IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/fda/fdaddt/2009-12.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Compatibility with Firm Dominance

Author

Listed:
  • María Fernanda Viecens

Abstract

This paper analyzes the effect of firm dominance on the incentives to become compatible and how compatibility decisions affect investment incentives. We will consider compatibility in two dimensions: compatibility of the complementary good and inter-network compatibility. We show that if products are substitutes, compatibility tends to be welfare decreasing with the potential negative consequences of increasing compatibility being more likely when asymmetries are strong. We also find that in many instances the dominant firm’s interests regarding compatibility are in line with those of users, and are opposite to those of the weak firm, which will always demand more compatibility to be enforced. Finally we show that compatibility may harm innovation, particularly for the dominant firm.

Suggested Citation

  • María Fernanda Viecens, 2009. "Compatibility with Firm Dominance," Working Papers 2009-12, FEDEA.
    • Handle: RePEc:fda:fdaddt:2009-12
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://documentos.fedea.net/pubs/dt/2009/dt-2009-12.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Joseph Farrell & Garth Saloner, 1985. "Standardization, Compatibility, and Innovation," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 16(1), pages 70-83, Spring.
    2. Jay Pil Choi, 2003. "Antitrust Analysis of Mergers with Bundling in Complementary Markets: Implications for Pricing, Innovation, and Compatibility Choice," Working Papers 03-02, NET Institute, revised Oct 2003.
    3. Nicholas Economides & Evangelos Katsamakas, 2005. "Linux vs. Windows: A comparison of application and platform innovation incentives for open source and proprietary software platforms+," Working Papers 05-03, NET Institute, revised Sep 2005.
    4. Jeffrey Church & Neil Gandal, 2000. "Systems Competition, Vertical Merger, and Foreclosure," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 9(1), pages 25-51, March.
    5. Doganoglu, Toker & Wright, Julian, 2006. "Multihoming and compatibility," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 24(1), pages 45-67, January.
    6. repec:bpj:rneart:v:6:y:2007:i:1:p:1-15 is not listed on IDEAS
    7. Bulow, Jeremy I & Geanakoplos, John D & Klemperer, Paul D, 1985. "Multimarket Oligopoly: Strategic Substitutes and Complements," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 93(3), pages 488-511, June.
    8. 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.
    9. Clements, Matthew T., 2004. "Direct and indirect network effects: are they equivalent?," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 22(5), pages 633-645, May.
    10. Hannan Timothy H. & Borzekowski Ron, 2007. "Incompatibility and Investment in ATM Networks," Review of Network Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 6(1), pages 1-15, March.
    11. Matutes, Carmen & Regibeau, Pierre, 1989. "Standardization across Markets and Entry," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(4), pages 359-371, June.
    12. Michael Carter & Julian Wright, 2003. "Asymmetric Network Interconnection," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 22(1), pages 27-46, February.
    13. Economides, Nicholas & White, Lawrence J., 1994. "Networks and compatibility: Implications for antitrust," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 38(3-4), pages 651-662, April.
    14. Cremer, Jacques & Rey, Patrick & Tirole, Jean, 2000. "Connectivity in the Commercial Internet," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 48(4), pages 433-472, December.
    15. Church, Jeffrey & Gandal, Neil, 1992. "Network Effects, Software Provision, and Standardization," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 40(1), pages 85-103, March.
    16. Robin S. Lee, 2013. "Vertical Integration and Exclusivity in Platform and Two-Sided Markets," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 103(7), pages 2960-3000, December.
    17. David A. Malueg & Marius Schwartz, 2006. "COMPATIBILITY INCENTIVES OF A LARGE NETWORK FACING MULTIPLE RIVALS -super-," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 54(4), pages 527-567, December.
    18. Matutes, Carmen & Regibeau, Pierre, 1992. "Compatibility and Bundling of Complementary Goods in a Duopoly," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 40(1), pages 37-54, March.
    19. 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.
    20. Luis Cabral & Ben Polak, 2007. "Dominant Firms, Imitation, and Incentives to Innovate," Working Papers 07-5, New York University, Leonard N. Stern School of Business, Department of Economics.
    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. Athanasopoulos, Thanos, 2014. "Compatibility, Intellectual Property,Innovation and Welfare in Durable Goods Markets with Network Effects," The Warwick Economics Research Paper Series (TWERPS) 1043, University of Warwick, Department of Economics.
    2. Maruyama Masayoshi & Zennyo Yusuke, 2013. "Compatibility and the Product Life Cycle in Two-Sided Markets," Review of Network Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 12(2), pages 131-155, June.
    3. Maruyama, Masayoshi & Zennyo, Yusuke, 2015. "Application compatibility and affiliation in two-sided markets," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 39-42.

    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:fda:fdaddt:2009-12. 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: (Carmen Arias). General contact details of provider: http://www.fedea.net .

    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.