IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/mktlet/v34y2023i4d10.1007_s11002-023-09674-7.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Platform break-even market share

Author

Listed:
  • Daniel Arce

    (University of Texas at Dallas)

Abstract

This study characterizes break-even market share within the context of two-sided platform markets. It combines chicken-and-egg pricing with previously unexplored network-based measures of total addressable market and serviceable available market. In addition, it accounts for the density of transactions across a platform’s network. A network-based driver of market share is how the number of users on each side translates into the platform’s addressable market. A two-sided market-based driver is how fixed costs are spread over the total value of the indirect externality created on the platform’s subsidized side. For marketing managers, these and other facets matter for identifying how large a network-based platform need be to capture significant market value, which is a necessary datum for attracting internal or external financing; calculating break-even volume and market share for potential entrants; and forecasting whether the market is winner-take-all based on transaction density.

Suggested Citation

  • Daniel Arce, 2023. "Platform break-even market share," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 34(4), pages 713-725, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:mktlet:v:34:y:2023:i:4:d:10.1007_s11002-023-09674-7
    DOI: 10.1007/s11002-023-09674-7
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11002-023-09674-7
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11002-023-09674-7?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. Gawer, Annabelle, 2014. "Bridging differing perspectives on technological platforms: Toward an integrative framework," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(7), pages 1239-1249.
    2. Paul Belleflamme & Martin Peitz, 2019. "Managing competition on a two‐sided platform," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(1), pages 5-22, January.
    3. Geoffrey G. Parker & Marshall W. Van Alstyne, 2005. "Two-Sided Network Effects: A Theory of Information Product Design," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 51(10), pages 1494-1504, October.
    4. Marc Rysman, 2009. "The Economics of Two-Sided Markets," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 23(3), pages 125-143, Summer.
    5. Gretz, Richard T. & Basuroy, Suman, 2013. "Why Quality May Not Always Win: The Impact of Product Generation Life Cycles on Quality and Network Effects in High-tech Markets," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 89(3), pages 281-300.
    6. Jean-Charles Rochet & Jean Tirole, 2003. "Platform Competition in Two-Sided Markets," Journal of the European Economic Association, MIT Press, vol. 1(4), pages 990-1029, June.
    7. S. Sriram & Puneet Manchanda & Mercedes Bravo & Junhong Chu & Liye Ma & Minjae Song & Scott Shriver & Upender Subramanian, 2015. "Platforms: a multiplicity of research opportunities," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 26(2), pages 141-152, June.
    8. E. Glen Weyl, 2010. "A Price Theory of Multi-sided Platforms," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 100(4), pages 1642-1672, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Xing Wan & Javier Cenamor & Geoffrey Parker & Marshall Van Alstyne, 2017. "Unraveling Platform Strategies: A Review from an Organizational Ambidexterity Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(5), pages 1-18, May.
    2. Mohammed Mardan & Mark J. Tremblay, 2022. "Network Effects: Betwixt and Between," CESifo Working Paper Series 10082, CESifo.
    3. Peters, Frank, 2018. "The business of video games is a multi-player game : Essays on governance choices and performance in a two-sided market in the cultural industries," Other publications TiSEM 886b3148-4bbb-4ea4-b666-0, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    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. 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.
    6. Lapo Filistrucchi & Damien Geradin & Eric van Damme, 2012. "Identifying Two-Sided Markets," Working Papers - Economics wp2012_01.rdf, Universita' degli Studi di Firenze, Dipartimento di Scienze per l'Economia e l'Impresa.
    7. Jullien, Bruno & Pavan, Alessandro & Rysman, Marc, 2021. "Two-sided Markets, Pricing, and Network Effects," TSE Working Papers 21-1238, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE).
    8. Justus Haucap & Torben Stühmeier, 2016. "Competition and antitrust in Internet markets," Chapters, in: Johannes M. Bauer & Michael Latzer (ed.), Handbook on the Economics of the Internet, chapter 9, pages 183-210, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    9. Jingtao Yi & Jinqiu He & Lihong Yang, 2019. "Platform heterogeneity, platform governance and complementors’ product performance: an empirical study of the mobile application industry," Frontiers of Business Research in China, Springer, vol. 13(1), pages 1-20, December.
    10. Marchand, André & Hennig-Thurau, Thorsten, 2013. "Value Creation in the Video Game Industry: Industry Economics, Consumer Benefits, and Research Opportunities," Journal of Interactive Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 27(3), pages 141-157.
    11. Rietveld, G.J. & Eggers, J.P., 2016. "Demand Heterogeneity and the Adoption of Platform Complements," ERIM Report Series Research in Management ERS-2016-003-STR, Erasmus Research Institute of Management (ERIM), ERIM is the joint research institute of the Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University and the Erasmus School of Economics (ESE) at Erasmus University Rotterdam.
    12. Liu, He & Li, Xuerong & Wang, Shouyang, 2021. "A bibliometric analysis of 30 years of platform research: Developing the research agenda for platforms, the associated technologies and social impacts," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 169(C).
    13. Pieter Gautier & Bo Hu & Makoto Watanabe, 2023. "Marketmaking Middlemen," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 54(1), pages 83-103, March.
    14. Martin Peitz, 2023. "Governance and Regulation of Platforms," CRC TR 224 Discussion Paper Series crctr224_2023_480, University of Bonn and University of Mannheim, Germany.
    15. Junic Kim & Jaewook Yoo, 2019. "Platform Growth Model: The Four Stages of Growth Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(20), pages 1-16, October.
    16. Satish Nambisan & Shaker A. Zahra & Yadong Luo, 2019. "Global platforms and ecosystems: Implications for international business theories," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 50(9), pages 1464-1486, December.
    17. Juha Winter & Sandro Battisti & Thommie Burström & Sakari Luukkainen, 2018. "Exploring the Success Factors of Mobile Business Ecosystems," International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management (IJITM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 15(03), pages 1-23, June.
    18. Rodolphe Durand & Robert M. Grant & Tammy L. Madsen & David P. McIntyre & Arati Srinivasan, 2017. "Networks, platforms, and strategy: Emerging views and next steps," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(1), pages 141-160, January.
    19. Lai, Puqing, 2014. "Utilizing the access value of customers," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 57(1), pages 61-71.
    20. Alexander Gleiss & Marco Kohlhagen & Key Pousttchi, 2021. "An apple a day – how the platform economy impacts value creation in the healthcare market," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 31(4), pages 849-876, December.

    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:kap:mktlet:v:34:y:2023:i:4:d:10.1007_s11002-023-09674-7. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.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.