IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ormnsc/v68y2022i12p8699-8721.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Revenue-Sharing Allocation Strategies for Two-Sided Media Platforms: Pro-Rata vs. User-Centric

Author

Listed:
  • Saeed Alaei

    (Google Research, Mountain View, California 94043)

  • Ali Makhdoumi

    (Fuqua School of Business, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina 27708)

  • Azarakhsh Malekian

    (Rotman School of Management, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario M5S 3E6, Canada)

  • Saša Pekeč

    (Fuqua School of Business, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina 27708)

Abstract

We consider a two-sided streaming service platform that generates revenues by charging users a subscription fee for unlimited access to the content and compensates content providers (artists) through a revenue-sharing allocation rule. Platform users are heterogeneous in both their overall consumption and the distribution of their consumption over different artists. We study two primary revenue allocation rules used by market-leading music streaming platforms— pro-rata and user-centric . With pro-rata, artists are paid proportionally to their share of the overall streaming volume, whereas with user-centric, each user’s subscription fee is divided proportionally among artists based on the consumption of that user. We characterize when these two allocation rules can sustain a set of artists on the platform and compare them from both the platform’s and the artists’ perspectives. In particular, we show that, despite the cross-subsidization between low- and high-streaming-volume users, the pro-rata rule can be preferred by both the platform and the artists. Furthermore, the platform’s problem of selecting an optimal portfolio of artists is NP-complete. However, by establishing connections to the knapsack problem, we develop a polynomial time approximation scheme (PTAS) for the optimal platform’s profit. In addition to determining the platform’s optimal revenue allocation rule in the class of pro-rata and user-centric rules, we consider the optimal revenue allocation rule in the class of arbitrary rules. Building on duality theory, we develop a polynomial time algorithm that outputs a set of artists so that the platform’s profit is within a single artist’s revenue from the optimal profit.

