Tipping and Concentration in Markets with Indirect Network Effects

References

• Ackerberg D. A., Gowrisankaran G. Quantifying equilibrium network externalities in the ACH banking industry. RAND J. Econom. (2006) 37(3):738–761Crossref, Google Scholar
• Armstrong M. Competition in two-sided markets. RAND J. Econom. (2006) 37(3):668–691Crossref, Google Scholar
• Arthur W. B. Competing technologies, increasing returns, and lock-in by historical events. Econom. J. (1989) 99(394):116–131Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bajari P., Benkard L., Levin J. Estimating dynamic models of imperfect competition. Econometrica (2007) 75(5):1331–1370Crossref, Google Scholar
• Basu A., Mazumdar T., Raj S. P. Indirect network externality effects on product attributes. Marketing Sci. (2003) 22(2):209–221Link, Google Scholar
• Benkard C. L. A dynamic analysis of the market for wide-bodied commercial aircraft. Rev. Econom. Stud. (2004) 71(3):581–611Crossref, Google Scholar
• Berry S., Levinsohn J., Pakes A. Automobile prices in market equilibrium. Econometrica (1995) 63(4):841–890Crossref, Google Scholar
• Blakely R. Halo 3 blows away rivals to set record. Times Online (2007) October 4). http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/technology/article2590013.eceGoogle Scholar
• Bresnahan T. F. Network effects and Microsoft. (2001) (Mimeo, Stanford University, Stanford, CA) Google Scholar
• Bronnenberg B. J., Dubé J.-P., Mela C. F., Albuquerque P., Erdem T., Gordon B., Hanssens D., Hitsch G., Hong H., Sun B. Measuring long-run marketing effects and their implications for long-run marketing decisions. Marketing Lett. (2008) 19(3):367–382Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cabral L. Dynamic price competition with network effects. (2009) . Working paper, New York University, New YorkGoogle Scholar
• Carranza J. E. Estimation of demand for differentiated durable good. (2006) (Manuscript, University of Wisconsin–Madison, Madison) Google Scholar
• Chou C., Shy O. Network effects without network externalities. Internat. J. Indust. Organ. (1990) 8(2):259–270Crossref, Google Scholar
• Church J., Gandal N. Complementary network externalities and technological adoption. Internat. J. Indust. Organ. (1993) 11(2):239–260Crossref, Google Scholar
• Clements M. T., Ohashi H. Indirect network effects and the product cycle: Video games in the U.S., 1994–2002. J. Indust. Econom. (2005) 53(4):515–542Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cobb J. Video-game makers shift strategy. (2003) . CNBC, http://web.archive.org/web/20031012223017/http://moneycentral.msn.com/content/CNBCTV/Articles/TVReports/P47656.aspGoogle Scholar
• Coughlan P. J. Competitive dynamics in home video games (A): The age of Atari. (2001a) (Harvard Business School, Boston) . HBS Case 9-701-091Google Scholar
• Coughlan P. J. Competitive dynamics in home video games (I): The Sony PlayStation. (2001b) (Harvard Business School, Boston) . HBS Case 9-701-099Google Scholar
• Coughlan P. J. Competitive dynamics in home video games (K): PlayStation vs. Nintendo64. (2001c) (Harvard Business School, Boston) . HBS Case 9-701-101Google Scholar
• David P. A. Clio and the economics of QWERTY. Amer. Econom. Rev. (1985) 75(2):332–337Google Scholar
• David P. A. Path dependence: A foundational concept for historical social science. Cliometrica (2007) 1(2):91–114Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dean J. Pricing policies for new products. Harvard Bus. Rev. (1976) 54(6):141–153Google Scholar
• Dockner E., Jørgensen S. Optimal pricing strategies for new products in dynamic oligopolies. Marketing Sci. (1988) 7(4):315–334Link, Google Scholar
• Doraszelski U., Pakes A., Armstrong M., Porter R. H. A framework for applied dynamic analysis in IO. Handbook of Industrial Organization (2007) 3(North-Holland, Amsterdam) 1887–1966Google Scholar
• Dranove D., Gandal N. The DVD-vs.-DIVX standard war: Empirical evidence of network effects and preannouncement effects. J. Econom. Management Strategy (2003) 12(3):363–386Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dubé J.-P., Hitsch G. J., Manchanda P. An empirical model of advertising dynamics. Quant. Marketing Econom. (2005) 3(2):107–144Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dubé J.-P., Hitsch G. J., Rossi E. Do switching costs make markets less competitive? J. Marketing Res. (2009) 46(4):435–445Crossref, Google Scholar
