IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/trf/wpaper/257.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Platform Standards, Collusion and Quality Incentives

Author

Listed:
  • Salim, Claudia

Abstract

This paper examines how quality incentives are related to the interoperability of competing platforms. Platforms choose whether to operate standardised or exclusively, prior to quality and subsequent price competition. We find that platforms choose a common standard if they can coordinate their quality provision. The actual investment then depends on the cost of quality provision: If rather high, platforms refrain from investment; if rather low, platforms maintain vertically differentiated platforms. The latter case is socially more desirable than exclusivity where platforms do not invest. Nevertheless, quality competition of standardised platforms induces the highest investment and maximum welfare.

Suggested Citation

  • Salim, Claudia, 2009. "Platform Standards, Collusion and Quality Incentives," Discussion Paper Series of SFB/TR 15 Governance and the Efficiency of Economic Systems 257, Free University of Berlin, Humboldt University of Berlin, University of Bonn, University of Mannheim, University of Munich.
  • Handle: RePEc:trf:wpaper:257
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://epub.ub.uni-muenchen.de/13295/1/257.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Joseph Farrell & Garth Saloner, 1988. "Coordination through Committees and Markets," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 19(2), pages 235-252, Summer.
    2. Mark Armstrong, 2006. "Competition in two‐sided markets," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 37(3), pages 668-691, September.
    3. Baake, Pio & Boom, Anette, 2001. "Vertical product differentiation, network externalities, and compatibility decisions," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 19(1-2), pages 267-284, January.
    4. Doganoglu, Toker & Wright, Julian, 2006. "Multihoming and compatibility," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 24(1), pages 45-67, January.
    5. Jean-Charles Rochet & Jean Tirole, 2003. "Platform Competition in Two-Sided Markets," Journal of the European Economic Association, MIT Press, vol. 1(4), pages 990-1029, June.
    6. Bester, Helmut & Petrakis, Emmanuel, 1993. "The incentives for cost reduction in a differentiated industry," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 11(4), pages 519-534.
    7. Carmen Matutes & Pierre Regibeau, 1988. ""Mix and Match": Product Compatibility without Network Externalities," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 19(2), pages 221-234, Summer.
    8. Distaso, Walter & Lupi, Paolo & Manenti, Fabio M., 2006. "Platform competition and broadband uptake: Theory and empirical evidence from the European union," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 18(1), pages 87-106, March.
    9. 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.
    10. Michael L. Katz, 1986. "An Analysis of Cooperative Research and Development," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 17(4), pages 527-543, Winter.
    11. Schiff, Aaron, 2003. "Open and closed systems of two-sided networks," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 15(4), pages 425-442, December.
    12. Stanley M. Besen & Joseph Farrell, 1994. "Choosing How to Compete: Strategies and Tactics in Standardization," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 8(2), pages 117-131, Spring.
    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. Juan Manuel Sanchez‐Cartas & Gonzalo León, 2021. "Multisided Platforms And Markets: A Survey Of The Theoretical Literature," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(2), pages 452-487, April.
    2. Juan Manuel Sánchez-Cartas & Gonzalo Leon, 2017. "Shared networks and market power in two-sided markets," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 37(3), pages 2173-2180.
    3. Juan‐Manuel Sánchez‐Cartas & Gonzalo León, 2020. "Data sharing agreements in vertically differentiated two‐sided markets," International Journal of Economic Theory, The International Society for Economic Theory, vol. 16(3), pages 260-281, September.

    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. Oz Shy, 2011. "A Short Survey of Network Economics," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 38(2), pages 119-149, March.
    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. Ron Adner & Jianqing Chen & Feng Zhu, 2020. "Frenemies in Platform Markets: Heterogeneous Profit Foci as Drivers of Compatibility Decisions," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 66(6), pages 2432-2451, June.
    4. Salim, Claudia, 2008. "Platform interconnection and quality incentives," Discussion Papers 2008/16, Free University Berlin, School of Business & Economics.
    5. Daniel P. Gross, 2020. "Collusive Investments in Technological Compatibility: Lessons from U.S. Railroads in the Late 19th Century," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 66(12), pages 5683-5700, December.
    6. Ding, Rong & Ko, Chiu Yu & Shen, Bo, 2022. "Partial compatibility in two-sided markets: Equilibrium and welfare analysis," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 116(C).
    7. Jullien, Bruno & Pavan, Alessandro & Rysman, Marc, 2021. "Two-sided Markets, Pricing, and Network Effects," TSE Working Papers 21-1238, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE).
    8. Nicholas Economides & Evangelos Katsamakas, 2006. "Two-Sided Competition of Proprietary vs. Open Source Technology Platforms and the Implications for the Software Industry," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(7), pages 1057-1071, July.
    9. Timothy Simcoe & Jeremy Watson, 2019. "Forking, Fragmentation, and Splintering," Strategy Science, INFORMS, vol. 4(4), pages 283-297, December.
    10. María Fernanda Viecens, 2009. "Compatibility with Firm Dominance," Working Papers 2009-12, FEDEA.
    11. David S. Evans & Richard Schmalensee, 2005. "The economics of interchange fees and their regulation : an overview," Proceedings – Payments System Research Conferences, Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City, issue May, pages 73-120.
    12. repec:ebl:ecbull:v:12:y:2007:i:7:p:1-8 is not listed on IDEAS
    13. Justus Baron & Daniel F. Spulber, 2018. "Technology Standards and Standard Setting Organizations: Introduction to the Searle Center Database," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(3), pages 462-503, September.
    14. Alessandro Gavazza, 2011. "Demand spillovers and market outcomes in the mutual fund industry," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 42(4), pages 776-804, December.
    15. Domenico Buccella & Luciano Fanti & Luca Gori, 2023. "Strategic product compatibility in network industries," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 140(2), pages 141-168, October.
    16. Gastón Llanes & Andrea Mantovani & Francisco Ruiz-Aliseda, 2019. "Entry into Complementary Good Markets with Network Effects," Strategy Science, INFORMS, vol. 4(4), pages 262-282, December.
    17. Rattanasuda Poolsombat & Gianluigi Vernasca, 2006. "Partial Multihoming in Two-sided Markets," Discussion Papers 06/10, Department of Economics, University of York.
    18. Matutes, Carmen & Regibeau, Pierre, 1996. "A selective review of the economics of standardization. Entry deterrence, technological progress and international competition," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 12(2), pages 183-209, September.
    19. Nicholas Economides, 1997. "The Economics of Networks," Brazilian Electronic Journal of Economics, Department of Economics, Universidade Federal de Pernambuco, vol. 1(0), December.
    20. Rasch, Alexander, 2017. "Compatibility, network effects, and collusion," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 151(C), pages 39-43.
    21. Nicholas Economides & Lawrence J. White, 1993. "One-Way Networks, Two-Way Networks, Compatibility, and Antitrust," Working Papers 93-14, New York University, Leonard N. Stern School of Business, Department of Economics.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    two-sided markets; standards; investment in transaction quality;
    All these keywords.

    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:trf:wpaper:257. 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: Tamilla Benkelberg (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/vfmunde.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.