IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/dyngam/v14y2024i3d10.1007_s13235-023-00516-9.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Strategic Licensing Model Choice with Network Effects in a Dynamic Duopoly

Author

Listed:
  • Fei Yan

    (Nanjing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics)

  • Hong-Zhuan Chen

    (Nanjing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics)

  • Sahin Telli

    (Nanjing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics)

  • Zhi-Chao Zhang

    (Nanjing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics)

Abstract

Network effects encourage the innovative firms to expand their market size by licensing the technology to the third-party manufacturers who provide substitutable but incompatible products in a duopoly. Moreover, network effects render consumer valuation inherently dynamic. Consumer perceptions of the sales quantities are constantly changing, causing the impact of network effects is dynamic over time. Therefore, we examine technology licensing and quantity competition in a dynamic duopoly including an innovative firm and a third-party manufacturer, and we consider that consumer utility increases with the dynamic impact of network effects. Because the innovative firm can strategically choose different licensing models in a dynamic production game, we derive the firms’ subgame-perfect Nash equilibrium decisions and profits and analyze the effects of different licensing models and different network effects on firm’s instantaneous and steady-state equilibrium decisions. Dynamic technology licensing contracts will benefit the innovative firm more than a no licensing contract in a long term, especially when the network effect is stronger. Moreover, when the network effect is weak, the dynamic royalty licensing reduces the third-party manufacturer’s production quantities, while the dynamic fixed fee licensing induces a higher total market demand which increases the impact of network effects and thus benefits the innovative firm, consumer and society. Interestingly, when the network effect is stronger, a dynamic royalty licensing is more effective for mitigating market competition by increasing the sales quantities and prices of the licensor and licensee because of the significant impact of network effects, thus benefiting the innovative firm and society.

Suggested Citation

  • Fei Yan & Hong-Zhuan Chen & Sahin Telli & Zhi-Chao Zhang, 2024. "Strategic Licensing Model Choice with Network Effects in a Dynamic Duopoly," Dynamic Games and Applications, Springer, vol. 14(3), pages 611-641, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:dyngam:v:14:y:2024:i:3:d:10.1007_s13235-023-00516-9
    DOI: 10.1007/s13235-023-00516-9
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s13235-023-00516-9
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s13235-023-00516-9?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
    ---><---