• Evans D. S. The antitrust economics of multisided platform markets. Yale J. Regulation (2003) 20(Summer):325–381Google Scholar
• Evans D. S., Schmalenesee R. The industrial organization of markets with two-sided platforms. Competition Policy Internat. (2007) 3(1):151–179Google Scholar
• Farrell J., Klemperer P., Armstrong M., Porter R. H. Coordination and lock-in: Competition with switching costs and network effects. Handbook of Industrial Organization (2007) 3(North-Holland, Amsterdam) 1967–2072Crossref, Google Scholar
• Farrell J., Saloner G. Installed base and compatibility: Invnovation, product preannouncements and predation. Amer. Econom. Rev. (1986) 76(5):940–955Google Scholar
• Gallagher D. Video game sales blow away forecasts. MarketWatch (2007) October 18). http://www.marketwatch.com/story/video-game-sales-soar-in-sept-halo-3-pushes-xbox-360-past-wiiGoogle Scholar
• Gandal N., Kende M., Rob R. The dynamics of technological adoption in hardware/software systems: The case of compact disc players. RAND J. Econom. (2000) 31(1):43–61Crossref, Google Scholar
• Goettler R., Gordon B. Competition and innovation in the microprocessor industry: Does AMD spur Intel to innovate more? (2009) . Working paper, University of Chicago Booth School of Business, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
• Gordon B. R. A dynamic model of consumer replacement cycles in the PC processor industry. Marketing Sci (2009) 28(5):846–867Link, Google Scholar
• Gowrisankaran G., Rysman M. Dynamics of consumer demand for new durable goods. (2009) . Working paper, University of Arizona, TucsonCrossref, Google Scholar
• Gupta S., Jain D. C., Sawhney M. S. Modeling the evolution of markets with indirect network externalities: An application to digital television. Marketing Sci. (1999) 18(3):396–416Link, Google Scholar
• Horsky D. A diffusion model incorporating product benefits, price, income, and information. Marketing Sci. (1990) 9(4):342–365Link, Google Scholar
• Horwitz J. Audience benchmark: Adult video games adoption, cross-ownerhsip, and usage. (2002) (Report, Jupiter Research, New York) Google Scholar
• Hotz V. J., Miller R. A. Conditional choice probabilities and the estimation of dynamic models. Rev. Econom. Stud. (1993) 60(3):497–529Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hotz V. J., Miller R. A., Sanders S., Smith J. A simulation estimator for dynamic models of discrete choice. Rev. Econom. Stud. (1994) 61(2):265–289Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jenkins M., Liu P., Matzkin R. L., McFadden D. L. The browser war—Econometric analysis of Markov perfect equilibrium in markets with network effects. (2004) . Working paper, Stanford University, Stanford, CAGoogle Scholar
• Jeuland A., Dolan R. An aspect of new product planning: Dynamic pricing. TIMS Stud. Management Sci. (1982) 18:1–21Google Scholar
• Judd K.Numerical Methods in Economics (1998) (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA) Google Scholar
• Kalish S. Monopolist pricing with dynamic demand and production cost. Marketing Sci. (1983) 2(2):135–159Link, Google Scholar
• Karaca-Mandic P. Estimation and evaluation of externalities and complementarities. (2004) . Ph.D. dissertation, University of California, Berkeley, BerkeleyGoogle Scholar
• Katz M. L., Shapiro C. Network externalities, competition and compatibility. Amer. Econom. Rev. (1985) 75(3):424–440Google Scholar
• Katz M. L., Shapiro C. Product introduction with network externalities. J. Indust. Econom. (1992) 40(1):55–83Crossref, Google Scholar
• Katz M. L., Shapiro C. Systems competition and network effects. J. Econom. Perspectives (1994) 8(2):93–115Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kirkpatrick D. D. Acclaim forecasts a huge deficit; stock plunges 25%. Wall Street Journal (1996) (Eastern ed.)(October 29):B8Google Scholar
• Koski H., Kretschmer T. Survey on competing in network industries: Firm strategies, market outcomes, and policy implications. J. Indust., Competition Trade (2004) 4(1):5–31Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kunii I. The games Sony plays: Can it use PlayStation to win mastery of cyberspace? BusinessWeek (1998) June 15):34Google Scholar
