Fighting City Hall: Entry Deterrence and Technology Upgrades in Cable TV Markets

References

• American Public Power AssociationAnnual Directory and Statistical Report (2001) (Naylor Publications, Gainesville, FL) Google Scholar
• Anderson N. Want 50 Mbps Internet in your town? Threaten to roll out your own. (2009) . arstechnica.com. (October 27), http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2009/10/want-50mbps-internet-in-your-town-threaten-to-roll-out-your-own.arsGoogle Scholar
• Bailey E. E., Baily M. N., Baumol W. J., Cramton P., Faulhaber G. R., Flamm K., Gilbert R., et al. Economists' statement on U.S. broadband policy. (2006) . Working Paper 06-06-01, American Enterprise Institute–Brookings Joint Center for Regulator Studies, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
• Balhoff M. J., Rowe R. C. Municipal broadband: Digging beneath the surface. (2005) . Accessed May 7, 2011, http://www.balhoffrowe.com/pdf/Municipal%20Broadband--Digging%20Beneath%20the%20Surface.pdfGoogle Scholar
• Baller J. Comments before the United States Department of Commerce National Telecommunications and Information Administration, Docket No. 011109273-1273-01, December 19, 2001. (2001) . Accessed May 7, 2011, http://www.ntia.doc.gov/ntiahome/broadband/comments2/APPA.htmGoogle Scholar
• Baller J. Proposed state barriers to public entry (as of October 8, 2005). (2005) . Accessed May 7, 2011, http://classic-web.archive.org/web/20051024030526/www.baller.com/pdfs/Baller_Proposed_State_Barriers.pdfGoogle Scholar
• Baller J. State barriers to public entry in effect as of the end of 2004. (2006) . Accessed May 7, 2011, http://classic-web.archive.org/web/20110511132413/http://baller.com/pdfs/Barriers2004.pdfGoogle Scholar
• Baller J. State restrictions on community broadband services or other public communications initiatives (as of January 1, 2011). (2011) . Accessed May 7, 2011, http://www.baller.com/pdfs/BallerStateBarriers(1-1-11).pdf, and http://law.justia.com/codes/alabama/2006/8577/11-50b-1.htmlGoogle Scholar
• Baller J., Stokes S. The public sector's authority to engage in telecommunications activity. J. Municipal Telecommunications (1999) 1(1):1–18Google Scholar
• Bayus B. L., Agarwal R. The role of pre-entry experience, entry timing, and product technology strategies in explaining firm survival. Management Sci. (2007) 53(12):1887–1902Link, Google Scholar
• Bowers L. C. Study on cable, Internet service feasibility proposed. Cleveland Daily Banner (2007) August 30). http://www.clevelandbanner.com/pages/archivesGoogle Scholar
• Casadesus-Masanell R., Ghemawat P. Dynamic mixed duopoly: A model motivated by Linux vs. Windows. Management Sci. (2006) 52(7):1072–1084Link, Google Scholar
• Charter Communications SEC Form 10-K. (2005) . Accessed May 28, 2011, http://library.corporate-ir.net/library/11/112/112298/items/207833/CHTR_AR05.pdfGoogle Scholar
• Chipty T. Vertical integration, market foreclosure, and consumer welfare in the cable television industry. Amer. Econom. Rev. (2001) 91(3):428–453Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ciciora W., Farmer J., Large D., Adams M.Modern Cable Television Technology: Video, Voice and Data Communications (2004) (Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco) Google Scholar
• Crandall R., Cave M. E., Majumdar S. K., Vogelsang I. Broadband Communications. Handbook of Telecommunications Economics (2005) 2(Elsevier, New York) 156–187Google Scholar
• Crawford G. The impact of the 1992 cable act on household demand and welfare. RAND J. Econom. (2000) 31(3):422–449Crossref, Google Scholar
• Crawford G., Rose N. Cable regulation in the satellite era. Economic Regulation and Its Reform: What Have We Learned? (2012) (University of Chicago Press, Chicago) . ForthcomingGoogle Scholar
• Cremer H., Marchand M., Thisse J. The public firm as an instrument for regulating an oligopolistic market. Oxford Econom. Papers (1989) 41(2):283–301Google Scholar
• Dafny L. Games hospitals play: Entry deterrence in hospital procedure markets. J. Econom. Management Strategy (2005) 14(3):513–542Crossref, Google Scholar
• De Donder P., Roemer J. E. Mixed oligopoly equilibria when firms' objectives are endogenous. Internat. J. Indust. Organ. (2009) 27(3):414–423Crossref, Google Scholar
• de Figueiredo R., Edwards G. Does private money buy public policy? Campaign contributions and regulatory outcomes in telecommunications. J. Econom. Management Strategy (2007) 16(3):547–576Crossref, Google Scholar
• Della Vigna S., Kaplan E. The fox news effect: Media bias and voting. Quart. J. Econom. (2007) 122(3):1187–1234Crossref, Google Scholar
• de Medici E. May suggests city council “fast-track” cable options. Cleveland Daily Banner (2001) November 24). http://www.clevelandbanner.com/pages/archivesGoogle Scholar
• de Medici E. Fee increase will pay for cable company upgrades. Cleveland Daily Banner (2003) January 2). http://www.clevelandbanner.com/pages/archivesGoogle Scholar
• Duggan M. Hospital market structure and the behavior of not-for-profit hospitals. RAND J. Econom. (2002) 33(3):433–446Crossref, Google Scholar
