IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/boc/bocoec/614.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Referrals in Search Markets

Author

Listed:
  • Maria Arbatskaya

    (Emory University)

  • Hideo Konishi

    (Boston College)

Abstract

This paper compares the equilibrium outcomes in search markets with and without referrals. Although it seems clear that consumers would benefit from referrals, it is not at all clear whether firms would unilaterally provide information about competing offers since such information could encourage consumers to purchase the product elsewhere. In a model of a horizontally differentiated product market with sequential consumer search, we show that valuable referrals can arise in the equilibrium: a firm will give referrals to consumers whose ideal product is suffciently far from the firms offering. We allow firms to price-discriminate among consumers, and consumers to misrepresent their tastes. It is found that the equilibrium profits tend to be higher in markets with referrals than in the ones without. Consumers tend to be better o¤ in the presence of referrals when search costs are not too low, and under a certain parameter range, referrals lead to a Pareto improvement.

Suggested Citation

  • Maria Arbatskaya & Hideo Konishi, 2005. "Referrals in Search Markets," Boston College Working Papers in Economics 614, Boston College Department of Economics, revised 10 May 2011.
  • Handle: RePEc:boc:bocoec:614
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://fmwww.bc.edu/EC-P/wp614.pdf
    File Function: main text
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Stiglitz, J E, 1979. "Equilibrium in Product Markets with Imperfect Information," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 69(2), pages 339-345, May.
    2. Stephen J. Spurr, 1990. "The Impact of Advertising and Other Factors on Referral Practices, with Special Reference to Lawyers," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 21(2), pages 235-246, Summer.
    3. Diamond, Peter A., 1971. "A model of price adjustment," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 3(2), pages 156-168, June.
    4. Asher Wolinsky, 1984. "Product Differentiation with Imperfect Information," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 51(1), pages 53-61.
    5. Asher Wolinsky, 1986. "True Monopolistic Competition as a Result of Imperfect Information," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 101(3), pages 493-511.
    6. Luis Garicano & Tano Santos, 2004. "Referrals," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 94(3), pages 499-525, June.
    7. Asher Wolinsky, 1983. "Retail Trade Concentration Due to Consumers' Imperfect Information," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 14(1), pages 275-282, Spring.
    8. Birger Wernerfelt, 1994. "Selling Formats for Search Goods," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 13(3), pages 298-309.
    9. Anderson, Simon P & Renault, Regis, 2000. "Consumer Information and Firm Pricing: Negative Externalities from Improved Information," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 41(3), pages 721-742, August.
    10. Konishi, Hideo, 2005. "Concentration of competing retail stores," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(3), pages 488-512, November.
    11. Colwell, Peter F & Kahn, Charles M, 2001. "The Economic Functions of Referrals and Referral Fees," The Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics, Springer, vol. 23(3), pages 267-296, November.
    12. Mark V. Pauly, 1979. "The Ethics and Economics of Kickbacks and Fee Splitting," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 10(1), pages 344-352, Spring.
    13. Janssen, Maarten C.W. & Moraga-Gonzalez, Jose Luis & Wildenbeest, Matthijs R., 2005. "Truly costly sequential search and oligopolistic pricing," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 23(5-6), pages 451-466, June.
    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. Simona Grassi & Ching-to Albert Ma, 2016. "Information acquisition, referral, and organization," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 47(4), pages 935-960, November.
    2. Jianqiang Zhang & Zhuping Liu & Raghunath Singh Rao, 2018. "Flirting with the enemy: online competitor referral and entry-deterrence," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 16(2), pages 209-249, June.
    3. Daniele Condorelli & Andrea Galeotti & Vasiliki Skreta, 2018. "Selling through referrals," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(4), pages 669-685, October.
    4. Ding, Ke & Gokan, Toshitaka & Zhu, Xiwei, 2013. "Search, matching, and self-organization of a marketplace," IDE Discussion Papers 396, Institute of Developing Economies, Japan External Trade Organization(JETRO).
    5. Larry G. Epstein & Hiroaki Kaido & Kyoungwon Seo, 2016. "Robust Confidence Regions for Incomplete Models," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 84, pages 1799-1838, September.
    6. Priazhkina, Sofia & Page, Frank H., 2018. "Sharing market access in buyer–seller networks," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 175(C), pages 415-446.
    7. Ke Ding & Toshitaka Gokan & Xiwei Zhu, 2017. "Small business and the self-organization of a marketplace," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 58(1), pages 1-19, January.