• Lee S. R. Vertical integration and exclusivity in platform and two-sided markets. (2009) . Working paper, New York University, New YorkGoogle Scholar
• Liu H. Dynamics of pricing in the video game console market: Skimming or penetration? J. Marketing Res. (2010) . ForthcomingGoogle Scholar
• Markovich S. Snowball: A dynamic oligopoly model with indirect network effects. J. Econom. Dynamics Control (2008) 32(3):909–938Crossref, Google Scholar
• Meese R. A., Rogoff K. Empirical exchange rate models of the Seventies: Do they fit out of sample? J. Internat. Econom. (1982) 14(1–2):3–24Crossref, Google Scholar
• Melnikov O. Demand for differentiated durable products: The case of the U.S. computer printer industry. (2000) . Working paper, Yale University, New Haven, CTGoogle Scholar
• Nair H. Intertemporal price discrimination with forward-looking consumers: Application to the U.S. market for console video-games. Quant. Marketing Econom. (2007) 5(3):239–292Crossref, Google Scholar
• Nair H., Chintagunta P., Dubé J.-P. Empirical analysis of indirect network effects in the market for personal digital assistants. Quant. Marketing Econom. (2004) 2(1):23–58Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ohashi H. The role of network effects in the U.S. VCR market, 1978–1986. J. Econom. Management Strategy (2003) 12(4):447–494Crossref, Google Scholar
• Park S. Quantitative analysis of network externalities in competing technologies: The VCR case. Rev. Econom. Statist. (2004) 86(4):937–945Crossref, Google Scholar
• Pesendorfer M., Schmidt-Dengler P. Asymptotic least squares estimators for dynamic games. Rev. Econom. Stud. (2008) 75(3):901–928Crossref, Google Scholar
• Petrin A., Train K. Control function corrections for omitted attributes in differentiated product models. (2006) . Working paper, University of Minnesota, Twin CitiesGoogle Scholar
• Petrin A., Train K. A control function approach to endogeneity in consumer choice models. J. Marketing Res. (2010) 47(1):3–13Crossref, Google Scholar
• Prince J. T. Repeat purchase amid rapid quality improvement: Structural estimation of the demand for personal computers. J. Econom. Management Strategy (2008) 17(1):1–33Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rigdon J. Nintendo 64 revitalizes slumping video-game market. Wall Street Journal (1996) (Eastern ed.)(December 17):B1Google Scholar
• Rochet J.-C., Tirole J. Platform competition in two-sided markets. J. Eur. Econom. Assoc. (2003) 1(4):990–1029Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rogoff K., Acemoglu D., Rogoff K., Woodford M. Comment on “Exchange rate models are not as bad as you think.”. NBER Macroeconomics Annual 2007 (2008) 22(University of Chicago Press, Chicago) 443–452Google Scholar
• Ryan S. The costs of environmental regulation in a concentrated industry. (2006) . Working paper, MIT, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
• Ryan S., Tucker C. Heterogeneity and the dynamics of technology adoption. (2008) . Working paper, MIT, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
• Rysman M. Competition between networks: A study of the market for Yellow Pages. Rev. Econom. Stud. (2004) 71(2):483–512Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rysman M. The empirics of antitrust in two-sided markets. Competition Policy Internat. (2007) 3(1):483–512Google Scholar
• Shankar V., Bayus B. Network effects and competition: An empirical analysis of the home video game market. Strategic Management J. (2003) 24(4):375–384Crossref, Google Scholar
• Shapiro C., Varian H. R. The art of standards wars. California Management Rev. (1999) 41(2):8–32Crossref, Google Scholar
• Song I., Chintagunta P. K. A micromodel of new product adoption with heterogeneous and forward-looking consumers: Application to the digital camera category. Quant. Marketing Econom. (2003) 1(4):371–407Crossref, Google Scholar
• Williams D. Structure and competition in the U.S. home video game industry. Internat. J. Media Management (2002) 4(1):41–54Crossref, Google Scholar
• Woolridge J. M.Econometric Analysis of Cross Section and Panel Data (2002) (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA) Google Scholar