IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/jemstr/v24y2015i2p306-324.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Investment Incentives in Open‐Source and Proprietary Two‐Sided Platforms

Author

Listed:
  • Ramon Casadesus‐Masanell
  • Gastón Llanes

Abstract

We study incentives to invest in platform quality in open‐source and proprietary two‐sided platforms. Open platforms have open access, and developers invest to improve the platform. Proprietary platforms have closed access, and investment is done by the platform owner. We present five main results. First, open platforms may benefit from limited developer access. Second, an open platform may lead to higher investment than a proprietary platform. Third, opening one side of a proprietary platform may lower incentives to invest in platform quality. Fourth, the structure of access prices of the proprietary platform depends on (i) how changes in the number of developers affect the incentives to invest in the open platform, and (ii) how investment in the open platform affects the revenues of the proprietary platform. Finally, a proprietary platform may benefit from higher investment in the open platform. This result helps to explain why the owner of a proprietary platform such as Microsoft has chosen to contribute to the development of Linux.

Suggested Citation

  • Ramon Casadesus‐Masanell & Gastón Llanes, 2015. "Investment Incentives in Open‐Source and Proprietary Two‐Sided Platforms," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 24(2), pages 306-324, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:jemstr:v:24:y:2015:i:2:p:306-324
    DOI: 10.1111/jems.12089
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/jems.12089
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/jems.12089?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Nicholas Economides & Evangelos Katsamakas, 2005. "Linux vs. Windows: A comparison of application and platform innovation incentives for open source and proprietary software platforms+," Working Papers 05-03, NET Institute, revised Sep 2005.
    2. Chaim Fershtman & Neil Gandal, 2011. "open source software, a brief survey of the economics of," The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics,, Palgrave Macmillan.
    3. 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.
    4. Ramon Casadesus-Masanell & Francisco Ruiz-Aliseda, 2008. "Platform Competition, Compatibility, and Social Efficiency," Working Papers 08-32, NET Institute.
    5. Mustonen, Mikko, 2003. "Copyleft--the economics of Linux and other open source software," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 15(1), pages 99-121, March.
    6. 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.
    7. Alexandre Gaudeul, 2004. "Competition between open-source and proprietary software: the (La)TeX case study," Industrial Organization 0409007, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    8. Daniel F. Spulber, 1996. "Market Making by Price-Setting Firms," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 63(4), pages 559-580.
    9. Bitzer, Jurgen, 2004. "Commercial versus open source software: the role of product heterogeneity in competition," Economic Systems, Elsevier, vol. 28(4), pages 369-381, December.
    10. Llanes, Gastón & de Elejalde, Ramiro, 2013. "Industry equilibrium with open-source and proprietary firms," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 31(1), pages 36-49.
    11. Fershtman, Chaim & Gandal, Neil, 2011. "A Brief Survey of the Economics of Open Source Software," CEPR Discussion Papers 8434, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    12. Ramon Casadesus-Masanell & Pankaj Ghemawat, 2006. "Dynamic Mixed Duopoly: A Model Motivated by Linux vs. Windows," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(7), pages 1072-1084, July.
    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. Ricardo Flores‐Fillol & Alberto Iozzi & Tommaso Valletti, 2018. "Platform pricing and consumer foresight: The case of airports," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(4), pages 705-725, October.
    2. 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.
    3. Esther Gal‐Or & Ronen Gal‐Or & Nabita Penmetsa, 2019. "Can platform competition support market segmentation? Network externalities versus matching efficiency in equity crowdfunding markets," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(3), pages 420-435, June.
    4. Jhan-Jia Lin & Yu-Tse Lee & Ja-Ling Wu, 2021. "The Effect of Thickness-Based Dynamic Matching Mechanism on a Hyperledger Fabric-Based TimeBank System," Future Internet, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-21, March.
    5. Chung‐Hui Chou, 2021. "Could coexistence of open‐source and proprietary platforms be an equilibrium outcome?," Manchester School, University of Manchester, vol. 89(3), pages 297-309, June.
    6. Xing Gao, 2020. "Open Source or Closed Source? A Competitive Analysis with Software Security," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 17(1), pages 56-73, March.
    7. Luigi Balletta & Antonio Tesoriere, 2020. "Cumulative innovation, open source, and distance to frontier," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 22(6), pages 1875-1920, December.
    8. Choi, Jay Pil & Jeon, Doh-Shin & KIM, Byung-Cheol, 2012. "Internet Interconnection and Network Neutrality," TSE Working Papers 12-355, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE).
    9. Peng Huang & Gaoyan Lyu & Yi Xu, 2022. "Quality Regulation on Two-Sided Platforms: Exclusion, Subsidization, and First-Party Applications," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(6), pages 4415-4434, June.
    10. Thomas Clauss & Peter Harengel & Marianne Hock, 2019. "The perception of value of platform-based business models in the sharing economy: determining the drivers of user loyalty," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 13(3), pages 605-634, June.
    11. Liu, He & Amit, Raphael & Qiao, Han & Wang, Shouyang, 2024. "Digital platform compatibility strategies in platform co-opetition," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 174(C).
    12. Yuan Jing, 2022. "The Relationship Between Business Model Innovation and Operational Performance of Incubator Enterprise," International Journal of Science and Business, IJSAB International, vol. 16(1), pages 153-191.
    13. Ding, Rong & Ko, Chiu Yu & Shen, Bo, 2022. "Partial compatibility in two-sided markets: Equilibrium and welfare analysis," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 116(C).
    14. Maruyama, Masayoshi & Zennyo, Yusuke, 2017. "Process innovation, application compatibility, and welfare," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 1-12.

