IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/jecrev/v61y2010i4p558-564.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Note On Durable Goods Monopolists: Commitment To Forward Compatibility

Author

Listed:
  • SANG‐HO LEE
  • LE DUC NIEM

Abstract

This note re-examines the previous results on durable goods monopolists under the time inconsistency problem that the firm tends to make its goods less compatible as a “planned obsolescence” strategy in the presence of network effects. We find that the possibility of the commitment to forward compatibility is profitable to the monopolist, depending upon the degree of technological progress and network effects. Therefore, contractual commitments that are frequently feasible and observed in real‐world markets make the society better off.

Suggested Citation

  • Sang‐Ho Lee & Le Duc Niem, 2010. "A Note On Durable Goods Monopolists: Commitment To Forward Compatibility," The Japanese Economic Review, Japanese Economic Association, vol. 61(4), pages 558-564, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:jecrev:v:61:y:2010:i:4:p:558-564
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1111/j.1468-5876.2009.00506.x
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Drew Fudenberg & Jean Tirole, 1998. "Upgrades, Tradeins, and Buybacks," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 29(2), pages 235-258, Summer.
    2. Choi, Jay Pil, 1994. "Network Externality, Compatibility Choice, and Planned Obsolescence," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 42(2), pages 167-182, June.
    3. Michael Waldman, 2003. "Durable Goods Theory for Real World Markets," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 17(1), pages 131-154, Winter.
    4. Glenn Ellison & Drew Fudenberg, 2000. "The Neo-Luddite's Lament: Excessive Upgrades in the Software Industry," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 31(2), pages 253-272, Summer.
    5. Jeremy Bulow, 1986. "An Economic Theory of Planned Obsolescence," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 101(4), pages 729-749.
    6. Sang‐Ho Lee, 2006. "Durable Goods Monopolists And Backward Compatibility," The Japanese Economic Review, Japanese Economic Association, vol. 57(1), pages 141-155, March.
    7. Michael Waldman, 1993. "A New Perspective on Planned Obsolescence," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 108(1), pages 273-283.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Athanasopoulos, Thanos, 2015. "Efficient Upgrading in Durable Network Goods: Is Commitment Always Good?," Economic Research Papers 270543, University of Warwick - Department of Economics.
    2. Cerquera Dussán, Daniel, 2007. "Durable Goods, Innovation and Network Externalities," ZEW Discussion Papers 07-086, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    3. Michael Waldman, 2004. "Antitrust Perspectives for Durable-Goods Markets," CESifo Working Paper Series 1306, CESifo.
    4. Eric Brouillat, 2015. "Live fast, die young? Investigating product life spans and obsolescence in an agent-based model," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 25(2), pages 447-473, April.
    5. Utaka, Atsuo, 2008. "Pricing strategy, quality signaling, and entry deterrence," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 26(4), pages 878-888, July.
    6. Atsuo Utaka, 2015. "High Price Strategy and Quality Signalling," The Japanese Economic Review, Japanese Economic Association, vol. 66(3), pages 408-420, September.
    7. Eric Brouillat, 2011. "Durability of consumption goods and market competition: an agent-based modelling," Post-Print hal-00780254, HAL.
    8. Kuppelwieser, Volker G. & Klaus, Phil & Manthiou, Aikaterini & Boujena, Othman, 2019. "Consumer responses to planned obsolescence," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 157-165.
    9. Jong‐Hee Hahn, 2006. "Damaged durable goods," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 37(1), pages 121-133, March.
    10. Qiu_Hong Wang & Kai-Lung Hui, 2005. "Technology Timing and Pricing In the Presence of an Installed Base," Industrial Organization 0512013, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    11. Baojun Jiang & Lin Tian, 2018. "Collaborative Consumption: Strategic and Economic Implications of Product Sharing," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(3), pages 1171-1188, March.
    12. Il-Horn Hann & Byungwan Koh & Marius F. Niculescu, 2016. "The Double-Edged Sword of Backward Compatibility: The Adoption of Multigenerational Platforms in the Presence of Intergenerational Services," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 27(1), pages 112-130, March.
    13. Judith Chevalier & Austan Goolsbee, 2009. "Are Durable Goods Consumers Forward-Looking? Evidence from College Textbooks," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 124(4), pages 1853-1884.
    14. Ramesh Sankaranarayanan, 2007. "Innovation and the Durable Goods Monopolist: The Optimality of Frequent New-Version Releases," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(6), pages 774-791, 11-12.
    15. Juan Ruiz, 2003. "Another Perspective on Planned obsolescence: is there really too much Innovation?," Industrial Organization 0302001, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    16. Athanasopoulos, Thanos, 2013. "Efficient Upgrading in Network Goods : Is Commitment Always Good?," The Warwick Economics Research Paper Series (TWERPS) 1006, University of Warwick, Department of Economics.
    17. Hoppe, Heidrun C. & Lee, In Ho, 2003. "Entry deterrence and innovation in durable-goods monopoly," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 47(6), pages 1011-1036, December.
    18. Atsuo Utaka, 2022. "Clearance sales and new product introduction," The Japanese Economic Review, Springer, vol. 73(3), pages 539-554, July.
    19. Ramon Caminal, 2016. "Dynamic Product Diversity," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 64(1), pages 1-26, March.
    20. Gerstle, Ari D. & Waldman, Michael, 2016. "Mergers in durable-goods industries: A re-examination of market power and welfare effects," Research in Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(4), pages 677-692.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    L1 ; D4 ;

    JEL classification:

    • L1 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance
    • D4 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design

    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:bla:jecrev:v:61:y:2010:i:4:p:558-564. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/jeaaaea.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.