IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/tuc/tucewp/0014.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

10 Jahre YouTube: Von dem Aufstieg einer Plattform und der Entwicklung neuer Märkte zum Kollateralschaden einer Google-Regulierung?

Author

Abstract

Vor ca. 10 Jahren wurde das Unternehmen YouTube gegründet, das bereits ein Jahr später in die Unternehmung Google integriert wurde. Die heute mehrseitige Plattform nahm seitdem eine bemerkenswerte Entwicklung und hat für die Unterhaltungsindustrie mittlerweile einen nicht zu verachtenden Stellenwert. Der folgende Beitrag soll zeigen, dass im Zuge YouTubes Entwicklung neue Märkte geschaffen wurden, die aufgrund der engen Verflechtung mit Google durch eine denkbare und von vielen Seiten auch geforderte Regulierung des Suchma-schinenanbieters ebenfalls gewandelt werden.

Suggested Citation

  • Wiebke Roß & Jens Weghake, 2015. "10 Jahre YouTube: Von dem Aufstieg einer Plattform und der Entwicklung neuer Märkte zum Kollateralschaden einer Google-Regulierung?," TUC Working Papers in Economics 0014, Abteilung für Volkswirtschaftslehre, Technische Universität Clausthal (Department of Economics, Technical University Clausthal).
    • Handle: RePEc:tuc:tucewp:0014
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://ftp.tu-clausthal.de/pub/institute/wiwi/RePEc/pdf/10JahreYouTube_RossWeghake_nachGutachten.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kevin M. Murphy & Steven J. Davis, 2000. "A Competitive Perspective on Internet Explorer," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 90(2), pages 184-187, May.
    2. 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.
    3. Dewenter, Ralf & Rösch, Jürgen & Terschüren, Anna, 2014. "Abgrenzung zweiseitiger Märkte am Beispiel von Internetsuchmaschinen," Working Paper 151/2014, Helmut Schmidt University, Hamburg.
    4. Blanckenburg Korbinian von, 2014. "Führt Google Shopping zu einer neuen Art von Wettbewerbsproblem?," Zeitschrift für Wirtschaftspolitik, De Gruyter, vol. 63(3), pages 240-256, December.
    5. Caillaud, Bernard & Jullien, Bruno, 2001. "Competing cybermediaries," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 45(4-6), pages 797-808, May.
    6. 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.
    7. Engelhardt Sebastian von & Freytag Andreas & Köllmann Volker, 2013. "Wettbewerbspolitischer Handlungsbedarf bei der Verknüpfung von zweiseitigen Märkten im Internet: Der Fall Google," Zeitschrift für Wirtschaftspolitik, De Gruyter, vol. 62(3), pages 311-332, December.
    8. repec:lus:zwipol:v:62:y:2013:i:3:p:11-332 is not listed on IDEAS
    9. Haucap, Justus & Kehder, Christiane, 2013. "Suchmaschinen zwischen Wettbewerb und Monopol: Der Fall Google," DICE Ordnungspolitische Perspektiven 44, Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf Institute for Competition Economics (DICE).
    10. Kathleen M. Eisenhardt & Jeffrey A. Martin, 2000. "Dynamic capabilities: what are they?," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 21(10‐11), pages 1105-1121, October.
    11. Smith,Vernon L., 2009. "Rationality in Economics," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521133388.
    12. Robert H. Bork & J. Gregory Sidak, 2012. "What Does The Chicago School Teach About Internet Search And The Antitrust Treatment Of Google?," Journal of Competition Law and Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 8(4), pages 663-700.
    13. von Hayek, Friedrich August, 1989. "The Pretence of Knowledge," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 79(6), pages 3-7, December.
    14. Vernon L. Smith, 2003. "Constructivist and Ecological Rationality in Economics," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 93(3), pages 465-508, June.
    15. 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.
    16. Oliver Falck & Justus Haucap & Jürgen Kühling & Constantin Mang, 2013. "Is Everything Regulated? – The Importance of the Demand-Side for Growth-Oriented Telecommunication Policy," ifo Schnelldienst, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, vol. 66(15), pages 42-46, August.
    17. Pollock, Rufus, 2008. "Is Google the next Microsoft? Competition, Welfare and Regulation in Internet Search," MPRA Paper 8885, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    18. Dewenter, Ralf, 2006. "Das Konzept der zweiseitigen Maerkte am Beispiel von Zeitungsmonopolen," Working Paper 53/2006, Helmut Schmidt University, Hamburg.
    19. Falck, Oliver & Haucap, Justus & Kühling, Jürgen & Mang, Constantin, 2013. "Alles Regulierung oder was? Die Bedeutung der Nachfrageseite für eine wachstumsorientierte Telekommunikationspolitik," DICE Ordnungspolitische Perspektiven 47, Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf Institute for Competition Economics (DICE).
    20. Daniel A. Crane, 2012. "Search Neutrality And Referral Dominance," Journal of Competition Law and Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 8(3), pages 459-468.
    21. Hoyt Bleakley & Jeffrey Lin, 2015. "History and the Sizes of Cities," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 105(5), pages 558-563, May.
    22. Nina Czernich & Oliver Falck & Tobias Kretschmer & Ludger Woessmann, 2011. "Broadband Infrastructure and Economic Growth," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 121(552), pages 505-532, May.
    23. David Evans & Richard Schmalensee, 2007. "The Industrial Organization of Markets with Two-Sided Platforms," CPI Journal, Competition Policy International, vol. 3.
    24. 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.
    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. 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.
    2. 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.
    3. Gaenssle, Sophia & Budzinski, Oliver, 2019. "Stars in social media: New light through old windows?," Ilmenau Economics Discussion Papers 123, Ilmenau University of Technology, Institute of Economics.
    4. Budzinski, Oliver, 2016. "Aktuelle Herausforderungen der Wettbewerbspolitik durch Marktplätze im Internet," Ilmenau Economics Discussion Papers 103, Ilmenau University of Technology, Institute of Economics.

