IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/dicedp/286.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

A cautionary note on using hotelling models in platform markets

Author

Listed:
  • Jeitschko, Thomas D.
  • Kim, Soo Jin
  • Yankelevich, Aleksandr

Abstract

We study a Hotelling framework in which customers first pay a monopoly platform to enter the market before deciding between two competing services on opposite ends of a Hotelling line. This setup is common when modeling competition in Internet content provision. We find that standard taken-for-granted solution methods under full market coverage break down, and that in the unique full-coverage equilibrium, the competing service providers set substantially lower prices. Standard methods and prices are restored by giving service providers the first move.

Suggested Citation

  • Jeitschko, Thomas D. & Kim, Soo Jin & Yankelevich, Aleksandr, 2018. "A cautionary note on using hotelling models in platform markets," DICE Discussion Papers 286, Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf Institute for Competition Economics (DICE).
    • Handle: RePEc:zbw:dicedp:286
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/177851/1/1019526823.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hsing Kenneth Cheng & Subhajyoti Bandyopadhyay & Hong Guo, 2011. "The Debate on Net Neutrality: A Policy Perspective," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 22(1), pages 60-82, March.
    2. Juliane Fudickar, 2015. "Net Neutrality, Vertical Integration, and Competition Between Content Providers," BDPEMS Working Papers 2015014, Berlin School of Economics.
    3. Duarte Brito & Pedro Pereira & João Vareda, 2013. "Network Neutrality under ISP duopoly: on the ability to assign capacity," CEFAGE-UE Working Papers 2013_19, University of Evora, CEFAGE-UE (Portugal).
    4. 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.
    5. Jay Pil Choi & Byung‐Cheol Kim, 2010. "Net neutrality and investment incentives," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 41(3), pages 446-471, September.
    6. Andrei Hagiu, 2009. "Two‐Sided Platforms: Product Variety and Pricing Structures," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 18(4), pages 1011-1043, December.
    7. d'Aspremont, C & Gabszewicz, Jean Jaskold & Thisse, J-F, 1979. "On Hotelling's "Stability in Competition"," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 47(5), pages 1145-1150, September.
    8. Edmond Baranes, 2014. "The interplay between network investment and content quality: Implications to net neutrality on the Internet," Post-Print hal-01830012, HAL.
    9. Baranes, Edmond, 2014. "The interplay between network investment and content quality: Implications to net neutrality on the Internet," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 28(C), pages 57-69.
    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. Gautier, Axel & Somogyi, Robert, 2020. "Prioritization vs zero-rating: Discrimination on the internet," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 73(C).

    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. Economides, Nicholas & Tåg, Joacim, 2012. "Network neutrality on the Internet: A two-sided market analysis," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 91-104.
    2. Edmond Baranes & Cuong Hung Vuong, 2022. "Investment in quality upgrade and regulation of the internet," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 61(1), pages 1-31, February.
    3. Jitsuzumi, Toshiya, 2024. "Model analysis on the economic impact of paid peering: Implications of the Netflix vs. SK broadband dispute," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(4).
    4. Burcu Tan & Edward G. Anderson, Jr. & Geoffrey G. Parker, 2020. "Platform Pricing and Investment to Drive Third-Party Value Creation in Two-Sided Networks," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 31(1), pages 217-239, March.
    5. Jeitschko, Thomas D. & Kim, Soo Jin & Yankelevich, Aleksandr, 2021. "Zero-Rating and Vertical Content Foreclosure," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 55(C).
    6. Sahar Fekih Romdhane & Chokri Aloui & Khaïreddine Jebsi, 2020. "On the Net Neutrality Efficiency under Congestion Price Discrimination," Networks and Spatial Economics, Springer, vol. 20(3), pages 833-872, September.
    7. Daeho Lee & Junseok Hwang, 2011. "The Effect of Network Neutrality on the Incentive to Discriminate, Invest and Innovate: A Literature Review," TEMEP Discussion Papers 201184, Seoul National University; Technology Management, Economics, and Policy Program (TEMEP), revised Nov 2011.
    8. Jin Li & Gary Pisano & Yejia Xu & Feng Zhu, 2023. "Marketplace Scalability and Strategic Use of Platform Investment," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 69(7), pages 3958-3975, July.
    9. Njoroge Paul & Ozdaglar Asuman & Stier-Moses Nicolás E. & Weintraub Gabriel Y., 2014. "Investment in Two-Sided Markets and the Net Neutrality Debate," Review of Network Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 12(4), pages 355-402, February.
    10. Juliane Fudickar, 2015. "Net Neutrality, Vertical Integration, and Competition Between Content Providers," BDPEMS Working Papers 2015014, Berlin School of Economics.
    11. Zennyo, Yusuke, 2020. "Freemium competition among ad-sponsored platforms," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(C).
    12. Anna D'Annunzio & Pierfrancesco Reverberi, 2015. "Content providers and co-investment in broadband networks," DIAG Technical Reports 2015-05, Department of Computer, Control and Management Engineering, Universita' degli Studi di Roma "La Sapienza".
    13. José Marino García García & Aurelia Valiño Castro & A. Jesús Sánchez Fuentes, 2016. "Price discrimination of ott providers under duopolistic competition and multi-dimmesional product differentiation in retail broadband access," Working Papers. Collection A: Public economics, governance and decentralization 1607, Universidade de Vigo, GEN - Governance and Economics research Network.
    14. Shin, Dong-Hee & Kim, Hyup (Henry) & Kim, Nam Cheol & Kim, So Jeong & Kim, Sungho & Kim, Guri, 2015. "Application of Actor-Network Theory to Network Neutrality in Korea," 26th European Regional ITS Conference, Madrid 2015 127176, International Telecommunications Society (ITS).
    15. Grzybowski, Lukasz & Hasbi, Maude & Liang, Julienne, 2018. "Transition from copper to fiber broadband: The role of connection speed and switching costs," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 1-10.
    16. Attila Ambrus & Emilio Calvano & Markus Reisinger, 2016. "Either or Both Competition: A "Two-Sided" Theory of Advertising with Overlapping Viewerships," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 8(3), pages 189-222, August.
    17. Koning, Kendall J. & Yankelevich, Aleksandr, 2018. "From internet “Openness” to “Freedom”: How far has the net neutrality pendulum swung?," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 37-45.
    18. Agam Gupta & Biswatosh Saha & Parthasarathi Banerjee, 2018. "Pricing decisions of car aggregation platforms in sharing economy: a developing economy perspective," Journal of Revenue and Pricing Management, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 17(5), pages 341-355, October.
    19. Liu Xingyi, 2016. "Fear of Discrimination: Net Neutrality and Product Differentiation on the Internet," Review of Network Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 15(4), pages 211-247, December.
    20. Hui Li & Qiaowei Shen & Yakov Bart, 2018. "Local Market Characteristics and Online-to-Offline Commerce: An Empirical Analysis of Groupon," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(4), pages 1860-1878, April.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Hotelling Model; First Mover Advantage; Two-Sided Market;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D21 - Microeconomics - - Production and Organizations - - - Firm Behavior: Theory
    • D43 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design - - - Oligopoly and Other Forms of Market Imperfection
    • L0 - Industrial Organization - - General

    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:zbw:dicedp:286. 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/diduede.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.