IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ormksc/v25y2006i5p543-546.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Reply to “A Comment on ‘Is Having More Channels Really Better? A Model of Competition Among Commercial Television Broadcasters' ”

Author

Listed:
  • Yong Liu

    (Martin J. Whitman School of Management, Syracuse University, Syracuse, New York 13104)

  • Daniel S. Putler

    (Sauder School of Business, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia V6T 1Z2, Canada)

  • Charles B. Weinberg

    (Sauder School of Business, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia V6T 1Z2, Canada)

Abstract

Liu et al. [Liu, Y., D. S. Putler, C. B. Weinberg. 2004. Is having more channels really better? A model of competition among commercial television broadcasters. (1) 120–133] examine the television broadcast industry using a model in which profit-maximizing broadcasters seek to gain viewers by choosing the type of program to offer and by spending money to set program quality, allowing broadcasters to sell access to those viewers (through inserted advertisements) at a fixed rate per viewer. Wu and Chou [Wu, C., S. Chou. 2006. Commentary on “Is having more channels really better? A model of competition among commercial television broadcasters”. (5) 541–545] argue that the duopoly result for a certain range of the cost parameter in Liu et al. is not a pure strategy Nash equilibrium. They further propose some modifications to the original model to restore Liu et al.'s results. In this reply, we demonstrate how a single strategy, not included in the strategy space of the Liu et al. duopoly model leads to the difference between our analysis and that of Wu and Chou. While we had intended to rule out this strategy, the text was not entirely clear on this issue; Wu and Chou's comment provides an opportunity to clarify the situation. We provide both empirical and theoretical support for excluding this strategy, which allows us to focus on the more plausible competitive situations in television broadcasting. We also reply to Wu and Chou's other comments on several issues, such as the relative importance of program type versus quality.

Suggested Citation

  • Yong Liu & Daniel S. Putler & Charles B. Weinberg, 2006. "A Reply to “A Comment on ‘Is Having More Channels Really Better? A Model of Competition Among Commercial Television Broadcasters' ”," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(5), pages 543-546, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:inm:ormksc:v:25:y:2006:i:5:p:543-546
    DOI: 10.1287/mksc.1060.0233
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mksc.1060.0233
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/mksc.1060.0233?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. Kusum L. Ailawadi & Praveen K. Kopalle & Scott A. Neslin, 2005. "Predicting Competitive Response to a Major Policy Change: Combining Game-Theoretic and Empirical Analyses," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 24(1), pages 12-24, September.
    2. Shan-Yu Chou & Chi-Cheng Wu, 2006. "A Comment on “Is Having More Channels Really Better? A Model of Competition Among Commercial Television Broadcasters”," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(5), pages 538-542, September.
    3. B. Curtis Eaton & Richard G. Lipsey, 1975. "The Principle of Minimum Differentiation Reconsidered: Some New Developments in the Theory of Spatial Competition," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 42(1), pages 27-49.
    4. Wen Zhou, 2004. "The Choice of Commercial Breaks in Television Programs: The Number, Length and Timing," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 52(3), pages 315-326, September.
    5. Eaton, B Curtis & Lipsey, Richard G, 1978. "Freedom of Entry and the Existence of Pure Profit," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 88(351), pages 455-469, September.
    6. Andrew Ainslie & Xavier Drèze & Fred Zufryden, 2005. "Modeling Movie Life Cycles and Market Share," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 24(3), pages 508-517, November.
    7. Martin K. Perry, 1982. "Oligopoly and Consistent Conjectural Variations," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 13(1), pages 197-205, Spring.
    8. Vassilakis, Spyros, 1993. "Multiproduct firms in the representative consumer model of product differentiation," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 22(2), pages 149-160.
    9. Steven M. Shugan, 2005. "Marketing and Designing Transaction Games," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 24(4), pages 525-530.
    10. Goettler, Ronald L & Shachar, Ron, 2001. "Spatial Competition in the Network Television Industry," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 32(4), pages 624-656, Winter.
    11. Yong Liu & Daniel S. Putler & Charles B. Weinberg, 2004. "Is Having More Channels Really Better? A Model of Competition Among Commercial Television Broadcasters," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(1), pages 120-133, July.
    12. Timothy W. McGuire & Richard Staelin, 1983. "An Industry Equilibrium Analysis of Downstream Vertical Integration," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 2(2), pages 161-191.
    13. Steven C. Salop, 1979. "Monopolistic Competition with Outside Goods," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 10(1), pages 141-156, Spring.
    14. John R. Hauser, 1988. "Note—Competitive Price and Positioning Strategies," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 7(1), pages 76-91.
    15. Novshek, William, 1980. "Equilibrium in simple spatial (or differentiated product) models," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 22(2), pages 313-326, April.
    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. Fabio Caldieraro, 2016. "The Role of Brand Image and Product Characteristics on Firms’ Entry and OEM Decisions," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 62(11), pages 3327-3350, November.