    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. Roß Wiebke & Weghake Jens, 2015. "10 Jahre YouTube: Von dem Aufstieg einer Plattform und der Entwicklung neuer Märkte zum Kollateralschaden einer Google-Regulierung? / 10 Years YouTube: From the Arising of a Platform and the Developme," ORDO. Jahrbuch für die Ordnung von Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft, De Gruyter, vol. 66(1), pages 195-220, January.
    2. Haucap, Justus & Heimeshoff, Ulrich, 2017. "Ordnungspolitik in der digitalen Welt," DICE Ordnungspolitische Perspektiven 90, Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf Institute for Competition Economics (DICE).
    3. Budzinski, Oliver, 2016. "Aktuelle Herausforderungen der Wettbewerbspolitik durch Marktplätze im Internet," Ilmenau Economics Discussion Papers 103, Ilmenau University of Technology, Institute of Economics.
    4. Justus Haucap & Torben Stühmeier, 2016. "Competition and antitrust in Internet markets," Chapters, in: Johannes M. Bauer & Michael Latzer (ed.), Handbook on the Economics of the Internet, chapter 9, pages 183-210, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    5. Justus Haucap & Ulrich Heimeshoff, 2014. "Google, Facebook, Amazon, eBay: Is the Internet driving competition or market monopolization?," International Economics and Economic Policy, Springer, vol. 11(1), pages 49-61, February.
    6. Peitz, Martin & Valletti, Tommaso, 2015. "Reassessing competition concerns in electronic communications markets," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(10), pages 896-912.
    7. Charles Angelucci & Julia Cage & Michael Sinkinson, 2020. "Media Competition and News Diets," Working Papers hal-03393063, HAL.
    8. Calvano, Emilio & Polo, Michele, 2021. "Market power, competition and innovation in digital markets: A survey," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 54(C).
    9. repec:hal:spmain:info:hdl:2441/4ec86lkes59hv9tfv77ld1p5fr is not listed on IDEAS
    10. Renato Gomes & Alessandro Pavan, 2013. "Cross-Subsidization and Matching Design," Discussion Papers 1559, Northwestern University, Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science.
    11. Claire M. Weiller & Michael G. Pollitt, 2013. "Platform markets and energy services," Working Papers EPRG 1334, Energy Policy Research Group, Cambridge Judge Business School, University of Cambridge.
    12. 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.
    13. Zhiyong Liu & Yue Qiao, 2012. "Abuse of Market Dominance Under China’s 2007 Anti-monopoly Law: A Preliminary Assessment," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 41(1), pages 77-107, August.
    14. 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.
    15. Bruno Jullien & Alessandro Pavan, 2013. "Platform Competition under Dispersed Information," Discussion Papers 1568, Northwestern University, Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science.
    16. Oliver Budzinski & Annika Stöhr, 2019. "Competition policy reform in Europe and Germany – institutional change in the light of digitization," European Competition Journal, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(1), pages 15-54, January.
    17. Dewenter Ralf & Lüth Hendrik, 2015. "Eine alternative Definition von Suchneutralität / An alternative definition of search neutrality," ORDO. Jahrbuch für die Ordnung von Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft, De Gruyter, vol. 66(1), pages 221-242, January.
    18. Dittmann Heidi & Kuchinke Björn A., 2015. "Ordnungsökonomische Aspekte der Sharing Economy / Sharing Economy and Regulation," ORDO. Jahrbuch für die Ordnung von Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft, De Gruyter, vol. 66(1), pages 243-262, January.
    19. Jullien, Bruno & Pavan, Alessandro, 2013. "Platform Pricing under Dispersed Information," IDEI Working Papers 793, Institut d'Économie Industrielle (IDEI), Toulouse.
    20. 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.
    21. Graeme Guthrie & Julian Wright, 2007. "Competing Payment Schemes," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 55(1), pages 37-67, March.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Google; Marktmacht; Mehrseitige Märkte; Regulierung; YouTube;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D43 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design - - - Oligopoly and Other Forms of Market Imperfection
    • D85 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Network Formation
    • L12 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Monopoly; Monopolization Strategies
    • L25 - Industrial Organization - - Firm Objectives, Organization, and Behavior - - - Firm Performance
    • L51 - Industrial Organization - - Regulation and Industrial Policy - - - Economics of Regulation
    • L82 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Services - - - Entertainment; Media

    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:tuc:tucewp:0014. 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: Christian Hirschmann (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/avtucde.html .

    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.