Platform Competition under Asymmetric Information
In the context of platform competition in a two-sided market, we study how ex-ante uncertainty and ex-post asymmetric information concerning the value of a new technology affects the strategies of the platforms and the market outcome. We find that the incumbent dominates the market by setting the welfare-maximizing quantity when the difference in the degree of asymmetric information between buyers and sellers is significant. However, if this difference is below a certain threshold, then even the incumbent platform will distort its quantity downward. Since a monopoly incumbent would set the welfare-maximizing quantity, this result indicates that platform competition may lead to a market failure: Competition results in a lower quantity and lower welfare than a monopoly. We consider two applications of the model. First, we consider multi-homing. We find that multi-homing solves the market failure resulting from asymmetric information. However, if platforms can impose exclusive dealing, then they will do so, which result in market inefficiency. Second, the model provides a new argument for why it is usually entrants, not incumbents, that bring major technological innovations to the market.
References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- E. Glen Weyl, 2010. "A Price Theory of Multi-sided Platforms," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 100(4), pages 1642-1672, September.
- Attila Ambrus & Rossella Argenziano, 2009.
"Asymmetric Networks in Two-Sided Markets,"
American Economic Journal: Microeconomics,
American Economic Association, vol. 1(1), pages 17-52, February.
- Ambrus, Attila & Argenziano, Rossella, 2009. "Asymmetric Networks in Two-Sided Markets," Scholarly Articles 3204916, Harvard University Department of Economics.
- Drew Fudenberg & Jean Tirole, 1991. "Game Theory," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262061414, December.
- Ettore Damiano & Li Hao, 2008. "Competing Matchmaking," Journal of the European Economic Association, MIT Press, vol. 6(4), pages 789-818, 06.
- Damiano, Ettore & Li, Hao, 2005. "Competing Matchmaking," Microeconomics.ca working papers damiano-05-01-25-10-08-07, Vancouver School of Economics, revised 18 Oct 2005.
- Ramon Casadesus-Masanell & Francisco Ruiz-Aliseda, 2008. "Platform Competition, Compatibility, and Social Efficiency," Working Papers 08-32, NET Institute.
- Casadesus-Masanell, Ramon & Ruiz-Aliseda, Francisco, 2009. "Platform competition, compatibility, and social efficiency," IESE Research Papers D/798, IESE Business School.
- repec:hrv:faseco:4589709 is not listed on IDEAS
- Andrei Hagiu & Robin S. Lee, 2011. "Exclusivity and Control," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 20(3), pages 679-708, 09.
- Bruno Jullien, 2011. "Competition in Multi-sided Markets: Divide and Conquer," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 3(4), pages 186-220, November.
- Caillaud, Bernard & Jullien, Bruno, 2001. "Competing cybermediaries," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 45(4-6), pages 797-808, May.
- Gilbert, Richard J & Newbery, David M G, 1982. "Preemptive Patenting and the Persistence of Monopoly," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 72(3), pages 514-526, June. Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)