Platform Standards, Collusion and Quality Incentives
AbstractThis paper examines how quality incentives are related to the interoperability of competing platforms. Platforms choose whether to operate standardised or exclusively, prior to quality and subsequent price competition. We find that platforms choose a common standard if they can coordinate their quality provision. The actual investment then depends on the cost of quality provision: If rather high, platforms refrain from investment; if rather low, platforms maintain vertically differentiated platforms. The latter case is socially more desirable than exclusivity where platforms do not invest. Nevertheless, quality competition of standardised platforms induces the highest investment and maximum welfare.
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 Free University of Berlin, Humboldt University of Berlin, University of Bonn, University of Mannheim, University of Munich in its series Discussion Paper Series of SFB/TR 15 Governance and the Efficiency of Economic Systems with number 257.
Date of creation: Jan 2009
Date of revision:
Contact details of provider:
Postal: Geschwister-Scholl-Platz 1, D-80539 Munich, Germany
Web page: http://www.sfbtr15.de/
More information through EDIRC
two-sided markets; standards; investment in transaction quality;
This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:
- NEP-ALL-2009-03-22 (All new papers)
- NEP-COM-2009-03-22 (Industrial Competition)
- NEP-NET-2009-03-22 (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.:
- Anette Boom & Pio Baake, .
"Vertical Product Differentiation, Network Externalities, and Compatibility Decisions,"
010, Departmental Working Papers.
- Baake, Pio & Boom, Anette, 2001. "Vertical product differentiation, network externalities, and compatibility decisions," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 19(1-2), pages 267-284, January.
- Bester, H. & Petrakis, E., 1991.
"The Incentives for Cost Reduction in a Differentiated Industry,"
9136, Tilburg - Center for Economic Research.
- Bester, Helmut & Petrakis, Emmanuel, 1993. "The incentives for cost reduction in a differentiated industry," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 11(4), pages 519-534.
- Bester, H. & Petrakis, E., 1991. "The Incentives for Cost Reduction in a Differentiated Industry," Discussion Paper 1991-36, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
- Doganoglu, Toker & Wright, Julian, 2006.
"Multihoming and compatibility,"
International Journal of Industrial Organization,
Elsevier, vol. 24(1), pages 45-67, January.
- Schiff, Aaron, 2003. "Open and closed systems of two-sided networks," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 15(4), pages 425-442, December.
- Joseph Farrell and Garth Saloner., 1987.
"Coordination Through Committees and Markets,"
Economics Working Papers
8740, University of California at Berkeley.
- Farrell, Joseph & Saloner, Garth, 1987. "Coordination Through Committees and Markets," Department of Economics, Working Paper Series qt5sn4b6v4, Department of Economics, Institute for Business and Economic Research, UC Berkeley.
- Farrell, Joseph & Saloner, Garth, 1988. "Coordination Through Committees and Markets," Department of Economics, Working Paper Series qt08w115vq, Department of Economics, Institute for Business and Economic Research, UC Berkeley.
- Joseph Farrell and Garth Saloner., 1988. "Coordination through Committees and Markets," Economics Working Papers 8864, University of California at Berkeley.
- Walter Distaso & Paolo Lupi & Fabio M. Manenti, 2005.
"Platform Competition and Broadband Uptake: Theory and Empirical Evidence from the European Union,"
- Distaso, Walter & Lupi, Paolo & Manenti, Fabio M., 2006. "Platform competition and broadband uptake: Theory and empirical evidence from the European union," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 18(1), pages 87-106, March.
- 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, 06.
- 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.
- 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.
- Stanley M. Besen & Joseph Farrell, 1994. "Choosing How to Compete: Strategies and Tactics in Standardization," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 8(2), pages 117-131, Spring.
- Economides, Nicholas, 1989. "Desirability of Compatibility in the Absence of Network Externalities," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 79(5), pages 1165-81, December.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Alexandra Frank).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.