Suggested Citation

  • Saeed Alaei & Ali Makhdoumi & Azarakhsh Malekian & Saša Pekeč, 2022. "Revenue-Sharing Allocation Strategies for Two-Sided Media Platforms: Pro-Rata vs. User-Centric," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(12), pages 8699-8721, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:inm:ormnsc:v:68:y:2022:i:12:p:8699-8721
    DOI: 10.1287/mnsc.2022.4307
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2022.4307
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/mnsc.2022.4307?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Constantinos Daskalakis & Alan Deckelbaum & Christos Tzamos, 2017. "Strong Duality for a Multiple‐Good Monopolist," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 85, pages 735-767, May.
    2. Hiller R. Scott & Walter Jason M., 2017. "The Rise of Streaming Music and Implications for Music Production," Review of Network Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 16(4), pages 351-385, December.
    3. Nima Haghpanah & Jason Hartline, 2021. "When Is Pure Bundling Optimal? [Commodity Bundling and the Burden of Monopoly]," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 88(3), pages 1127-1156.
    4. Armstrong, Mark, 2013. "A more general theory of commodity bundling," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 148(2), pages 448-472.
    5. Gustavo Bergantiños & Juan D. Moreno-Ternero, 2022. "On the axiomatic approach to sharing the revenues from broadcasting sports leagues," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 58(2), pages 321-347, February.
    6. Robin S. Lee, 2013. "Vertical Integration and Exclusivity in Platform and Two-Sided Markets," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 103(7), pages 2960-3000, December.
    7. John Birge & Ozan Candogan & Hongfan Chen & Daniela Saban, 2021. "Optimal Commissions and Subscriptions in Networked Markets," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 23(3), pages 569-588, May.
    8. Menicucci, Domenico & Hurkens, Sjaak & Jeon, Doh-Shin, 2015. "On the optimality of pure bundling for a monopolist," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 33-42.
    9. Ginsburgh, Victor & Zang, Israel, 2003. "The museum pass game and its value," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 43(2), pages 322-325, May.
    10. Kostas Bimpikis & Ozan Candogan & Daniela Saban, 2019. "Spatial Pricing in Ride-Sharing Networks," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 67(3), pages 744-769, May.
    11. Brett Danaher & Yan Huang & Michael D. Smith & Rahul Telang, 2014. "An Empirical Analysis of Digital Music Bundling Strategies," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 60(6), pages 1413-1433, June.
    12. William Vickrey, 1961. "Counterspeculation, Auctions, And Competitive Sealed Tenders," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 16(1), pages 8-37, March.
    13. Bergantiños, Gustavo & Moreno-Ternero, Juan D., 2015. "The axiomatic approach to the problem of sharing the revenue from museum passes," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 78-92.
    14. Gustavo Bergantiños & Juan D. Moreno-Ternero, 2020. "Sharing the Revenues from Broadcasting Sport Events," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 66(6), pages 2417-2431, June.
    15. Manelli, Alejandro M. & Vincent, Daniel R., 2006. "Bundling as an optimal selling mechanism for a multiple-good monopolist," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 127(1), pages 1-35, March.
    16. Stennek, Johan, 2014. "Exclusive quality – Why exclusive distribution may benefit the TV-viewers," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(C), pages 42-57.
    17. R. Preston McAfee & John McMillan & Michael D. Whinston, 1989. "Multiproduct Monopoly, Commodity Bundling, and Correlation of Values," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 104(2), pages 371-383.
    18. So Yeon Chun & Dan A. Iancu & Nikolaos Trichakis, 2020. "Loyalty Program Liabilities and Point Values," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 22(2), pages 257-272, March.
    19. Benjamin Shiller & Joel Waldfogel, 2013. "The Challenge Of Revenue Sharing With Bundled Pricing: An Application To Music," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 51(2), pages 1155-1165, April.
    20. E. Carroni & D. Paolini, 2019. "The business model of a streaming platform," Working Paper CRENoS 201902, Centre for North South Economic Research, University of Cagliari and Sassari, Sardinia.
    21. Anja Lambrecht & Avi Goldfarb & Alessandro Bonatti & Anindya Ghose & Daniel Goldstein & Randall Lewis & Anita Rao & Navdeep Sahni & Song Yao, 2014. "How do firms make money selling digital goods online?," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 25(3), pages 331-341, September.
    22. Aguiar, Luis & Martens, Bertin, 2016. "Digital music consumption on the Internet: Evidence from clickstream data," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(C), pages 27-43.
    23. Bin Hu & Izak Duenyas & Damian R. Beil, 2013. "Does Pooling Purchases Lead to Higher Profits?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 59(7), pages 1576-1593, July.
    24. Shengli Li & Qiuyue Luo & Liangfei Qiu & Subhajyoti Bandyopadhyay, 2020. "Optimal Pricing Model of Digital Music: Subscription, Ownership or Mixed?," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 29(3), pages 688-704, March.
    25. Xianjun Geng & Maxwell B. Stinchcombe & Andrew B. Whinston, 2005. "Bundling Information Goods of Decreasing Value," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 51(4), pages 662-667, April.
    26. Alessandro Pavan & Ilya Segal & Juuso Toikka, 2014. "Dynamic Mechanism Design: A Myersonian Approach," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 82(2), pages 601-653, March.
    27. Mark Armstrong & Julian Wright, 2007. "Two-sided Markets, Competitive Bottlenecks and Exclusive Contracts," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 32(2), pages 353-380, August.
    28. Yannis Bakos & Erik Brynjolfsson, 1999. "Bundling Information Goods: Pricing, Profits, and Efficiency," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 45(12), pages 1613-1630, December.
    29. William James Adams & Janet L. Yellen, 1976. "Commodity Bundling and the Burden of Monopoly," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 90(3), pages 475-498.
    30. Xiao Huang & Mahesh Nagarajan & Greys Sošić, 2013. "Some implications of pricing bundles," Naval Research Logistics (NRL), John Wiley & Sons, vol. 60(3), pages 237-250, April.
    31. Gao, Jiti & Lu, Zudi & Tjostheim, Dag, 2003. "Semiparametric spatial regression: theory and practice," MPRA Paper 11991, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised Oct 2006.
    32. Ken Hendricks & Alan Sorensen, 2009. "Information and the Skewness of Music Sales," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 117(2), pages 324-369, April.
    33. Paul BELLEFLAMME, 2016. "The economics of digital goods: a progress report," LIDAM Reprints CORE 2819, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
    34. Joel Waldfogel, 2017. "How Digitization Has Created a Golden Age of Music, Movies, Books, and Television," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 31(3), pages 195-214, Summer.
    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. Da, Yuwen & Gou, Qinglong & Liang, Chao, 2023. "Will self-gifting of streamers hurt unions? Analyzing the union’s compensation mechanism for a live streaming supply chain," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 177(C).
    2. Juan Carlos Gonc{c}alves-Dosantos & Ricardo Mart'inez & Joaqu'in S'anchez-Soriano, 2024. "Measures of relevance to the success of streaming platforms," Papers 2403.08421, arXiv.org.
    3. François Moreau & Patrik Wikström & Ola Haampland & Rune Johannessen, 2024. "Alternative payment models in the music streaming market: A comparative approach based on stream-level data," Post-Print hal-04679366, HAL.

