IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article

Complementarities and the Demand for Home Broadband Internet Services

  • Hongju Liu

    ()

    (School of Business, University of Connecticut, Connecticut 06269)

  • Pradeep K. Chintagunta

    ()

    (Booth School of Business, University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois 60637)

  • Ting Zhu

    ()

    (Booth School of Business, University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois 60637)

Before the deregulation of digital subscriber line (DSL) services by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) in 2005, phone companies were required to share their DSL bandwidth with independent DSL providers. Despite the large number of independent providers that entered the market, phone companies accounted for 95.3% of all DSL subscribers in 2005. A common explanation for this is based on supply-side factors such as the costs faced by these providers to lease phone lines from phone companies, as well as the price discounts offered by phone companies. In this paper, we look for a demand-side explanation for this market outcome. Analyzing consumer choices in the broadband category alone would lead us to the conclusion that consumers have a much higher preference for their local phone providers--a finding at odds with service awards received by independent DSL providers. Thus we look for a demand-side explanation that is based on the demand not just for broadband services but also for related services such as cable TV and local phone. We find evidence of strong complementarities between the consumption of broadband and of those related categories. The main source of such complementarities, in our data, is the benefits to consumers from having a single provider for multiple services. We then carry out counterfactual experiments assuming that there are no changes in the regular prices of the various services. Our results indicate that the share of phone companies in the broadband market would have been 43% smaller without complementarities stemming from such a single-provider effect, whereas shutting off the state dependence effects would have reduced their share by 30%, and shutting off the effects of price discounts on the DSL+local phone bundle would have resulted in their share declining by 21%.

If 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.

File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mksc.1090.0551
Download Restriction: no

Article provided by INFORMS in its journal Marketing Science.

Volume (Year): 29 (2010)
Issue (Month): 4 (07-08)
Pages: 701-720

as
in new window

Handle: RePEc:inm:ormksc:v:29:y:2010:i:4:p:701-720
Contact details of provider: Postal:
7240 Parkway Drive, Suite 300, Hanover, MD 21076 USA

Phone: +1-443-757-3500
Fax: 443-757-3515
Web page: http://www.informs.org/
Email:


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.:

as in new window
  1. Austan Goolsbee & Amil Petrin, 2004. "The Consumer Gains from Direct Broadcast Satellites and the Competition with Cable TV," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 72(2), pages 351-381, 03.
  2. Erdem, Tulin & Sun, Baohong, 2001. "Testing for Choice Dynamics in Panel Data," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 19(2), pages 142-52, April.
  3. P. Seetharaman & Siddhartha Chib & Andrew Ainslie & Peter Boatwright & Tat Chan & Sachin Gupta & Nitin Mehta & Vithala Rao & Andrei Strijnev, 2005. "Models of Multi-Category Choice Behavior," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 16(3), pages 239-254, December.
  4. Amil Petrin, 2002. "Quantifying the Benefits of New Products: The Case of the Minivan," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 110(4), pages 705-729, August.
  5. Peter M. Guadagni & John D. C. Little, 1983. "A Logit Model of Brand Choice Calibrated on Scanner Data," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 2(3), pages 203-238.
  6. Alan L. Montgomery & Eric T. Bradlow, 1999. "Why Analyst Overconfidence About the Functional Form of Demand Models Can Lead to Overpricing," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 18(4), pages 569-583.
  7. Matthew Gentzkow, 2007. "Valuing New Goods in a Model with Complementarity: Online Newspapers," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 97(3), pages 713-744, June.
  8. Harvey S. Rosen & Kenneth A. Small, 1979. "Applied Welfare Economics with Discrete Choice Models," NBER Working Papers 0319, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  9. Inseong Song & Pradeep K. Chintagunta, 2006. "Measuring Cross-Category Price Effects with Aggregate Store Data," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(10), pages 1594-1609, October.
  10. Park, Rolla Edward & Wetzel, Bruce M & Mitchell, Bridger M, 1983. "Price Elasticities for Local Telephone Calls," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 51(6), pages 1699-730, November.
  11. Oz Shy, 1996. "Industrial Organization: Theory and Applications," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262691795, June.
  12. S. Sriram & Pradeep K. Chintagunta & Manoj K. Agarwal, 2010. "Investigating Consumer Purchase Behavior in Related Technology Product Categories," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 29(2), pages 291-314, 03-04.
  13. Daniel McFadden & Kenneth Train, 2000. "Mixed MNL models for discrete response," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 15(5), pages 447-470.
  14. Kenneth E. Train & Daniel L. McFadden & Moshe Ben-Akiva, 1987. "The Demand for Local Telephone Service: A Fully Discrete Model of Residential Calling Patterns and Service Choices," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 18(1), pages 109-123, Spring.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:inm:ormksc:v:29:y:2010:i:4:p:701-720. 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 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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 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.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.