IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ucb/calbwp/e01-306.html

Competition or Predation? Schumpeterian Rivalry in Network Markets

Author

Listed:
  • Joseph Farrell and Michael L. Katz.

Abstract

We explore the logic of predation and rules designed to prevent it in markets subject to network effects. Although, as many have informally argued, predatory behavior is plausibly more likely to succeed in such markets, we find that it is particularly hard to intervene in network markets in ways that improve welfare. We find that imposition of the leading proposals for rules against predatory pricing may lower or raise consumer welfare, depending on conditions that may be difficult to identify in practice.

Suggested Citation

  • Joseph Farrell and Michael L. Katz., 2001. "Competition or Predation? Schumpeterian Rivalry in Network Markets," Economics Working Papers E01-306, University of California at Berkeley.
    • Handle: RePEc:ucb:calbwp:e01-306
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.haas.berkeley.edu/groups/iber/wps/econ/E01-306.pdf
    File Function: main text
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Cabral, Luis M B & Riordan, Michael H, 1994. "The Learning Curve, Market Dominance, and Predatory Pricing," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 62(5), pages 1115-1140, September.
    2. Ordover, Janusz A. & Saloner, Garth, 1989. "Predation, monopolization, and antitrust," Handbook of Industrial Organization, in: R. Schmalensee & R. Willig (ed.), Handbook of Industrial Organization, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 9, pages 537-596, Elsevier.
    3. 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.
    4. 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.
    5. Katz, Michael L & Shapiro, Carl, 1986. "Technology Adoption in the Presence of Network Externalities," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 94(4), pages 822-841, August.
    6. 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)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Joao Carlos Correia Leitao, 2004. "Optimal Divisionalization for Selling Networks of Cable Television Services," Industrial Organization 0403004, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Kai Hüschelrath & Jürgen Weigand, 2013. "Predation enforcement options: an evaluation in a Cournot framework," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 35(2), pages 241-272, April.
    3. Gerard Llobet & Michael Manove, 2006. "Network Size and Network Capture," Boston University - Department of Economics - Working Papers Series WP2006-007, Boston University - Department of Economics.
    4. Gunnar Alexandersson & Staffan Hultén, 2006. "Predatory bidding in competitive tenders: A Swedish case study," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 22(1), pages 73-94, July.
    5. Edlin, Aaron S. & Farrell, Joseph, 2002. "The American Airlines Case: A Chance to Clarify Predation Policy," Competition Policy Center, Working Paper Series qt32h8b40m, Competition Policy Center, Institute for Business and Economic Research, UC Berkeley.
    6. Koski, Heli & Sierimo, Carolina, 2003. "Entry and Exit in the ICT Sector - New Markets, New Industrial Dynamics?," Discussion Papers 847, The Research Institute of the Finnish Economy.

    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. Mariotto, Carlotta & Verdier, Marianne, 2015. "Innovation and competition in Internet and mobile banking: an industrial organization perspective," Bank of Finland Research Discussion Papers 23/2015, Bank of Finland.
    2. Mariotto, Carlotta & Verdier, Marianne, 2015. "Innovation and competition in Internet and mobile banking: an industrial organization perspective," Research Discussion Papers 23/2015, Bank of Finland.
    3. Chiara Fumagalli & Massimo Motta, 2013. "A Simple Theory of Predation," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 56(3), pages 595-631.
    4. repec:bof:bofrdp:urn:nbn:fi:bof-201511261452 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. Carlotta MARIOTTO & Marianne VERDIER, 2015. "Innovation and Competition in Internet and Mobile Banking: an Industrial Organization Perspective," Communications & Strategies, IDATE, Com&Strat dept., vol. 1(99), pages 129-146, 3rd quart.
    6. Colla, Paolo & Garcia, Filomena, 2016. "Technology adoption: Hysteresis and absence of lock-in," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 107-111.
    7. Belleflamme,Paul & Peitz,Martin, 2015. "Industrial Organization," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9781107069978, January.
    8. Luis Cabral, 2014. "Staggered Contracts, Market Power and Welfare," Working Papers 14-13, New York University, Leonard N. Stern School of Business, Department of Economics.
    9. Richard J. Gilbert & Michael L. Katz, 2001. "An Economist's Guide to U.S. v. Microsoft," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 15(2), pages 25-44, Spring.
    10. Luís Cabral, 2018. "We’re Number 1: Price Wars for Market Share Leadership," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(5), pages 2013-2030, May.
    11. Lindsey, Robin & West, Douglas S., 2003. "Predatory pricing in differentiated products retail markets," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 21(4), pages 551-592, April.
    12. Cabral, Luís, 2014. "Aftermarket power and foremarket competition," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 60-69.
    13. Fumagalli, Chiara & Motta, Massimo, 2020. "Tying in evolving industries, when future entry cannot be deterred," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 73(C).
    14. Bayer, Christian, 2007. "Investment timing and predatory behavior in a duopoly with endogenous exit," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 31(9), pages 3069-3109, September.
    15. Joseph Farrell & Michael L. Katz, 2000. "Innovation, Rent Extraction, and Integration in Systems Markets," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 48(4), pages 413-432, December.
    16. Choi, Jay Pil & Jeon, Doh-Shin, 2016. "A Leverage Theory of Tying in Two-Sided Markets," TSE Working Papers 16-689, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE), revised Oct 2019.
    17. 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.
    18. Cooper, James C. & Froeb, Luke M. & O'Brien, Dan & Vita, Michael G., 2005. "Vertical antitrust policy as a problem of inference," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 23(7-8), pages 639-664, September.
    19. Pérez, Carlos J. & Ponce, Carlos J., 2015. "Disruption costs, learning by doing, and technology adoption," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 64-75.
    20. Church, Jeffrey & Gandal, Neil, 1996. "Strategic entry deterrence: Complementary products as installed base," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 12(2), pages 331-354, September.
    21. Christian Bayer, 2004. "The Other Side of Limited Liability: Predatory Behavior and Investment Timing," Industrial Organization 0407001, University Library of Munich, Germany.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • L1 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance
    • D4 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design

    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:ucb:calbwp:e01-306. 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: Christopher F. Baum (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/debrkus.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.