Product Strategy for Innovators in Markets with Network Effects
This paper examines four alternative product strategies available to an innovating firm in markets with network effects: single-product monopoly, technology licensing, product-line extension, and a combination of licensing and product-line extension. We address three questions. First, what factors affect the attractiveness of each of the four product strategies? Second, under what conditions will any particular strategy dominate the others? Third, what is the impact of licensing fees on the profitability of a licensing strategy? We show that offering a product line utilizes consumer heterogeneity to increase the total user base and is superior to free licensing when the innovator's cost of producing a low-quality product is low and network effects are weak. However, because of the advantage of licensing in generating a larger installed base, free licensing can dominate line extension when network effects are strong, even if the innovator suffers no cost disadvantage compared to the competitor. We also show that paid licensing trumps free licensing when the clone product has a high quality or a low cost, regardless of network effect. Finally, strong network effects make a lump-sum fee more profitable than a royalty fee (or a combination of both) because a royalty fee reduces the licensee's production.
Volume (Year): 23 (2004)
Issue (Month): 2 (October)
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: 7240 Parkway Drive, Suite 300, Hanover, MD 21076 USA|
Web page: http://www.informs.org/
More information through EDIRC
References listed on IDEAS
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.:
- Teece, David J., 1993.
"Profiting from technological innovation: Implications for integration, collaboration, licensing and public policy,"
Elsevier, vol. 22(2), pages 112-113, April.
- Teece, David J., 1986. "Profiting from technological innovation: Implications for integration, collaboration, licensing and public policy," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 15(6), pages 285-305, December.
- Praveen K. Kopalle & Carl F. Mela & Lawrence Marsh, 1999. "The Dynamic Effect of Discounting on Sales: Empirical Analysis and Normative Pricing Implications," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 18(3), pages 317-332.
- Belleflamme, Paul, 1998. "Adoption of network technologies in oligopolies," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 16(4), pages 415-444, July.
- Barry L. Bayus, 1992. "The Dynamic Pricing of Next Generation Consumer Durables," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 11(3), pages 251-265.
- Sudheer Gupta & Richard Loulou, 1998. "Process Innovation, Product Differentiation, and Channel Structure: Strategic Incentives in a Duopoly," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 17(4), pages 301-316.
- 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.
- Anette Boom & Pio Baake, . "Vertical Product Differentiation, Network Externalities, and Compatibility Decisions," Papers 010, Departmental Working Papers.
- Engelbert Dockner & Steffen Jørgensen, 1988. "Optimal Pricing Strategies for New Products in Dynamic Oligopolies," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 7(4), pages 315-334.
- Anirudh Dhebar & Shmuel S. Oren, 1985. "Optimal Dynamic Pricing For Expanding Networks," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 4(4), pages 336-351.
- Michael L. Katz & Carl Shapiro, 1994. "Systems Competition and Network Effects," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 8(2), pages 93-115, Spring.
- Jinhong Xie & Marvin Sirbu, 1995. "Price Competition and Compatibility in the Presence of Positive Demand Externalities," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 41(5), pages 909-926, May.
- Bental, Benjamin & Spiegel, Menahem, 1995. "Network Competition, Product Quality, and Market Coverage in the Presence of Network Externalities," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(2), pages 197-208, June.
- Kathleen R. Conner, 1995. "Obtaining Strategic Advantage from Being Imitated: When Can Encouraging "Clones" Pay?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 41(2), pages 209-225, February.
- Amiya Basu & Tridib Mazumdar & S. P. Raj, 2003. "Indirect Network Externality Effects on Product Attributes," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(2), pages 209-221, April.
- Sachin Gupta & Dipak C. Jain & Mohanbir S. Sawhney, 1999. "Modeling the Evolution of Markets with Indirect Network Externalities: An Application to Digital Television," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 18(3), pages 396-416.
- Nicholas Economides & Fredrick Flyer, 1997. "Compatibility and Market Structure for Network Goods," Working Papers 98-02, New York University, Leonard N. Stern School of Business, Department of Economics.
- Preyas S. Desai, 2001. "Quality Segmentation in Spatial Markets: When Does Cannibalization Affect Product Line Design?," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(3), pages 265-283, August.
- Gregory Dobson & Shlomo Kalish, 1988. "Positioning and Pricing a Product Line," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 7(2), pages 107-125.
- Devavrat Purohit, 1994. "What Should You Do When Your Competitors Send in the Clones?," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 13(4), pages 392-411.
- Esser, P. & Leruth, L., 1988. "Marketing Compatible, Yet Differentiated Products: In Search Of Competitive Equilibria When Network Externalities Are At Work," Papers 8807, Universite Libre de Bruxelles - C.E.M.E..
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:inm:ormksc:v:23:y:2004:i:2:p:243-254. 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: (Mirko Janc)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.