IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2011.08553.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Marketing resource allocation in duopolies over social networks

Author

Listed:
  • Vineeth S. Varma
  • Irinel-Constantin Morarescu
  • Samson Lasaulce
  • Samuel Martin

Abstract

One of the key features of this paper is that the agents' opinion of a social network is assumed to be not only influenced by the other agents but also by two marketers in competition. One of our contributions is to propose a pragmatic game-theoretical formulation of the problem and to conduct the complete corresponding equilibrium analysis (existence, uniqueness, dynamic characterization, and determination). Our analysis provides practical insights to know how a marketer should exploit its knowledge about the social network to allocate its marketing or advertising budget among the agents (who are the consumers). By providing relevant definitions for the agent influence power (AIP) and the gain of targeting (GoT), the benefit of using a smart budget allocation policy instead of a uniform one is assessed and operating conditions under which it is potentially high are identified.

Suggested Citation

  • Vineeth S. Varma & Irinel-Constantin Morarescu & Samson Lasaulce & Samuel Martin, 2020. "Marketing resource allocation in duopolies over social networks," Papers 2011.08553, arXiv.org.
    • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2011.08553
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://arxiv.org/pdf/2011.08553
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Nirvikar Singh & Xavier Vives, 1984. "Price and Quantity Competition in a Differentiated Duopoly," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 15(4), pages 546-554, Winter.
    2. Rainer Hegselmann & Stefan König & Sascha Kurz & Christoph Niemann & Jörg Rambau, 2015. "Optimal Opinion Control: The Campaign Problem," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 18(3), pages 1-18.
    3. Gilboa, Itzhak & Matsui, Akihiko, 1991. "Social Stability and Equilibrium," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 59(3), pages 859-867, May.
    4. Lawrence Friedman, 1958. "Game-Theory Models in the Allocation of Advertising Expenditures," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 6(5), pages 699-709, October.
    5. Matsui, Akihiko, 1992. "Best response dynamics and socially stable strategies," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 57(2), pages 343-362, August.
    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. Vineeth S. Varma & Samson Lasaulce & Julien Mounthanyvong & Irinel-Constantin Morarescu, 2020. "Allocating marketing resources over social networks: A long-term analysis," Papers 2011.09268, arXiv.org.
    2. Sandholm,W.H., 2003. "Excess payoff dynamics, potential dynamics, and stable games," Working papers 5, Wisconsin Madison - Social Systems.
    3. Viossat, Yannick, 2008. "Evolutionary dynamics may eliminate all strategies used in correlated equilibrium," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 56(1), pages 27-43, July.
    4. Antonio Cabrales & Giovanni Ponti, 2000. "Implementation, Elimination of Weakly Dominated Strategies and Evolutionary Dynamics," Review of Economic Dynamics, Elsevier for the Society for Economic Dynamics, vol. 3(2), pages 247-282, April.
    5. Christoph Kuzmics & Daniel Rodenburger, 2018. "A case of evolutionary stable attainable equilibrium in the lab," Graz Economics Papers 2018-05, University of Graz, Department of Economics.
    6. Hofbauer, Josef & Hopkins, Ed, 2005. "Learning in perturbed asymmetric games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 52(1), pages 133-152, July.
    7. Christoph Kuzmics & Daniel Rodenburger, 2020. "A case of evolutionarily stable attainable equilibrium in the laboratory," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 70(3), pages 685-721, October.
    8. Ewerhart, Christian & Valkanova, Kremena, 2020. "Fictitious play in networks," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 182-206.
    9. Andreas Blume, 1995. "Information Transmission and Preference Similarity," Game Theory and Information 9504002, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 29 May 1996.
    10. Berger, Ulrich & Hofbauer, Josef, 2006. "Irrational behavior in the Brown-von Neumann-Nash dynamics," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 56(1), pages 1-6, July.
    11. Matsui Akihiko & Matsuyama Kiminori, 1995. "An Approach to Equilibrium Selection," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 65(2), pages 415-434, April.
    12. Ulrich Berger, 2004. "Some Notes on Learning in Games with Strategic Complementarities," Game Theory and Information 0409001, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    13. Tolotti, Marco & Yepez, Jorge, 2020. "Hotelling-Bertrand duopoly competition under firm-specific network effects," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 176(C), pages 105-128.
    14. Berger, Ulrich, 2005. "Fictitious play in 2 x n games," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 120(2), pages 139-154, February.
    15. Ely,J.C. & Sandholm,W.H., 2000. "Evolution with diverse preferences," Working papers 5, Wisconsin Madison - Social Systems.
    16. Dai Zusai, 2018. "Tempered best response dynamics," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 47(1), pages 1-34, March.
    17. Fujishima, Shota, 2013. "Evolutionary implementation of optimal city size distributions," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(2), pages 404-410.
    18. Harris, Christopher, 1998. "On the Rate of Convergence of Continuous-Time Fictitious Play," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 22(2), pages 238-259, February.
    19. George Loginov, 2022. "Cyclical behavior of evolutionary dynamics in coordination games with changing payoffs," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 51(1), pages 1-27, March.
    20. Ulrich Berger, 2003. "A general model of best response adaptation," Game Theory and Information 0303008, University Library of Munich, Germany.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:arx:papers:2011.08553. 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: arXiv administrators (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://arxiv.org/ .

    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.