IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/net/wpaper/1610.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

How Do Complementors Respond to the Threat of Platform Owner Entry? Evidence from the Mobile App Market

Author

Listed:
  • Wen Wen

    (University of Texas at Austin, McCombs School of Business, 2110 Speedway, Austin, TX 78712)

  • Feng Zhu

    (Harvard University, Harvard Business School, Morgan Hall 431, Boston, MA 02163)

Abstract

How do complementors respond to the threat of platform owner entry, and how do such responses differ from the responses to actual entry? Using the mobile platform Android as our research setting, we examine how app developers on Android adjust their rate and direction of innovation efforts and prices in response to Google’s entry threat and actual entry into to the app markets. Based on a difference-indifferences empirical framework, we find that app developers that are affected by Google’s entry reduce their innovation efforts on affected apps after entry threats increase; after Google’s actual entry, they reduce innovation efforts on affected apps further and also increase these apps’ prices. However, we find that affected app developers do not withdraw from the platform completely—once the threat occurs, they shift innovation efforts from affected apps to other unaffected apps, as indicated by an increase in updates on unaffected apps during both the entry-threat and actual-entry period.

Suggested Citation

  • Wen Wen & Feng Zhu, 2016. "How Do Complementors Respond to the Threat of Platform Owner Entry? Evidence from the Mobile App Market," Working Papers 16-10, NET Institute.
  • Handle: RePEc:net:wpaper:1610
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.netinst.org/Wen_16-10.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bertschek, I., 1995. "How to Stay in The Market? - Products and Process Innovation as a Response to Increasing Imports and Foreign Direct Investment," SFB 373 Discussion Papers 1995,7, Humboldt University of Berlin, Interdisciplinary Research Project 373: Quantification and Simulation of Economic Processes.
    2. Austan Goolsbee & Chad Syverson, 2008. "How Do Incumbents Respond to the Threat of Entry? Evidence from the Major Airlines," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 123(4), pages 1611-1633.
    3. Bertschek, Irene, 1995. "Product and Process Innovation as a Response to Increasing Import and Foreign Direct Investment," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(4), pages 341-357, December.
    4. Feng Zhu & Qihong Liu, 2018. "Competing with complementors: An empirical look at Amazon.com," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(10), pages 2618-2642, October.
    5. Xavier Vives, 2008. "Innovation And Competitive Pressure," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 56(3), pages 419-469, December.
    6. Annabelle Gawer & Rebecca Henderson, 2007. "Platform Owner Entry and Innovation in Complementary Markets: Evidence from Intel," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 16(1), pages 1-34, March.
    7. Randal Heeb, 2003. "Randal Heeb Innovation and Vertical Integration in Complementary Markets," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 12(3), pages 387-417, September.
    8. Alejandro Zentner & Michael Smith & Cuneyd Kaya, 2013. "How Video Rental Patterns Change as Consumers Move Online," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 59(11), pages 2622-2634, November.
    9. Choi, Jay Pil & Stefanadis, Christodoulos, 2001. "Tying, Investment, and the Dynamic Leverage Theory," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 32(1), pages 52-71, Spring.
    10. Becchetti, Leonardo & Paganetto, Luigi, 2001. "The determinants of suboptimal technological development in the system company-component producers relationship," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 19(9), pages 1407-1421, November.
    11. Dennis W. Carlton & Michael Waldman, 2002. "The Strategic Use of Tying to Preserve and Create Market Power in Evolving Industries," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 33(2), pages 194-220, Summer.
    12. Nickell, Stephen J, 1996. "Competition and Corporate Performance," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 104(4), pages 724-746, August.
    13. Josh Lerner & Scott Stern, 2012. "The Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity Revisited," NBER Books, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc, number lern11-1.
    14. Greenstein, Shane & Ramey, Garey, 1998. "Market structure, innovation and vertical product differentiation," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 16(3), pages 285-311, May.
    15. Miller, David A., 2008. "Invention under uncertainty and the threat of ex post entry," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 52(3), pages 387-412, April.
    16. Robert C. Seamans, 2012. "Fighting City Hall: Entry Deterrence and Technology Upgrades in Cable TV Markets," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 58(3), pages 461-475, March.
    17. Klemperer, Paul D, 1987. "Entry Deterrence in Markets with Consumer Switching Costs," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 97(388a), pages 99-117, Supplemen.
    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. Timothy Bates & William D. Bradford & Robert Seamans, 2018. "Minority entrepreneurship in twenty-first century America," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 50(3), pages 415-427, March.
    2. Frédéric Marty & Thierry Warin, 2020. "Innovation in Digital Ecosystems: Challenges and Questions for Competition Policy," CIRANO Working Papers 2020s-10, CIRANO.

