IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/trf/wpaper/523.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Does a Platform Monopolist Want Competition?

Author

Listed:
  • Niedermayer, Andreas

Abstract

We consider a software vendor first selling a monopoly platform and then an application running on this platform. He may face competition by an entrant in the applications market. The platform monopolist can benefit from competition for three reasons. First, his profits from the platform increase. Second, competition serves as a credible commitment to lower prices for applications. Third, higher expected product variety may lead to higher demand for his application. Results carry over to non-software platforms and, partially, to upstream and downstream firms. The model also explains why Microsoft Office is priced significantly higher than Microsoft’s operating system.

Suggested Citation

  • Niedermayer, Andreas, 2015. "Does a Platform Monopolist Want Competition?," Discussion Paper Series of SFB/TR 15 Governance and the Efficiency of Economic Systems 523, Free University of Berlin, Humboldt University of Berlin, University of Bonn, University of Mannheim, University of Munich.
  • Handle: RePEc:trf:wpaper:523
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://epub.ub.uni-muenchen.de/25322/1/523SFB.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Nicholas Economides & Brian Viard, 2003. "Pricing of Complementary Goods and Network Effects," Working Papers 03-12, New York University, Leonard N. Stern School of Business, Department of Economics.
    2. Norbert Schulz & Konrad Stahl, 1996. "Do Consumers Search for the Highest Price? Oligopoly Equilibrium and Monopoly Optimum in Differentiated Products Markets," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 27(3), pages 542-562, Autumn.
    3. Johannes Muthers & Sebastian Wismer, 2012. "Why Do Platforms Charge Proportional Fees? Commitment and Seller Participation," Working Papers 115, Bavarian Graduate Program in Economics (BGPE).
    4. Caillaud, Bernard & Jullien, Bruno, 2003. "Chicken & Egg: Competition among Intermediation Service Providers," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 34(2), pages 309-328, Summer.
    5. Andras Niedermayer, 2007. "On Platforms, Incomplete Contracts, and Open Source Software," Diskussionsschriften dp0707, Universitaet Bern, Departement Volkswirtschaft.
    6. Economides, Nicholas, 1996. "Network externalities, complementarities, and invitations to enter," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 12(2), pages 211-233, September.
    7. Simon Loertscher & Yves Schneider, 2011. "Chain Stores, Consumer Mobility, and Market Structure," Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics (JITE), Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 167(2), pages 236-246, 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. Andras Niedermayer, 2006. "Does a Platform Monopolist Want Competition?," Diskussionsschriften dp0604, Universitaet Bern, Departement Volkswirtschaft.
    2. Niedermayer Andras, 2015. "Does a Platform Monopolist Want Competition?," Review of Network Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 14(1), pages 1-44, March.
    3. Rupayan Pal & Vinay Ramani, 2017. "Will a matchmaker invite her potential rival in?," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(4), pages 806-819, December.
    4. DongJoon Lee & Kangsik Choi & Tatsuhiko Nariu, 2020. "Endogenous vertical structure with network externalities," Manchester School, University of Manchester, vol. 88(6), pages 827-846, December.
    5. Hagiu, Andrei & Hałaburda, Hanna, 2014. "Information and two-sided platform profits," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 34(C), pages 25-35.
    6. Hurkens, Sjaak & Lopez, Angel, 2010. "Mobile termination, network externalities, and consumer expectations," IESE Research Papers D/850, IESE Business School.
    7. Kevin Boudreau, 2010. "Open Platform Strategies and Innovation: Granting Access vs. Devolving Control," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 56(10), pages 1849-1872, October.
    8. Gherardo Girardi, 2013. "Second Sourcing with Capacity Constrained Firms and Locked-In Buyers," International Journal of the Economics of Business, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(1), pages 83-95, February.
    9. Damiano, Ettore & Li, Hao & Suen, Wing, 2012. "Competing for talents," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 147(6), pages 2190-2219.
    10. Estelle Malavolti, 2016. "Single Till or Dual Till at airports: a Two-Sided Market Analysis," Post-Print hal-01406372, HAL.
    11. Demetrius Yannelis, 2002. "On access pricing with network externalities," Atlantic Economic Journal, Springer;International Atlantic Economic Society, vol. 30(2), pages 186-190, June.
    12. D'Annunzio, Anna & Russo, Antonio, 2015. "Net Neutrality and internet fragmentation: The role of online advertising," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 30-47.
    13. Lam, W., 2015. "Switching Costs in Two-sided Markets," LIDAM Discussion Papers CORE 2015024, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
    14. Andrei Hagiu & Julian Wright, 2015. "Marketplace or Reseller?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 61(1), pages 184-203, January.
    15. Kevin J. Boudreau & Andrei Hagiu, 2009. "Platform Rules: Multi-Sided Platforms as Regulators," Chapters, in: Annabelle Gawer (ed.), Platforms, Markets and Innovation, chapter 7, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    16. Jennifer Brown & John Morgan, 2009. "How Much Is a Dollar Worth? Tipping versus Equilibrium Coexistence on Competing Online Auction Sites," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 117(4), pages 668-700, August.
    17. Amelio, Andrea & Giardino-Karlinger, Liliane & Valletti, Tommaso, 2020. "Exclusionary pricing in two-sided markets," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 73(C).
    18. Renato Gomes & Alessandro Pavan, 2013. "Cross-Subsidization and Matching Design," Discussion Papers 1559, Northwestern University, Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science.
    19. Alexandre de Corniere, 2013. "Search Advertising," Economics Series Working Papers 649, University of Oxford, Department of Economics.
    20. Tsuyoshi Toshimitsu, 2020. "Note on the excess entry theorem in the presence of network externalities," Economia e Politica Industriale: Journal of Industrial and Business Economics, Springer;Associazione Amici di Economia e Politica Industriale, vol. 47(2), pages 271-282, June.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Platforms; Entry; Complementary Goods; Price Commitment; Product Variety; Microsoft; Vertical Integration; Two-Sided Markets;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D41 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design - - - Perfect Competition
    • D43 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design - - - Oligopoly and Other Forms of Market Imperfection
    • L13 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Oligopoly and Other Imperfect Markets
    • L86 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Services - - - Information and Internet Services; Computer Software

    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:523. 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: . General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/vfmunde.html .

    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 hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.