IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/randje/v52y2021i4p815-838.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Private contracts in two‐sided platforms

Author

Listed:
  • Gastón Llanes
  • Francisco Ruiz‐Aliseda

Abstract

We study a platform that signs private contracts with sellers. Contractual secrecy implies interrelated hold‐up problems for buyers and sellers that reduce platform profits and welfare. By increasing its control over sellers' prices, the platform is able to increase price transparency and commit to not behaving opportunistically, which increases profits and welfare. Thus, policy prescriptions for dealing with contractual secrecy are reversed in the case of two‐sided platforms. We also find a platform may benefit from an erosion of its market power on one side of the market because this erosion may raise the surplus it offers the other side.

Suggested Citation

  • Gastón Llanes & Francisco Ruiz‐Aliseda, 2021. "Private contracts in two‐sided platforms," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 52(4), pages 815-838, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:randje:v:52:y:2021:i:4:p:815-838
    DOI: 10.1111/1756-2171.12392
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/1756-2171.12392
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/1756-2171.12392?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. Daniel P. O'Brien & Greg Shaffer, 1992. "Vertical Control with Bilateral Contracts," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 23(3), pages 299-308, Autumn.
    2. Patrick Rey & Thibaud Vergé, 2004. "Bilateral Control with Vertical Contracts," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 35(4), pages 728-746, Winter.
    3. Hanna Halaburda & Mikołaj Jan Piskorski & Pınar Yıldırım, 2018. "Competing by Restricting Choice: The Case of Matching Platforms," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(8), pages 3574-3594, August.
    4. Justin P. Johnson, 2017. "The Agency Model and MFN Clauses," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 84(3), pages 1151-1185.
    5. Chengsi Wang & Julian Wright, 2020. "Search platforms: showrooming and price parity clauses," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 51(1), pages 32-58, March.
    6. McAfee, R Preston & Schwartz, Marius, 1994. "Opportunism in Multilateral Vertical Contracting: Nondiscrimination, Exclusivity, and Uniformity," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 84(1), pages 210-230, March.
    7. 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.
    8. Chengsi Wang & Julian Wright, 2023. "Platform Investment and price parity clauses," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 71(2), pages 538-569, 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. Jan Frederic Nerbel & Markus Kreutzer, 2023. "Digital platform ecosystems in flux: From proprietary digital platforms to wide-spanning ecosystems," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 33(1), pages 1-20, December.
    2. Xi Li & Xinlong Li, 2023. "The Bright Side of Inequity Aversion," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 69(7), pages 4210-4227, July.

    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. Shota Ichihashi, 2021. "Competing data intermediaries," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 52(3), pages 515-537, September.
    2. Hiroshi Kitamura & Noriaki Matsushima & Misato Sato, 2024. "How Does Downstream Firms’ Efficiency Affect Exclusive Supply Agreements?," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 64(2), pages 219-242, March.
    3. Bisceglia, Michele & Padilla, Jorge & Piccolo, Salvatore, 2021. "When prohibiting wholesale price-parity agreements may harm consumers," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 76(C).
    4. Teh, Christopher & Wang, Chengsi & Watanabe, Makoto, 2024. "Strategic limitation of market accessibility: Search platform design and welfare," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 216(C).
    5. Chengsi Wang & Makoto Watanabe, 2021. "Directed Search on a Platform: Meet Fewer to Match More," Monash Economics Working Papers 2021-02, Monash University, Department of Economics.
    6. Gaston Llanes & Francisco Ruiz-Aliseda, 2015. "Private Contracts in Two-Sided Markets," Working Papers 15-16, NET Institute.
    7. Emmanuel Petrakis & Panagiotis Skartados, 2022. "Vertical Opportunism, Bargaining, and Share-Based Agreements," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 60(4), pages 549-565, June.
    8. Emanuele Bacchiega & Olivier Bonroy & Emmanuel Petrakis, 2018. "Contract contingency in vertically related markets," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(4), pages 772-791, October.
    9. Jihui Chen & Qiang Fu, 2017. "Do exclusivity arrangements harm consumers?," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 51(3), pages 311-339, June.
    10. Do, Jihwan & Miklós-Thal, Jeanine, 2023. "Partial secrecy in vertical contracting," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 90(C).
    11. Emanuele Bacchiega & Olivier Bonroy, 2021. "Secret contracting and Nash-in-Nash bargaining," SN Business & Economics, Springer, vol. 1(11), pages 1-7, November.
    12. Milliou, Chrysovalantou & Petrakis, Emmanuel, 2007. "Upstream horizontal mergers, vertical contracts, and bargaining," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 25(5), pages 963-987, October.
    13. Bjørn Olav Johansen & Tore Nilssen, 2016. "The Economics of Retailing Formats: Competition Versus Bargaining," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 64(1), pages 109-134, March.
    14. Moellers, Claudia & Normann, Hans-Theo & Snyder, Christopher M., 2017. "Communication in vertical markets: Experimental evidence," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 214-258.
    15. Pagnozzi, Marco & Piccolo, Salvatore & Reisinger, Markus, 2021. "Vertical contracting with endogenous market structure," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 196(C).
    16. Alipranti, Maria & Milliou, Chrysovalantou & Petrakis, Emmanuel, 2014. "Price vs. quantity competition in a vertically related market," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 124(1), pages 122-126.
    17. Skartados, Panagiotis, 2022. "Disclosure regime of contract terms and bargaining in vertical markets," UC3M Working papers. Economics 34144, Universidad Carlos III de Madrid. Departamento de Economía.
    18. Eguia, Jon X. & Llorente-Saguer, Aniol & Morton, Rebecca & Nicolò, Antonio, 2018. "Equilibrium selection in sequential games with imperfect information," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 465-483.
    19. Catherine C. de Fontenay & Joshua S. Gans, 2005. "Vertical Integration in the Presence of Upstream Competition," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 36(3), pages 544-572, Autumn.
    20. Michael Polemis & Konstantinos Eleftheriou, 2018. "To Regulate Or To Deregulate? The Role Of Downstream Competition In Upstream Monopoly Vertically Linked Markets," Bulletin of Economic Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 70(1), pages 51-63, January.

    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:randje:v:52:y:2021:i:4:p:815-838. 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: https://edirc.repec.org/data/randdus.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.