IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ebg/iesewp/d-0801.html

Foreclosing competition through access charges and price discrimination

Author

Listed:
  • Lopez, Angel L.

    (IESE Business School)

  • Rey, Patrick

    (Toulouse School of Economics)

Abstract

This article analyzes competition between two asymmetric networks, an incumbent and a new entrant. Networks compete in non-linear tariffs and may charge different prices for on-net and off-net calls. Departing from cost-based access pricing allows the incumbent to foreclose the market in a profitable way. If the incumbent benefits from customer inertia, then it has an incentive to insist on the highest possible access markup even if access charges are reciprocal and even in the absence of actual switching costs. If instead the entrant benefits from customer activism, then foreclosure is profitable only when switching costs are large enough.

Suggested Citation

  • Lopez, Angel L. & Rey, Patrick, 2009. "Foreclosing competition through access charges and price discrimination," IESE Research Papers D/801, IESE Business School.
    • Handle: RePEc:ebg:iesewp:d-0801
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.iese.edu/research/pdfs/DI-0801-E.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Sjaak Hurkens & Ángel Luis López, 2010. "Mobile Termination and Consumer Expectations under the Receiver-Pays Regime," Working Papers 10-12, NET Institute.
    2. Luis López, Ángel, 2011. "Mobile termination rates and the receiver-pays regime," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 23(2), pages 171-181, June.
    3. Muck, Johannes, 2012. "The effect of on-net / off-net differentiation and heterogeneuous consumers on network size in mobile telecommunications : an agent-based aporoach," 23rd European Regional ITS Conference, Vienna 2012 60355, International Telecommunications Society (ITS).
    4. Sjaak Hurkens & Doh-Shin Jeon, 2009. "Mobile Termination and Mobile Penetration," UFAE and IAE Working Papers 777.09, Unitat de Fonaments de l'Anàlisi Econòmica (UAB) and Institut d'Anàlisi Econòmica (CSIC).
    5. Hanna Hałaburda & Yaron Yehezkel, 2016. "The Role of Coordination Bias in Platform Competition," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 25(2), pages 274-312, April.
    6. Edmond Baranes & Cuong Huong Vuong, 2012. "Policy Implications of Asymmetric Termination Rate Regulation in Europe," Chapters, in: Gerald R. Faulhaber & Gary Madden & Jeffrey Petchey (ed.), Regulation and the Performance of Communication and Information Networks, chapter 14, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    7. Hanna Halaburda & Bruno Jullien & Yaron Yehezkel, 2013. "Dynamic Network Competition," Working Papers 13-10, NET Institute.
    8. Jullien, Bruno & Rey, Patrick & Sand-Zantman, Wilfried, 2013. "Termination fees revisited," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 31(6), pages 738-750.
    9. Edmond Baranes & Stefan Behringer & Jean-Christophe Poudou, 2017. "Mobile Access Charges and Collusion under Asymmetry," Annals of Economics and Statistics, GENES, issue 127, pages 33-60.
    10. Steffen Hoernig & Roman Inderst & Tommaso Valletti, 2014. "Calling circles: network competition with nonuniform calling patterns," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 45(1), pages 155-175, March.
    11. Sjaak Hurkens & Ángel L. López, 2014. "Mobile Termination, Network Externalities and Consumer Expectations," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 124(579), pages 1005-1039, September.
    12. Hurkens, Sjaak & Jeon, Doh-Shin, 2012. "Promoting network competition by regulating termination charges," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 30(6), pages 541-552.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • L41 - Industrial Organization - - Antitrust Issues and Policies - - - Monopolization; Horizontal Anticompetitive Practices
    • L51 - Industrial Organization - - Regulation and Industrial Policy - - - Economics of Regulation
    • L96 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Transportation and Utilities - - - Telecommunications

    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:ebg:iesewp:d-0801. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Noelia Romero (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ienaves.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.