IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/net/wpaper/0408.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Effects of Industry Concentration on Quality Choices for Network Connectivity

Author

Listed:

Abstract

I examine the effects of market concentration on connectivity in network industries. Using Cournot interactions for a duopoly, each network chooses quantity, quality for communications within the provider’s own network (internal quality), and quality for communications between the provider’s network and other networks (external quality). I find that large networks choose higher internal quality than do small networks and large networks choose higher internal quality than external quality. I also find that providers prefer flexible technologies that allow them to simultaneously choose outputs and qualities. Small networks prefer higher external quality than internal quality except when they make credible quality commitments before choosing output and have higher marginal operating costs than large networks. Networks choose identical external quality unless they have exogenously determined customer bases.

Suggested Citation

  • Mark A. Jamison, 2004. "Effects of Industry Concentration on Quality Choices for Network Connectivity," Working Papers 04-08, NET Institute.
    • Handle: RePEc:net:wpaper:0408
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.netinst.org/Jamison.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jacques Crémer & Patrick Rey & Jean Tirole, 2000. "Connectivity in the Commercial Internet," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 48(4), pages 433-472, December.
    2. Lopomo, Giuseppe & Ok, Efe A, 2001. "Bargaining, Interdependence, and the Rationality of Fair Division," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 32(2), pages 263-283, Summer.
    3. Jeffrey Rohlfs, 1974. "A Theory of Interdependent Demand for a Communications Service," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 5(1), pages 16-37, Spring.
    4. Nash, John, 1950. "The Bargaining Problem," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 18(2), pages 155-162, April.
    5. David Mandy & David Sappington, 2007. "Incentives for sabotage in vertically related industries," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 31(3), pages 235-260, June.
    6. repec:bla:jindec:v:48:y:2000:i:4:p:433-72 is not listed on IDEAS
    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. Shyh-fang Ueng, 2005. "A theory of efficient coexistence," International Economic Journal, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(3), pages 397-416.
    2. repec:aei:rpaper:1008544122 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. David Mandy & David Sappington, 2007. "Incentives for sabotage in vertically related industries," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 31(3), pages 235-260, June.
    4. Kidokoro, Yukihiro, 2007. "A model of Internet access when Internet connection speed is upgradable," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 19(1), pages 80-94, March.
    5. DongJoon Lee & Kangsik Choi & Tatsuhiko Nariu, 2020. "Endogenous vertical structure with network externalities," Manchester School, University of Manchester, vol. 88(6), pages 827-846, December.
    6. Oz Shy, 2011. "A Short Survey of Network Economics," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 38(2), pages 119-149, March.
    7. Barry Feldman, 2005. "Lost in Translation? Basis Utility and Proportionality in Games," Game Theory and Information 0507001, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 28 Feb 2006.
    8. Mandy, David M. & Mayo, John W. & Sappington, David E.M., 2016. "Targeting efforts to raise rivals' costs: Moving from “Whether” to “Whom”," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 1-15.
    9. Rabah Amir & Igor Evstigneev & Adriana Gama, 2021. "Oligopoly with network effects: firm-specific versus single network," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 71(3), pages 1203-1230, April.
    10. Sigbjørn Birkeland & Bertil Tungodden, 2014. "Fairness motivation in bargaining: a matter of principle," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 77(1), pages 125-151, June.
    11. Majumdar, Sumit K. & Mishra, Birendra & Chang, Hsihui, 2007. "Technology investment strategy in the presence of competitor entry: Broadband deployment in the US telecommunications industry," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 29(4), pages 422-430.
    12. Belleflamme,Paul & Peitz,Martin, 2015. "Industrial Organization," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9781107687899, January.
    13. Adriana Gama & Rim Lahmandi-Ayed & Ana Elisa Pereira, 2020. "Entry and mergers in oligopoly with firm-specific network effects," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 70(4), pages 1139-1164, November.
    14. Jack Fanning & Andrew Kloosterman, 2022. "An experimental test of the Coase conjecture: Fairness in dynamic bargaining," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 53(1), pages 138-165, March.
    15. Maurizio Zanardi, 2004. "Antidumping law as a collusive device," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 37(1), pages 95-122, February.
    16. M. Hinojosa & A. Mármol & J. Zarzuelo, 2008. "Inequality averse multi-utilitarian bargaining solutions," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 37(4), pages 597-618, December.
    17. Matsui, Kenji, 2020. "Optimal bargaining timing of a wholesale price for a manufacturer with a retailer in a dual-channel supply chain," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 287(1), pages 225-236.
    18. Simon G�chter & Arno Riedl, "undated". "Moral Property Rights in Bargaining," IEW - Working Papers 113, Institute for Empirical Research in Economics - University of Zurich.
    19. H Peyton Young, 2014. "The Evolution of Social Norms," Economics Series Working Papers 726, University of Oxford, Department of Economics.
    20. María Fernanda Viecens, 2009. "Compatibility with Firm Dominance," Working Papers 2009-12, FEDEA.
    21. Erkki Koskela & Ronnie Schöb, 2002. "Alleviating Unemployment: The Case for Green Tax Reforms," Chapters, in: Lawrence H. Goulder (ed.), Environmental Policy Making in Economies with Prior Tax Distortions, chapter 20, pages 355-378, Edward Elgar Publishing.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:net:wpaper:0408. 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: Nicholas Economides (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.NETinst.org/ .

    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.