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

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Akira Miyaoka, 2014. "Environmental technology transfer in a Cournot duopoly: the case of fixed-fee licensing," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 34(4), pages 2253-2266.
    2. Tanaka, Hitoshi & Iwaisako, Tatsuro & Futagami, Koichi, 2007. "Dynamic analysis of innovation and international transfer of technology through licensing," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 73(1), pages 189-212, September.
    3. Wang, Wei & Lyu, Gaoyan & Cui, Wei & Li, Yongjian, 2021. "Strategic technology commercialization in the supply chain under network effects," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 231(C).
    4. Charles W. L. Hill & Peter Hwang & W. Chan Kim, 1990. "An eclectic theory of the choice of international entry mode," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 11(2), pages 117-128, February.
    5. Chou, Chien-fu & Shy, Oz, 1990. "Network effects without network externalities," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 8(2), pages 259-270, June.
    6. Lee, DongJoon & Choi, Kangsik, 2018. "The efficiency of competing vertical chains with network externalities," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 168(C), pages 1-5.
    7. Tianle Song & Susheng Wang, 2019. "Network effects, trade, and productivity," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 40(7), pages 815-822, October.
    8. Fershtman, Chaim & Markovich, Sarit, 2010. "Patents, imitation and licensing in an asymmetric dynamic R&D race," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 28(2), pages 113-126, March.
    9. Fan, Cuihong & Jun, Byoung Heon & Wolfstetter, Elmar G., 2018. "Optimal licensing of technology in the face of (asymmetric) competition," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 32-53.
    10. Piga, Claudio A. G., 2000. "Competition in a duopoly with sticky price and advertising," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 18(4), pages 595-614, May.
    11. Nicos Savva & Niyazi Taneri, 2015. "The Role of Equity, Royalty, and Fixed Fees in Technology Licensing to University Spin-Offs," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 61(6), pages 1323-1343, June.
    12. Jiawei Chen & Ulrich Doraszelski & Joseph E. Harrington, Jr., 2009. "Avoiding market dominance: product compatibility in markets with network effects," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 40(3), pages 455-485, September.
    13. Wu, Cheng-Han, 2018. "Price competition and technology licensing in a dynamic duopoly," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 267(2), pages 570-584.
    14. Giacomo De Giorgi & Anders Frederiksen & Luigi Pistaferri, 2020. "Consumption Network Effects," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 87(1), pages 130-163.
    15. Hong, Xianpei & Govindan, Kannan & Xu, Lei & Du, Peng, 2017. "Quantity and collection decisions in a closed-loop supply chain with technology licensing," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 256(3), pages 820-829.
    16. Henry Wang, X., 2002. "Fee versus royalty licensing in a differentiated Cournot duopoly," Journal of Economics and Business, Elsevier, vol. 54(2), pages 253-266.
    17. Ming-Chung Chang & Jin-Li Hu & Gwo-Hshiung Tzeng, 2009. "Decision Making On Strategic Environmental Technology Licensing: Fixed-Fee Versus Royalty Licensing Methods," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 8(03), pages 609-624.
    18. Seung-Leul Kim & Sang-Ho Lee, 2014. "Eco-Technology Licensing under Emission Tax: Royalty vs. Fixed-Fee," Korean Economic Review, Korean Economic Association, vol. 30, pages 273-300.
    19. Wang, X. Henry, 1998. "Fee versus royalty licensing in a Cournot duopoly model," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 60(1), pages 55-62, July.
    20. Kuang-Cheng Andy Wang & Wen-Jung Liang & Chun-Hung A. Lin, 2012. "Licensing Under Network Externalities," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 88(283), pages 585-593, December.
    21. Vincenzo Denicolò & Piercarlo Zanchettin, 2012. "Leadership Cycles in a Quality‐Ladder Model of Endogenous Growth," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 122(561), pages 618-650, June.
    22. Zhe Song & Ziyuan Zhang & Xiaolin Xu & Chunlin Liu, 2015. "An agent-based model to study the market dynamics of perpetual and subscription licensing," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 66(5), pages 845-857, May.
    23. Bray, Michael J. & Lee, James N., 2000. "University revenues from technology transfer: Licensing fees vs. equity positions," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 15(5-6), pages 385-392.
    24. Jean J. Gabszewicz & Filomena Garcia, 2007. "Intrinsic quality improvements and network externalities," International Journal of Economic Theory, The International Society for Economic Theory, vol. 3(4), pages 261-278, December.
    25. Marie Thursby & Richard Jensen, 2001. "Proofs and Prototypes for Sale: The Licensing of University Inventions," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 91(1), pages 240-259, March.
    26. Wu, Cheng-Han, 2019. "Licensing to a competitor and strategic royalty choice in a dynamic duopoly," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 279(3), pages 840-853.
    27. Lucio Fuentelsaz & Juan Pablo Maicas & Yolanda Polo, 2012. "Switching Costs, Network Effects, and Competition in the European Mobile Telecommunications Industry," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 23(1), pages 93-108, March.
    28. Suzuki, Keishun, 2020. "Patent Protection, Optimal Licensing, And Innovation With Endogenous Entry," Macroeconomic Dynamics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 24(8), pages 2033-2059, December.
    29. Rockett, Katharine, 1990. "The quality of licensed technology," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 8(4), pages 559-574, December.
    30. Zhao, Dan, 2017. "Choices and impacts of cross-licensing contracts," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 389-405.
    31. Huaige Zhang & Xuejun Wang & Xianpei Hong & Qiang (Steven) Lu, 2018. "Technology Licensing in a Network Product Market: Fixed†Fee versus Royalty Licensing," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 94(305), pages 168-185, June.