    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. Packalen, Mikko, 2010. "Complements and potential competition," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 28(3), pages 244-253, May.
    2. Belleflamme,Paul & Peitz,Martin, 2015. "Industrial Organization," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9781107687899, September.
    3. Peng Huang & Marco Ceccagnoli & Chris Forman & D. J. Wu, 2013. "Appropriability Mechanisms and the Platform Partnership Decision: Evidence from Enterprise Software," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 59(1), pages 102-121, July.
    4. Annabelle Gawer & Rebecca Henderson, 2007. "Platform Owner Entry and Innovation in Complementary Markets: Evidence from Intel," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 16(1), pages 1-34, March.
    5. Chi, Yunjia & Qing, Ping & Jin, Yong Jimmy & Yu, Jinjun & Dong, Maggie Chuoyan & Huang, Li, 2022. "Competition or spillover? Effects of platform-owner entry on provider commitment," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 627-636.
    6. Niedermayer, Andras, 2013. "On platforms, incomplete contracts, and open source software," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 31(6), pages 714-722.
    7. Stephen Martin, 2012. "Market Structure and Market Performance," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 40(2), pages 87-108, March.
    8. Shu He & Jing Peng & Jianbin Li & Liping Xu, 2020. "Impact of Platform Owner’s Entry on Third-Party Stores," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 31(4), pages 1467-1484, December.
    9. Sutirtha Bagchi & Jagadeesh Sivadasan, 2017. "Barriers to Entry and Competitive Behavior: Evidence from Reforms of Cable Franchising Regulations," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 65(3), pages 510-558, September.
    10. Ronald Goettler & Brett Gordon, 2014. "Competition and product innovation in dynamic oligopoly," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 12(1), pages 1-42, March.
    11. Giulio Federico & Fiona Scott Morton & Carl Shapiro, 2020. "Antitrust and Innovation: Welcoming and Protecting Disruption," Innovation Policy and the Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 20(1), pages 125-190.
    12. Xavier Vives, 2008. "Innovation And Competitive Pressure," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 56(3), pages 419-469, December.
    13. Ana M. Fernandes & Caroline Paunov, 2013. "Does trade stimulate product quality upgrading?," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 46(4), pages 1232-1264, November.
    14. Feng Zhu & Qihong Liu, 2018. "Competing with complementors: An empirical look at Amazon.com," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(10), pages 2618-2642, October.
    15. Kyle Wilson & Mo Xiao & Peter F. Orazem, 2021. "Entry threat, entry delay, and Internet speed: The timing of the U.S. broadband rollout," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(1), pages 3-44, February.
    16. Randal Heeb, 2003. "Randal Heeb Innovation and Vertical Integration in Complementary Markets," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 12(3), pages 387-417, September.
    17. Maican, Florin & Orth, Matilda, 2015. "A dynamic analysis of entry regulations and productivity in retail trade," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 67-80.
    18. Kevin Boudreau, 2010. "Open Platform Strategies and Innovation: Granting Access vs. Devolving Control," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 56(10), pages 1849-1872, October.
    19. Lee, Chang-Yang, 2009. "Competition favors the prepared firm: Firms' R&D responses to competitive market pressure," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(5), pages 861-870, June.
    20. Miller, David A., 2008. "Invention under uncertainty and the threat of ex post entry," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 52(3), pages 387-412, April.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    platform owner entry; entry threat; innovation; mobile app industry;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • L11 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Production, Pricing, and Market Structure; Size Distribution of Firms
    • L86 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Services - - - Information and Internet Services; Computer Software
    • O32 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Management of Technological Innovation and R&D

    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:net:wpaper:1610. 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: Nicholas Economides (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.NETinst.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.