IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this article





We analyse a stylised game of technology adoption with network effects and two new technologies. Potential adopters can adopt early, late or not at all. We show that one of the reasons for the failure of new technologies can be the presence of multiple incompatible variants of that technology. An adopter's individual incentives to adopt are lower with two technologies than with one. Turning to aggregate expected welfare, we find that two active technologies may be welfare-improving. Copyright 2008 The Authors. Journal compilation 2008 Blackwell Publishing Ltd. and the Editorial Board of The Journal of Industrial Economics.

Suggested Citation

  • Tobias Kretschmer, 2008. "SPLINTERING AND INERTIA IN NETWORK INDUSTRIES -super-," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 56(4), pages 685-706, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:jindec:v:56:y:2008:i:4:p:685-706

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    File Function: link to full text
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Jeremy Bulow & Ming Huang & Paul Klemperer, 1999. "Toeholds and Takeovers," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 107(3), pages 427-454, June.
    2. Levin, Dan & Kagel, John H., 2005. "Almost common values auctions revisited," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 49(5), pages 1125-1136, July.
    3. Jacob K. Goeree & Theo Offerman, 2003. "Competitive Bidding in Auctions with Private and Common Values," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 113(489), pages 598-613, July.
    4. de Frutos, Maria-Angeles & Pechlivanos, Lambros, 2006. "Second-price common-value auctions under multidimensional uncertainty," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 55(1), pages 43-71, April.
    5. Cantillon, Estelle, 2008. "The effect of bidders' asymmetries on expected revenue in auctions," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 62(1), pages 1-25, January.
    6. Marco Pagnozzi, 2007. "Sorry Winners," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 30(3), pages 203-225, May.
      • Marco Pagnozzi, 2003. "Sorry Winners," CSEF Working Papers 108, Centre for Studies in Economics and Finance (CSEF), University of Naples, Italy, revised 09 May 2007.
    7. Milgrom, Paul R & Weber, Robert J, 1982. "A Theory of Auctions and Competitive Bidding," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 50(5), pages 1089-1122, September.
    8. Eric Maskin & John Riley, 2000. "Asymmetric Auctions," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 67(3), pages 413-438.
    9. Ian Ayres & Peter Cramton, 1996. "Deficit Reduction Through Diversity: How Affirmative Action at the FCC Increased Auction Competition," Papers of Peter Cramton 96slr, University of Maryland, Department of Economics - Peter Cramton, revised 09 Jun 1998.
    10. Christopher Avery & John H. Kagel, 1997. "Second-Price Auctions with Asymmetric Payoffs: An Experimental Investigation," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 6(3), pages 573-603, September.
    11. Olivier Compte & Philippe Jehiel, 2002. "On the Value of Competition in Procurement Auctions," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 70(1), pages 343-355, January.
    12. Klemperer, Paul, 2002. "How (not) to run auctions: The European 3G telecom auctions," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 46(4-5), pages 829-845, May.
    13. Marco Pagnozzi, 2007. "Bidding to lose? Auctions with resale," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 38(4), pages 1090-1112, December.
    14. Paul Klemperer, 2004. "Auctions: Theory and Practice," Online economics textbooks, SUNY-Oswego, Department of Economics, number auction1, March.
    15. Bikhchandani, Sushil, 1988. "Reputation in repeated second-price auctions," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 46(1), pages 97-119, October.
    16. Klemperer, Paul, 1998. "Auctions with almost common values: The 'Wallet Game' and its applications," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 42(3-5), pages 757-769, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)


    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.

    Cited by:

    1. Bourreau, Marc & Cambini, Carlo & Doğan, Pınar, 2012. "Access pricing, competition, and incentives to migrate from “old” to “new” technology," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 30(6), pages 713-723.
    2. Claussen, Jörg & Kretschmer, Tobias & Spengler, Thomas, 2010. "Market leadership through technology – Backward compatibility in the U.S. Handheld Video Game Industry," Discussion Papers in Business Administration 12716, University of Munich, Munich School of Management.
    3. Michal Grajek & Tobias Kretschmer, 2008. "Estimating critical mass in the global cellular telephony market," ESMT Research Working Papers ESMT-08-004 (R1), ESMT European School of Management and Technology, revised 15 Apr 2010.
    4. JP Eggers & Michal Grajek & Tobias Kretschmer, 2011. "Performance implications of core and complementary pre-entry experience: The role of consumer heterogeneity in mobile telephony," ESMT Research Working Papers ESMT-11-03 (R2), ESMT European School of Management and Technology, revised 29 May 2012.
    5. Belleflamme,Paul & Peitz,Martin, 2015. "Industrial Organization," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9781107069978, March.
    6. Kerstan, Sven & Kretschmer, Tobias & Muehlfeld, Katrin, 2012. "The dynamics of pre-market standardization," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 105-119.
    7. Grajek, Michał & Kretschmer, Tobias, 2012. "Identifying critical mass in the global cellular telephony market," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 30(6), pages 496-507.
    8. Claussen, Jörg & Kretschmer, Tobias & Spengler, Thomas, 2010. "Backward Compatibility to Sustain Market Dominance – Evidence from the US Handheld Video Game Industry," Discussion Papers in Business Administration 11499, University of Munich, Munich School of Management.
    9. J. P. Eggers, 2016. "Reversing course: Competing technologies, mistakes, and renewal in flat panel displays," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(8), pages 1578-1596, August.

    More about this item


    Access and download statistics


    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:jindec:v:56:y:2008:i:4:p:685-706. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Wiley-Blackwell Digital Licensing) or (Christopher F. Baum). General contact details of provider: .

    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.

    We have no references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.