    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. Anderson, Simon P. & Gabszewicz, Jean J., 2006. "The Media and Advertising: A Tale of Two-Sided Markets," Handbook of the Economics of Art and Culture, in: V.A. Ginsburgh & D. Throsby (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Art and Culture, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 18, pages 567-614, Elsevier.
    2. Delre, Sebastiano A. & Panico, Claudio & Wierenga, Berend, 2017. "Competitive strategies in the motion picture industry: An ABM to study investment decisions," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 34(1), pages 69-99.
    3. Torbenko, A., 2015. "Linear City Models: Overview and Typology," Journal of the New Economic Association, New Economic Association, vol. 25(1), pages 12-38.
    4. Yong Liu & Daniel Putler & Charles Weinberg, 2006. "The welfare and equity implications of competition in television broadcasting: the role of viewer tastes," Journal of Cultural Economics, Springer;The Association for Cultural Economics International, vol. 30(2), pages 127-140, September.
    5. Byong‐Duk Rhee & André de Palma & Claes Fornell & Jacques‐François Thisse, 1992. "Restoring The Principle Of Minimum Differentiation In Product Positioning," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 1(3), pages 475-505, September.
    6. Hans Jarle Kind & Tore Nilssen & Lars Sørgard, 2009. "Business Models for Media Firms: Does Competition Matter for How They Raise Revenue?," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 28(6), pages 1112-1128, 11-12.
    7. Ralph M. Braid, 2016. "Potential merger-forcing entry reduces maximum spacing between firms in spatial competition," Papers in Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 95(3), pages 653-669, August.
    8. Kenneth C. Wilbur, 2008. "A Two-Sided, Empirical Model of Television Advertising and Viewing Markets," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 27(3), pages 356-378, 05-06.
    9. Helge Sanner, 2005. "Price Responses to Market Entry With and Without Endogenous Product Choice," Volkswirtschaftliche Diskussionsbeiträge 81, Universität Potsdam, Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaftliche Fakultät.
    10. Fabio Caldieraro, 2016. "The Role of Brand Image and Product Characteristics on Firms’ Entry and OEM Decisions," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 62(11), pages 3327-3350, November.
    11. Sha Yang & Vishal Narayan & Henry Assael, 2006. "Estimating the Interdependence of Television Program Viewership Between Spouses: A Bayesian Simultaneous Equation Model," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(4), pages 336-349, July.
    12. Sumit Raut & Sanjeev Swami & Eunkyu Lee & Charles B. Weinberg, 2008. "How Complex Do Movie Channel Contracts Need to Be?," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 27(4), pages 627-641, 07-08.
    13. Ansari, A. & Economides, N. & Steckel, J., 1996. "The Max-Min-Min Principle of product Differentiation," Working Papers 96-10, New York University, Leonard N. Stern School of Business, Department of Economics.
    14. 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.
    15. Fleckinger, Pierre & Lafay, Thierry, 2010. "Product flexibility and price competition in Hotelling's duopoly," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 60(1), pages 61-68, July.
    16. Victor Ginsburgh & Shlomo Weber, 2002. "Product Lines and Price Discrimination in the European Car Market," Manchester School, University of Manchester, vol. 70(1), pages 101-114, January.
    17. Domenico Scalera & Alberto Zazzaro, 2005. "Cost reducing investments and spatial competition," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 12(20), pages 1-8.
    18. Ghosh, Arghya & Meagher, Kieron, 2015. "The politics of infrastructure investment: The role of product market competition," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 308-329.
    19. Vickrey, William S. & Anderson, Simon P. & Braid, Ralph M., 1999. "Spatial competition, monopolistic competition, and optimum product diversity," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 17(7), pages 953-963, October.
    20. Anil Arya & Brian Mittendorf & David E. M. Sappington, 2007. "The Bright Side of Supplier Encroachment," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(5), pages 651-659, 09-10.

    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:inm:ormksc:v:25:y:2006:i:5:p:543-546. 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: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.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.