    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. Konishi, Hideo & Sandfort, Michael T., 2002. "Expanding demand through price advertisement," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 20(7), pages 965-994, September.
    2. Simon P. Anderson & Régis Renault, 2006. "Advertising Content," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 96(1), pages 93-113, March.
    3. Moraga-González, José L. & Sándor, Zsolt & Wildenbeest, Matthijs R., 2014. "Prices, Product Differentiation, And Heterogeneous Search Costs," IESE Research Papers D/1097, IESE Business School.
    4. Sander Heinsalu, 2023. "Greater search cost reduces prices," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 75(3), pages 923-947, April.
    5. Jidong Zhou, 2020. "Improved Information in Search Markets," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 2264R, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University, revised Jun 2022.
    6. Andrew Rhodes & Jidong Zhou, 2019. "Consumer Search and Retail Market Structure," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(6), pages 2607-2623, June.
    7. Rhodes, Andrew, 2011. "Multiproduct pricing and the Diamond Paradox," MPRA Paper 32511, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    8. Gamp, Tobias & Krähmer, Daniel, 2022. "Biased Beliefs in Search Markets," Rationality and Competition Discussion Paper Series 365, CRC TRR 190 Rationality and Competition.
    9. Simon P. Anderson & Regis Renault, 1999. "Pricing, Product Diversity, and Search Costs: A Bertrand-Chamberlin-Diamond Model," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 30(4), pages 719-735, Winter.
    10. Atabek Atayev & Maarten Janssen, 2024. "Information Acquisition And Diffusion In Markets," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 65(2), pages 729-753, May.
    11. Simon P. Anderson & Régis Renault & Claude Jessua, 1996. "Produits différenciés et information imparfaite des consommateurs," Revue Économique, Programme National Persée, vol. 47(3), pages 425-435.
    12. Mark Armstrong, 2017. "Ordered Consumer Search," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 15(5), pages 989-1024.
    13. Michael R. Galbreth & Bikram Ghosh, 2020. "The effect of exogenous product familiarity on endogenous consumer search," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 18(2), pages 195-235, June.
    14. Heski Bar-Isaac & Sandro Shelegia, 2023. "Search, Showrooming, and Retailer Variety," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 42(2), pages 251-270, March.
    15. Obradovits, Martin, 2017. "Search and segregation," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 137-165.
    16. Alexandre de Cornière, 2016. "Search Advertising," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 8(3), pages 156-188, August.
    17. Maarten Janssen & Sandro Shelegia, 2020. "Beliefs and Consumer Search in a Vertical Industry [Can Small Deviations from Rationality Make Significant Differences to Economic Equilibria?]," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 18(5), pages 2359-2393.
    18. Michael Choi & Guillaume Rocheteau, 2024. "Information acquisition and price discrimination in dynamic, decentralized markets," Review of Economic Dynamics, Elsevier for the Society for Economic Dynamics, vol. 53, pages 1-46, July.
    19. Gokhan Guven & Eren Inci & Antonio Russo, 2017. "Apparent Competition in Two-Sided Platforms," CESifo Working Paper Series 6660, CESifo.
    20. Alexei Parakhonyak & Anton Sobolev, 2015. "Non‐Reservation Price Equilibrium and Search without Priors," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 0(584), pages 887-909, May.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    horizontal referrals; consumer search; information; matching; broker commission.;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C7 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory
    • D4 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design
    • D8 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty
    • L1 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance

    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:boc:bocoec:614. 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: Christopher F Baum (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/debocus.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.