IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bpj/rneart/v10y2011i4n1.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Why is Platform Pricing Generally Highly Skewed?

Author

Listed:
  • Schmalensee Richard

    (Massachusetts Institute of Technology)

Abstract

Bolt and Tieman (2008) suggested the prevalence of profit function non-concavity may account for the widespread use of skewed pricing by two-sided platform businesses. In both the Rochet-Tirole (2003) and Armstrong (2006) models, however, skewed pricing may simply reflect substantial differences between side-specific demand functions; non-concavity is not necessary. In the Rochet-Tirole (2003) model, ubiquitous high pass-through rates, which seem implausible, are required for non-concavity to be prevalent. In the Armstrong (2006) model, non-concavity is not sufficient for skewed pricing. In both models, non-concavity is associated with strong indirect network effects; in the Armstrong (2006) model, such effects are also associated with dynamic instability.

Suggested Citation

  • Schmalensee Richard, 2011. "Why is Platform Pricing Generally Highly Skewed?," Review of Network Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 10(4), pages 1-13, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:bpj:rneart:v:10:y:2011:i:4:n:1
    DOI: 10.2202/1446-9022.1274
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.2202/1446-9022.1274
    Download Restriction: For access to full text, subscription to the journal or payment for the individual article is required.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.2202/1446-9022.1274?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mark Armstrong, 2006. "Competition in two‐sided markets," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 37(3), pages 668-691, September.
    2. Benjamin E. Hermalin & Michael L. Katz, 2004. "Sender or Receiver: Who Should Pay to Exchange an Electronic Message?," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 35(3), pages 423-447, Autumn.
    3. Richard Schmalensee, 2002. "Payment Systems and Interchange Fees," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 50(2), pages 103-122, June.
    4. repec:bla:jindec:v:50:y:2002:i:2:p:103-22 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. Weyl, E. Glen, 2009. "Monopoly, Ramsey and Lindahl in Rochet and Tirole (2003)," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 103(2), pages 99-100, May.
    6. Mark Armstrong Author-Email: mark.armstrong@ucl.ac.uk Author-Workplace-Name: University College of London, 2006. "Competition in Two-Sided Markets," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 37(3), pages 668-691, Autumn.
    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. Soo Jin Kim & Pallavi Pal, 2021. "Quality Differentiation and Optimal Pricing Strategy in Multi-Sided Markets," CESifo Working Paper Series 9267, CESifo.
    2. Andrei Hagiu & Daniel Spulber, 2013. "First-Party Content and Coordination in Two-Sided Markets," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 59(4), pages 933-949, April.
    3. Emilio Calvano & Michele Polo, 2020. "Strategic Differentiation by Business Models: Free-To-Air and Pay-TV," The Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 130(625), pages 50-64.
    4. Tavalaei, M. Mahdi, 2020. "Waiting time in two-sided platforms: The case of the airport industry," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 159(C).
    5. Daniel G. Arce, 2020. "Platform pricing redux," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 87(2), pages 732-740, October.
    6. David S. Evans & Richard Schmalensee, 2013. "The Antitrust Analysis of Multi-Sided Platform Businesses," NBER Working Papers 18783, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.

    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. Rochet, Jean Charles & Tirole, Jean, 2008. "Tying in two-sided markets and the honor all cards rule," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 26(6), pages 1333-1347, November.
    2. Fumiko Hayashi, 2008. "The economics of payment card fee structure: what is the optimal balance between merchant fee and payment card rewards?," Research Working Paper RWP 08-06, Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City.
    3. Galeotti, Andrea & Moraga-González, José Luis, 2009. "Platform intermediation in a market for differentiated products," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 53(4), pages 417-428, May.
    4. Oliver Budzinski & Janina Satzer, 2011. "Sports Business and Multisided Markets: Towards a New Analytical Framework? (Long Version)," Working Papers 1104, International Association of Sports Economists;North American Association of Sports Economists.
    5. Dietl Helmut & Duschl Tobias & Franck Egon & Lang Markus, 2012. "A Contest Model of a Professional Sports League with Two-Sided Markets," Journal of Economics and Statistics (Jahrbuecher fuer Nationaloekonomie und Statistik), De Gruyter, vol. 232(3), pages 336-359, June.
    6. Subhasish M. Chowdhury & Stephen Martin, 2017. "Exclusivity and exclusion on platform Markets," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 120(2), pages 95-118, March.
    7. Oliver Budzinski & Janina Satzer, 2008. "Sports Business and the Theory of Multisided Markets," MAGKS Papers on Economics 200811, Philipps-Universität Marburg, Faculty of Business Administration and Economics, Department of Economics (Volkswirtschaftliche Abteilung).
    8. Simon P. Anderson & André De Palma, 2009. "Information congestion," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 40(4), pages 688-709, December.
    9. Hongru Tan, 2020. "The regulation of merchant fees in credit card markets," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 57(3), pages 258-276, June.
    10. Wilko Bolt & Sujit Chakravorti, 2010. "Digitization of Retail Payment," DNB Working Papers 270, Netherlands Central Bank, Research Department.
    11. Vladimir Mazalov & Elena Konovalchikova, 2020. "Hotelling’s Duopoly in a Two-Sided Platform Market on the Plane," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 8(6), pages 1-16, May.
    12. Wilko Bolt & Sujit Chakravorti, 2008. "Consumer choice and merchant acceptance of payment media," Working Paper Series WP-08-11, Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago.
    13. Fumiko Hayashi, 2008. "The economics of payment card fee structure: what drives payment card rewards?," Research Working Paper RWP 08-07, Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City.
    14. Wilko Bolt & Sujit Chakravorti, 2008. "Economics of payment cards: a status report," Economic Perspectives, Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago, vol. 32(Q IV), pages 15-27.
    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. Dittmann, Heidi & Kuchinke, Björn A., 2016. "Sharing Economy and Regulation," 27th European Regional ITS Conference, Cambridge (UK) 2016 148665, International Telecommunications Society (ITS).
    17. Claude Crampes & Carole Haritchabalet & Bruno Jullien, 2009. "Advertising, Competition And Entry In Media Industries," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 57(1), pages 7-31, March.
    18. Bolt, Wilko & Tieman, Alexander F., 2008. "Heavily skewed pricing in two-sided markets," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 26(5), pages 1250-1255, September.
    19. Julia Rothbauer & Gernot Sieg, 2013. "Public Service Broadcasting of Sport, Shows, and News to Mitigate Rational Ignorance," Journal of Media Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 26(1), pages 21-40, March.
    20. Alexander Matros, 2006. "Optimal Mechanisms for an Auction Mediator," Working Paper 202, Department of Economics, University of Pittsburgh, revised Jan 2006.

    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:bpj:rneart:v:10:y:2011:i:4:n:1. 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: Peter Golla (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.degruyter.com .

    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.