    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. Ramon Casadesus-Masanell & Gastón Llanes, 2011. "Mixed Source," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 57(7), pages 1212-1230, July.
    2. Llanes, Gastón & de Elejalde, Ramiro, 2013. "Industry equilibrium with open-source and proprietary firms," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 31(1), pages 36-49.
    3. Engelhardt, Sebastian v. & Freytag, Andreas, 2013. "Institutions, culture, and open source," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 90-110.
    4. Gauguier, Jean-Jacques, 2009. "L’industrialisation de l’Open Source," Economics Thesis from University Paris Dauphine, Paris Dauphine University, number 123456789/4388 edited by Toledano, Joëlle.
    5. Ramon Casadesus-Masanell & Feng Zhu, 2010. "Strategies to Fight Ad-Sponsored Rivals," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 56(9), pages 1484-1499, September.
    6. Bottai, Carlo, 2015. "Open Innovation in a Model à la Hotelling," Department of Economics and Statistics Cognetti de Martiis. Working Papers 201526, University of Turin.
    7. Bitzer, Jürgen & Geishecker, Ingo, 2010. "Who contributes voluntarily to OSS? An investigation among German IT employees," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 165-172, February.
    8. Luigi Di Gaetano, 2015. "A Model of corporate donations to open source under hardware–software complementarity," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 24(1), pages 163-190.
    9. Yu Wang & Yu Chen & Bonwoo Koo, 2017. "Open Source and Competition Strategy Under Network Effects," Graz Economics Papers 2017-03, University of Graz, Department of Economics.
    10. Cerquera Dussán, Daniel & Müller, Bettina, 2009. "Open Source, ICT infrastructure and firm performance," ZEW Discussion Papers 09-089, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    11. Sebastian von Engelhardt, 2010. "Quality Competition or Quality Cooperation? License-Type and the Strategic Nature of Open Source vs. Closed Source Business Models," Jena Economics Research Papers 2010-034, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena.
    12. 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.
    13. Chung‐Hui Chou, 2021. "Could coexistence of open‐source and proprietary platforms be an equilibrium outcome?," Manchester School, University of Manchester, vol. 89(3), pages 297-309, June.
    14. Eric Darmon & Dominique Torre, 2010. "Open source, dual licensing and software compétition," Post-Print halshs-00497623, HAL.
    15. Alexia Gaudeul, 2008. "Consumer Welfare and Market Structure in a Model of Competition between Open Source and Proprietary Software," Working Paper series, University of East Anglia, Centre for Competition Policy (CCP) 2008-31, Centre for Competition Policy, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK..
    16. Nicholas Economides & Evangelos Katsamakas, 2005. "Linux vs. Windows: A comparison of application and platform innovation incentives for open source and proprietary software platforms+," Working Papers 05-03, NET Institute, revised Sep 2005.
    17. Ramon Casadesus‐Masanell & Hanna Hałaburda, 2014. "When Does a Platform Create Value by Limiting Choice?," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 23(2), pages 259-293, June.
    18. Zach Zhizhong Zhou & Vidyanand Choudhary, 2022. "Impact of Competition from Open Source Software on Proprietary Software," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 31(2), pages 731-742, February.
    19. Nicholas Economides & Evangelos Katsamakas, 2005. "Linux vs. Windows: A Comparison of Innovation Incentives and a Case Study," Working Papers 05-11, New York University, Leonard N. Stern School of Business, Department of Economics.
    20. Economides, Nicholas & Tåg, Joacim, 2012. "Network neutrality on the Internet: A two-sided market analysis," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 91-104.

    More about this item

    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:bla:jemstr:v:24:y:2015:i:2:p:306-324. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.kellogg.northwestern.edu/research/journals/JEMS/ .

    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.