    32. Gabszewicz Jean & Garcia Filomena, 2007. "Optimal Monopoly Price Paths with Expanding Networks," Review of Network Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 6(1), pages 1-8, March.
    33. Dong Choi & Jongeun Oh & Yeonbae Kim & Junseok Hwang, 2012. "Competition in the Korean Internet Portal Market: Network Effects, Profit, and Market Efficiency," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 40(1), pages 51-73, February.
    34. Akira Miyaoka, 2014. "Environmental Technology Transfer in a Cournot Duopoly: The Case of Fixed-Fee Licensing," Discussion Papers in Economics and Business 14-08, Osaka University, Graduate School of Economics.
    35. Yue Li & Takashi Yanagawa, 2021. "Fixed‐fee vs. royalty licensing under asymmetric demand information," Manchester School, University of Manchester, vol. 89(6), pages 640-657, December.
    36. Zhao, Dan & Chen, Hongmin & Hong, Xianpei & Liu, Jingfang, 2014. "Technology licensing contracts with network effects," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 158(C), pages 136-144.
    37. Hoernig, Steffen, 2012. "Strategic delegation under price competition and network effects," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 117(2), pages 487-489.
    38. Saracho, Ana I., 2011. "Licensing information goods," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 187-199, March.
    39. 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.
    40. Chen, Yi-Wen & Yang, Ya-Po & Wang, Leonard F.S. & Wu, Shih-Jye, 2014. "Technology licensing in mixed oligopoly," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 31(C), pages 193-204.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Wu, Cheng-Han, 2019. "Licensing to a competitor and strategic royalty choice in a dynamic duopoly," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 279(3), pages 840-853.
    2. Hong, Xianpei & Zhou, Menghuan & Gong, Yeming, 2021. "Dilemma of quality information disclosure in technology licensing," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 294(2), pages 543-557.
    3. Li, Qing & Zhang, Huaige & Hong, Xianpei, 2020. "Knowledge structure of technology licensing based on co-keywords network: A review and future directions," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 154-165.
    4. Li, Hai & Qing, Qiankai & Wang, Juan & Hong, Xianpei, 2021. "An analysis of technology licensing and parallel importation under different market structures," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 289(1), pages 132-143.
    5. Wang, Wei & Lyu, Gaoyan & Cui, Wei & Li, Yongjian, 2021. "Strategic technology commercialization in the supply chain under network effects," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 231(C).
    6. Montinaro, Marta & Scrimitore, Marcella, 2019. "Per unit and ad valorem royalties in a patent licensing game," MPRA Paper 96642, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    7. Leonard F. S. Wang & Arijit Mukherjee & Chenhang Zeng, 2020. "Does technology licensing matter for privatization?," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 22(5), pages 1462-1480, September.
    8. Qiao, Haike & Su, Qin, 2021. "Distribution channel and licensing strategy choice considering consumer online reviews in a closed-loop supply chain," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 151(C).
    9. Stefano Bolatto & Giuseppe Pignataro, 2023. "Equity‐settled share‐based payments and their (strategic) use under asymmetric information," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 25(5), pages 1012-1042, October.
    10. Hao Xu & Deqing Tan, 2023. "Optimal Abatement Technology Licensing in a Dynamic Transboundary Pollution Game: Fixed Fee Versus Royalty," Computational Economics, Springer;Society for Computational Economics, vol. 61(3), pages 905-935, March.
    11. Zhao, Dan, 2017. "Choices and impacts of cross-licensing contracts," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 389-405.
    12. Montinaro, Marta & Pal, Rupayan & Scrimitore, Marcella, 2020. "Per Unit and Ad Valorem Royalties in a Patent Licensing Game," FACTS: Firms And Cities Towards Sustainability 307305, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM) > FACTS: Firms And Cities Towards Sustainability.
    13. Kim, Seung-Leul & Lee, Sang-Ho, 2021. "Optimal tariffs with emissions taxes under non-restrictive two-part licensing strategies by a foreign eco-competitor," MPRA Paper 108496, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    14. Chen, Jingxian & Liang, Liang & Yao, Dong-qing, 2017. "An analysis of intellectual property licensing strategy under duopoly competition: Component or product-based?," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 193(C), pages 502-513.
    15. Chien-Shu Tsai & Ting-Chung Tsai & Po-Sheng Ko & Chien-Hui Lee & Jen-Yao Lee & Yu-Lin Wang, 2019. "On the Sustainability of Technology Licensing Under Asymmetric Information Game," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(24), pages 1-15, December.
    16. Poddar, Sougata & Bouguezzi, Fehmi, 2011. "Patent licensing in spatial competition: Does pre-innovation cost asymmetry matter?," MPRA Paper 32764, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    17. Kim, Seung-Leul & Lee, Sang-Ho, 2016. "The licensing of eco-technology under emission taxation: Fixed fee vs. auction," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 343-357.
    18. Zhao, Dan & Chen, Hongmin & Hong, Xianpei & Liu, Jingfang, 2014. "Technology licensing contracts with network effects," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 158(C), pages 136-144.
    19. Wenzhu Zhang & Yue Dai & Lin Tian, 2021. "Pricing strategies for competitive firms with indirect network effects," Flexible Services and Manufacturing Journal, Springer, vol. 33(2), pages 547-581, June.
    20. Sen, Debapriya & Tauman, Yair, 2007. "General licensing schemes for a cost-reducing innovation," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 59(1), pages 163-186, April.

    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:spr:dyngam:v:14:y:2024:i:3:d:10.1007_s13235-023-00516-9. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.