IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this article

Mix-and-Match Compatibility in Asymmetric System Markets


  • Jong-Hee Hahn
  • Sang-Hyun Kim


This paper shows that the private incentive for mix-and-match compatibility in system markets diverges from the social planner's incentive if competing suppliers are asymmetric in production cost or product quality. There can be too much or too little compatibility when the market is served by fully integrated system suppliers. Also, the market outcome involves socially too much incompatibility in the form of exclusive technological alliances when the market is composed of independent component suppliers. These results contrast with the standard one obtained in the symmetric setup and shed new light on public policy towards compatibility, technological alliances, and bundling practices in system markets.

Suggested Citation

  • Jong-Hee Hahn & Sang-Hyun Kim, 2012. "Mix-and-Match Compatibility in Asymmetric System Markets," Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics (JITE), Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 168(2), pages 311-338, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:mhr:jinste:urn:sici:0932-4569(201206)168:2_311:mciasm_2.0.tx_2-g

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: Fulltext access is included for subscribers to the printed version.

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

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Michael A. Einhorn, 1992. "Mix and Match Compatibility with Vertical Product Dimensions," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 23(4), pages 535-547, Winter.
    2. Carbajo, Jose & de Meza, David & Seidmann, Daniel J, 1990. "A Strategic Motivation for Commodity Bundling," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(3), pages 283-298, March.
    3. Chen, Yongmin, 1997. "Equilibrium Product Bundling," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 70(1), pages 85-103, January.
    4. Dennis W. Carlton & Michael Waldman, 2002. "The Strategic Use of Tying to Preserve and Create Market Power in Evolving Industries," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 33(2), pages 194-220, Summer.
    5. Carmen Matutes & Pierre Regibeau, 1988. ""Mix and Match": Product Compatibility without Network Externalities," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 19(2), pages 221-234, Summer.
    6. Boom, Anette, 2001. "On the Desirability of Compatibility with Product Selection," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 49(1), pages 85-96, March.
    7. Economides, Nicholas, 1989. "Desirability of Compatibility in the Absence of Network Externalities," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 79(5), pages 1165-1181, December.
    8. Joseph Farrell & Hunter K. Monroe & Garth Saloner, 1998. "The Vertical Organization of Industry: Systems Competition versus Component Competition," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 7(2), pages 143-182, June.
    9. Barry Nalebuff, 2004. "Bundling as an Entry Barrier," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 119(1), pages 159-187.
    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. Hurkens, Sjaak & Jeon, Doh-Shin & Menicucci, Domenico, 2013. "Dominance and Competitive Bundling," TSE Working Papers 13-423, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE).
    2. Jeon, Doh-Shin & Menicucci, Domenico & Nasr, Nikrooz, 2016. "Compatibility Choices under Switching Costs," TSE Working Papers 16-691, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE).
    3. Belleflamme,Paul & Peitz,Martin, 2015. "Industrial Organization," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9781107687899, March.
    4. Sang-Hyun Kim & Jong-Hee Hahn, 2017. "On the Profitability of Interfirm Bundling in Oligopolies," Working papers 2017rwp-114, Yonsei University, Yonsei Economics Research Institute.
    5. Hurkens, Sjaak & Jeon, Doh-Shin & Menicucci, Domenico, 2016. "Leveraging Dominance with Credible Bundling," CEPR Discussion Papers 11304, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    6. Doh-Shin Jeon & Domenico Menicucci & Nikrooz Nasr, 2015. "Dynamics of Compatibility under Switching Costs," Working Papers 15-17, NET Institute, revised Oct 2015.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • D42 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design - - - Monopoly
    • L12 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Monopoly; Monopolization Strategies


    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:mhr:jinste:urn:sici:0932-4569(201206)168:2_311:mciasm_2.0.tx_2-g. 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: (Thomas Wolpert). 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.

    If CitEc recognized a 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.

    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.