Price Competition with Reduced Consumer Switching Costs: The Case of “Wireless Number Portability” in the Cellular Phone Industry

References

• Armstrong M. Competition in telecommunications. Oxford Rev. Econom. Policy (1997) 13(1):64–82Crossref, Google Scholar
• Armstrong M., Doyle C., Vickers J. The access pricing problem: A synthesis. J. Indust. Econom. (1996) 44(2):131–150Crossref, Google Scholar
• Beggs A., Klemperer P. Multi-period competition with switching costs. Econometrica (1992) 60(3):651–666Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bernardi M., Nuijten J. Number portability for mobile networks. (2000) . Report, European Radiocommunications Office (ERO), Copenhagen, DenmarkGoogle Scholar
• Cellular Telecommunications Industry Association (CTIA) In the matter of telephone number portability. (1998) . Report, CTIA, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
• Dreazen Y. J., Sports K. K. FCC action makes phones less mobile—It delays rules that would let cellphone users keep their number when switching carriers. Wall Street Journal (2002) July 17):D1Google Scholar
• Farrell J., Saloner G. Standardization, compatibility, and innovation. RAND J. Econom. (1985) 16(1):70–83Crossref, Google Scholar
• Farrell J., Shapiro C. Dynamic competition with switching costs. RAND J. Econom. (1988) 19(1):123–137Crossref, Google Scholar
• Federal Communications Commission FCC grants forbearance of local number portability for wireless carrier. (1999) . Report no. WT99-1 (February 8), Washington, D.C.Google 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. Technology adoption in the presence of network externalities. J. Political Econom. (1986) 94(4):823–841Crossref, Google Scholar
• Klemperer P. The competitiveness of markets with switching costs. RAND J. Econom. (1987a) 18(1):138–150Crossref, Google Scholar
• Klemperer P. Markets with consumer switching costs. Quart. J. Econom. (1987b) 102(2):375–394Crossref, Google Scholar
• Klemperer P. Competition when consumers have switching costs: An overview with applications to industrial organization, macroeconomics, and international trade. Rev. Econom. Stud. (1995) 62(4):515–539Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kwok B. Sunday backs consolidation but denies talks on merger. South China Morning Post (2002) July 9):P4Google Scholar
• Laffont J.-J., Rey P., Tirole J. Network competition I: Overview and nondiscriminatory pricing. RAND J. Econom. (1998a) 29(1):1–37Crossref, Google Scholar
• Laffont J.-J., Rey P., Tirole J. Network competition II: Price discrimination. RAND J. Econom. (1998b) 29(1):38–56Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ling C. Imminent wave of consolidation appears headed for teeming Asian telecom market. Wall Street Journal (2001) Oct. 30):B11East EditionGoogle Scholar
• Office of the Telecommunication Authority (OFTA) Consultation paper on number portability for mobile phone services in Hong Kong. (1997) . Report, OFTA, Wan Chai, Hong KongGoogle Scholar
• Office of the Telecommunication Authority (OFTA) Charges for interconnection between public mobile radiotelephone service (PMRS), personal communication services (PCS) and value added services (VAS) and the public switched telephone network (PSTN). (1998) . Report (May 15), OFTA, Wan Chai, Hong KongGoogle Scholar
• Office of the Telecommunication Authority (OFTA) Implementation of number portability in Hong Kong SAR. (1999a) . Report (September), OFTA, Wan Chai, Hong KongGoogle Scholar
• Office of the Telecommunication Authority (OFTA) Feasibility study and cost benefit analysis of number portability for mobile services in Hong Kong. (1999b) . Report (May). Consultation conducted by National Bureau of Economic Research and Smith System Engineering, OFTA, Wan Chai, Hong KongGoogle Scholar
• Parker P. M., Roller L. H. Collusive conduct in Duopolies: Multimarket contact and cross-ownership in the mobile telephone industry. RAND J. Econom. (1997) 28(2):304–323Crossref, Google Scholar
• Shaffer G., Zhang Z. J. Pay to switch or pay to stay: Preference-based price discrimination in markets with switching costs. J. Econom. Management Strategy (2000) 9(3):397–424Crossref, Google Scholar