    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. Jian Pei, 2020. "A Survey on Data Pricing: from Economics to Data Science," Papers 2009.04462, arXiv.org, revised Nov 2020.
    2. Mark Armstrong, 2016. "Nonlinear Pricing," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 8(1), pages 583-614, October.
    3. Gustavo Berganti~nos & Juan D. Moreno-Ternero, 2023. "Revenue sharing at music streaming platforms," Papers 2310.11861, arXiv.org.
    4. Sang‐Hyun Kim & Jong‐Hee Hahn, 2022. "On the profitability of interfirm bundling in oligopolies," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(3), pages 657-673, August.
    5. Jean‐Charles Rochet & John Thanassoulis, 2019. "Intertemporal price discrimination with two products," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 50(4), pages 951-973, December.
    6. Vithala R. Rao & Gary J. Russell & Hemant Bhargava & Alan Cooke & Tim Derdenger & Hwang Kim & Nanda Kumar & Irwin Levin & Yu Ma & Nitin Mehta & John Pracejus & R. Venkatesh, 2018. "Emerging Trends in Product Bundling: Investigating Consumer Choice and Firm Behavior," Customer Needs and Solutions, Springer;Institute for Sustainable Innovation and Growth (iSIG), vol. 5(1), pages 107-120, March.
    7. Hernando, Andres & Villena, Mauricio & Apablaza, Valentina, 2023. "Optimal Bidding for a Bundle of Power Transmission Infrastructure Works," MPRA Paper 120849, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 30 Apr 2024.
    8. Chenghuan Sean Chu & Phillip Leslie & Alan Sorensen, 2006. "Nearly Optimal Pricing for Multiproduct Firms," 2006 Meeting Papers 830, Society for Economic Dynamics.
    9. Qingning Cao & Xianjun Geng & Jun Zhang, 2022. "Impact of channel structure on a manufacturer's bundling decision with an application to digital goods," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 31(4), pages 1679-1697, April.
    10. Stefano Galavotti, 2014. "Reducing Inefficiency in Public Good Provision Through Linking," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 16(3), pages 427-466, June.
    11. Bergantiños, Gustavo & Moreno-Ternero, Juan D., 2022. "Monotonicity in sharing the revenues from broadcasting sports leagues," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 297(1), pages 338-346.
    12. Roesler, Anne-Katrin & Deb, Rahul, 2021. "Multi-Dimensional Screening: Buyer-Optimal Learning and Informational Robustness," CEPR Discussion Papers 16206, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    13. Jihui Chen & Qiang Fu, 2017. "Do exclusivity arrangements harm consumers?," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 51(3), pages 311-339, June.
    14. Bergantiños, Gustavo & Moreno-Ternero, Juan D., 2020. "Allocating extra revenues from broadcasting sports leagues," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 65-73.
    15. Gustavo Bergantiños & Juan D. Moreno-Ternero, 2022. "On the axiomatic approach to sharing the revenues from broadcasting sports leagues," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 58(2), pages 321-347, February.
    16. Hanming Fang & Peter Norman, 2010. "Optimal Provision of Multiple Excludable Public Goods," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 2(4), pages 1-37, November.
    17. Jehiel, Philippe & Meyer-ter-Vehn, Moritz & Moldovanu, Benny, 2007. "Mixed bundling auctions," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 134(1), pages 494-512, May.
    18. Gustavo Bergantiños & Juan D. Moreno-Ternero, 2023. "Decentralized revenue sharing from broadcasting sports," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 194(1), pages 27-44, January.
    19. Aguiar, Luis & Waldfogel, Joel, 2018. "As streaming reaches flood stage, does it stimulate or depress music sales?," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 278-307.
    20. Szalay, Dezső & Ketelaar, Felix, 2014. "Pricing a Package of Services," CEPR Discussion Papers 10313, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.

    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:inm:ormnsc:v:68:y:2022:i:12:p:8699-8721. 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: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.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.