IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/rtv/ceisrp/206.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Calling Circles: Network Competition with Non-Uniform Calling Patterns

Author

Listed:

Abstract

We introduce a flexible model of telecommunications network competition with non-uniform calling patterns, which account for the fact that customers tend to make most calls to a small set of contacts. Equilibrium call prices are distorted away from marginal cost, and competitive intensity is affected by the concentration of calling patterns. Contrary to previous predictions, jointly profit-maximizing access charges are set above termination cost in order to dampen competition, and the resulting on-net prices are below off-net prices, if calling patterns are sufficiently concentrated. We discuss implications for regulating access charges as well as on- and off-net price discrimination.

Suggested Citation

  • Steffen Hoernig & Roman Inderst & Tommaso Valletti, 2011. "Calling Circles: Network Competition with Non-Uniform Calling Patterns," CEIS Research Paper 206, Tor Vergata University, CEIS, revised 04 Jul 2011.
    • Handle: RePEc:rtv:ceisrp:206
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ceistorvergata.it/RePEc/rpaper/RP206.pdf
    File Function: Main text
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Daniel Birke & G. M. Peter Swann, 2007. "Network effects and the choice of mobile phone operator," Springer Books, in: Uwe Cantner & Franco Malerba (ed.), Innovation, Industrial Dynamics and Structural Transformation, pages 109-128, Springer.
    2. 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).
    3. Mark Armstrong & Julian Wright, 2009. "Mobile Call Termination," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 119(538), pages 270-307, June.
    4. Ángel L. López & Patrick Rey, 2009. "Foreclosing Competition through Access Charges and Price Discrimination," Working Papers 2009.99, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    5. Armstrong, Mark, 1998. "Network Interconnection in Telecommunications," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 108(448), pages 545-564, May.
    6. Armstrong, Mark & Wright, Julian, 2007. "Mobile call termination in the UK," MPRA Paper 2344, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    7. 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.
    8. Gabrielsen, Tommy Staahl & Vagstad, Steinar, 2008. "Why is on-net traffic cheaper than off-net traffic Access markup as a collusive device," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 52(1), pages 99-115, January.
    9. Joan Calzada & Tommaso M. Valletti, 2008. "Network Competition and Entry Deterrence," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 118(531), pages 1223-1244, August.
    10. Jean-Jacques Laffont & Patrick Rey & Jean Tirole, 1998. "Network Competition: II. Price Discrimination," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 29(1), pages 38-56, Spring.
    11. Christos Genakos & Tommaso Valletti, 2011. "Testing The “Waterbed” Effect In Mobile Telephony," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 9(6), pages 1114-1142, December.
    12. Katz, Michael L & Shapiro, Carl, 1985. "Network Externalities, Competition, and Compatibility," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 75(3), pages 424-440, June.
    13. David P. Baron, 2010. "Morally Motivated Self-Regulation," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 100(4), pages 1299-1329, September.
    14. Mengze Shi & Botao Yang & Jeongwen Chiang, 2009. "A Dyad Model of Calling Behaviour with Tie Strength Dynamics," Working Papers 09-12, NET Institute, revised Sep 2009.
    15. Armstrong, Mark, 2004. "Network interconnection with asymmetric networks and heterogeneous calling patterns," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 16(3), pages 375-390, September.
    16. Valletti, Tommaso M & Cave, Martin, 1998. "Competition in UK mobile communications," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 22(2), pages 109-131, March.
    17. Sobolewski, Maciej & Czajkowski, MikoŁaj, 2012. "Network effects and preference heterogeneity in the case of mobile telecommunications markets," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(3), pages 197-211.
    18. Armstrong, Mark & Vickers, John, 2001. "Competitive Price Discrimination," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 32(4), pages 579-605, Winter.
    19. Moen, Espen R. & Riis, Christian & Fjeldstad, Øystein, 2010. "Competition with Local Network Externalities," CEPR Discussion Papers 7778, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    20. Armstrong, Mark, 2006. "Price discrimination," MPRA Paper 4693, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    21. Benjamin E. Hermalin & Michael L. Katz, 2011. "Customer or Complementor? Intercarrier Compensation with Two‐Sided Benefits," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 20(2), pages 379-408, June.
    22. Dessein, Wouter, 2004. "Network competition with heterogeneous customers and calling patterns," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 16(3), pages 323-345, September.
    23. Armstrong, M., 1996. "Network interconnection," Discussion Paper Series In Economics And Econometrics 9625, Economics Division, School of Social Sciences, University of Southampton.
    24. Gans, Joshua S. & King, Stephen P., 2001. "Using 'bill and keep' interconnect arrangements to soften network competition," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 71(3), pages 413-420, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Sjaak Hurkens & Ángel Luis López, 2010. "Mobile Termination and Consumer Expectations under the Receiver-Pays Regime," Working Papers 10-12, NET Institute.
    2. Hoernig, Steffen, 2014. "Competition between multiple asymmetric networks: Theory and applications," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 32(C), pages 57-69.
    3. Thomas P. Tangerås, 2014. "Network competition with income effects," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 45(3), pages 645-673, September.
    4. Harbord, David & Pagnozzi, Marco, 2008. "On-Net/Off-Net Price Discrimination and 'Bill-and-Keep' vs. 'Cost-Based' Regulation of Mobile Termination Rates," MPRA Paper 14540, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    5. Jullien, Bruno & Rey, Patrick & Sand-Zantman, Wilfried, 2013. "Termination fees revisited," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 31(6), pages 738-750.
    6. 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.
    7. Hurkens, Sjaak & López, Ángel L., 2014. "Who Should Pay for Two-way Interconnection?," IESE Research Papers D/1102, IESE Business School.
    8. 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.
    9. Harbord, David & Hoernig, Steffen, 2010. "Welfare Analysis of Regulating Mobile Termination Rates in the UK (with an Application to the Orange/T-Mobile Merger)," MPRA Paper 21515, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    10. Hurkens, Sjaak & Jeon, Doh-Shin, 2009. "Mobile termination and mobile penetration," IESE Research Papers D/816, IESE Business School.
    11. David Harbord & Steffen Hoernig, 2015. "Welfare Analysis of Regulating Mobile Termination Rates in the U.K," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 63(4), pages 673-703, December.
    12. Hawthorne, Ryan, 2018. "The effects of lower mobile termination rates in South Africa," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(5), pages 374-385.
    13. Ángel L. López & Patrick Rey, 2016. "Foreclosing Competition Through High Access Charges and Price Discrimination," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 64(3), pages 436-465, September.
    14. 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.
    15. Hurkens, Sjaak & López, Ángel L., 2012. "The welfare effects of mobile termination rate regulation in asymmetric oligopolies: The case of Spain," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(5), pages 369-381.
    16. 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).
    17. Vogelsang Ingo, 2013. "The Endgame of Telecommunications Policy? A Survey," Review of Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 64(3), pages 193-270, December.
    18. Luis López, Ángel, 2011. "Mobile termination rates and the receiver-pays regime," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 23(2), pages 171-181, June.
    19. Lee, Dongyeol, 2015. "Regulating termination charges in asymmetric oligopolies," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(C), pages 16-28.
    20. Agostini, Claudio A. & Willington, Manuel & Lazcano, Raúl & Saavedra, Eduardo, 2017. "Predation and network based price discrimination in Chile," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(9), pages 781-791.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Network competition; non-uniform calling patterns; termination charge;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • L13 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Oligopoly and Other Imperfect Markets
    • L51 - Industrial Organization - - Regulation and Industrial Policy - - - Economics of Regulation

    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:rtv:ceisrp:206. 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: Barbara Piazzi (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/csrotit.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.