
Date of creation: 01 Nov 2011
Date of revision:
two-sided markets; market concentration; monopoly;
Find related papers by JEL classification:
- K20 - Law and Economics - - Regulation and Business Law - - - General
- L51 - Industrial Organization - - Regulation and Industrial Policy - - - Economics of Regulation
- L13 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Oligopoly and Other Imperfect Markets
- D42 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure and Pricing - - - Monopoly
- D43 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure and Pricing - - - Oligopoly and Other Forms of Market Imperfection
- L12 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Monopoly; Monopolization Strategies
This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:
- NEP-ALL-2011-12-13 (All new papers)
- NEP-COM-2011-12-13 (Industrial Competition)
- NEP-IND-2011-12-13 (Industrial Organization)
- NEP-LAW-2011-12-13 (Law & Economics)
- NEP-NET-2011-12-13 (Network Economics)
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.:
- Rochet, Jean-Charles & Tirole, Jean, 2003.
"Platform Competition in Two-Sided Markets,"
Open Access publications from University of Toulouse 1 Capitole
http://neeo.univ-tlse1.fr, University of Toulouse 1 Capitole.
- Jean-Charles Rochet & Jean Triole, 2002. "Platform Competition in Two Sided Markets," FMG Discussion Papers dp409, Financial Markets Group.
- Rochet, Jean-Charles & Tirole, Jean, 2003. "Platform Competition in Two-Sided Markets," IDEI Working Papers 152, Institut d'Économie Industrielle (IDEI), Toulouse.
- E. Glen Weyl, 2010. "A Price Theory of Multi-sided Platforms," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 100(4), pages 1642-72, September.
- Attila Ambrus & Rossella Argenziano, 2009.
"Asymmetric Networks in Two-Sided Markets,"
American Economic Journal: Microeconomics,
American Economic Association, vol. 1(1), pages 17-52, February.
- Argenziano, Rossella & Ambrus, Attila, 2009. "Asymmetric Networks in Two-sided Markets," Scholarly Articles 4589709, Harvard University Department of Economics.
- Ambrus, Attila & Argenziano, Rossella, 2009. "Asymmetric Networks in Two-Sided Markets," Scholarly Articles 3204916, Harvard University Department of Economics.
- Mark Armstrong, 2006.
"Competition in two‐sided markets,"
RAND Journal of Economics,
RAND Corporation, vol. 37(3), pages 668-691, 09.
- Armstrong, M., 2006. "Competition in two-sided markets," Open Access publications from University College London http://discovery.ucl.ac.u, University College London.
- Mark Armstrong, 2005. "Competition in Two-Sided Markets," Industrial Organization 0505009, EconWPA.
- Caillaud, Bernard & Jullien, Bruno, 2003. " Chicken & Egg: Competition among Intermediation Service Providers," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 34(2), pages 309-28, Summer.
- Ambarish Chandra & Allan Collard-Wexler, 2009.
"Mergers in Two-Sided Markets: An Application to the Canadian Newspaper Industry,"
Journal of Economics & Management Strategy,
Wiley Blackwell, vol. 18(4), pages 1045-1070, December.
- Chandra, Ambarish & Collard-Wexler, Allan, 2008. "Mergers in Two-Sided Markets: An Application to the Canadian Newspaper Industry," MPRA Paper 7954, University Library of Munich, Germany.
- Mark J. McCabe & Christopher M. Snyder, 2007. "Academic Journal Prices in a Digital Age: A Two-Sided Market Model," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 7(1), pages 2.
- Chaudhri, Vivek, 1998. "Pricing and efficiency of a circulation industry: The case of newspapers," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 10(1), pages 59-76, March.
- Simon P. Anderson, 2005. "Market Provision of Broadcasting: A Welfare Analysis," Review of Economic Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 72(4), pages 947-972, October.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Ekkehart Schlicht).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.