• Eger J. M., Becker A. M. Telecommunications and municipal utilities: Cooperation and competition in the new economy. (2000) . Special Report Prepared for the American Public Power Association. Accessed May 24, 2011, http://www.smartcommunities.org/APPA_special_report.pdfGoogle Scholar
• Emmons W., Prager R. The effects of market structure and ownership on prices and service offerings in the us cable television industry. RAND J. Econom. (1997) 28(4):732–750Crossref, Google Scholar
• Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Second Order on Reconsideration, Fourth Report and Order, and Fifth Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in the Matter of Implementation of Sections of the Cable Television Consumer Protection and Competition Act of 1992: Rate Regulation. (1994) . MM Docket 92–266, FCC, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
• Federal Power Commission Directory of electric and gas utilities in the United States. (1948) . Federal Power Commission, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
• Gertler P., Kuan J. Does it matter who your buyer is? The role of nonprofit mission in the market for corporate control of hospitals. J. Law Econom. (2009) 52(2):295–306Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gillett S., Lehr W., Osorio C. Municipal electric utilities' role in telecommunications services. Telecomm. Policy (2006) 30(8–9):464–480Crossref, Google Scholar
• Goolsbee A. The value of broadband and the deadweight loss of taxing new technologies. Contributions Econom. Anal. Policy (2006) 5(1). Article 8Google Scholar
• Goolsbee A., Petrin A. The consumer gains from direct broadcast satellites and the competition with cable TV. Econometrica (2004) 72(2):351–381Crossref, Google Scholar
• Greenstein S., Mazzeo M. The role of differentiation strategy in local telecommunication entry and market evolution: 1999–2002. J. Indust. Econom. (2006) 54(3):323–350Crossref, Google Scholar
• Haines M. R.Historical, Demographic, Economic, and Social Data: The United States, 1790–2002 (2010) (Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research, Ann Arbor, MI) Google Scholar
• Hamilton B. H., McManus B. Technology diffusion and market structure: Evidence from infertility treatment markets. (2010) . Working paper, Washington University in St. Louis, St. LouisGoogle Scholar
• Hauge J. A., Jamison M. A., Gentry R. J. Bureaucrats as entrepreneurs: Do municipal telecommunications providers hinder private enterprise? Inform. Econom. Policy (2008) 20(1):89–102Crossref, Google Scholar
• Helfat C. E., Lieberman M. B. The birth of capabilities: Market entry and the importance of pre-history. Indust. Corporate Change (2002) 11(4):725–760Crossref, Google Scholar
• Henisz W. J., Zelner B. A. The strategic organization of political risks and opportunities. Strategic Organ. (2003) 1(4):451–460Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hoetker G. The use of logit and probit models in strategic management research: Critical issues. Strategic Management J. (2007) 28(4):331–343Crossref, Google Scholar
• Holburn G., Vanden Burgh R. Making friends in hostile environments: Political strategy in regulated industries. Acad. Management Rev. (2008) 33(2):520–540Crossref, Google Scholar
• Klepper S., Simons K. Dominance by birthright: Entry of prior radio producers and competitive ramifications in the US television receiver industry. Strategic Management J. (2000) 21(10–11):997–1016Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lasar M. Cable-backed anti-muni broadband bill advances in North Carolina. (2011) . Accessed May 24, 2011, http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2011/03/cable-backed-anti-muni-broadband-bill-advances-in-north-carolina.arsGoogle Scholar
• Levin J., Tadelis S. Contracting for Government services: Theory and evidence from U.S. cities. J. Indust. Econom. (2010) 58(3):507–541Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lieberman M. Excess capacity as a barrier to entry: An empirical appraisal. J. Indust. Econom. (1987) 35(4):607–627Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mahoney J. T., McGahan A. M., Pitelis C. N. Perspective—The interdependence of private and public interests. Organ. Sci. (2009) 20(6):1034–1052Link, Google Scholar
• Mayo J. W., Otsuka Y. Demand, pricing and regulation: Evidence from the cable TV industry. RAND J. Econom. (1991) 22(3):396–410Crossref, Google Scholar
• McGahan A. M. The Limitations of the limited-liability, publicly traded corporation. (2007a) . Working paper, University of Toronto, Toronto, OntarioGoogle Scholar
• McGahan A. M. Academic research that matters to managers: On zebras, dogs, lemmings, hammers, and turnips. Acad. Management J. (2007b) 50(4):748–753Crossref, Google Scholar
• Megginson W., Netter J. From state to market: A survey of empirical studies on privatization. J. Econom. Literature (2001) 39(2):321–389Crossref, Google Scholar
• RCN SEC Form 10-K. (2005) . Accessed May 28, 2011, http://web.archive.org/web/20061019062650/http://investor.rcn.com/downloads/4-10-06_10KA.pdfGoogle Scholar
• Rubinovitz R. N. Market power and price increases for basic cable service since deregulation. RAND J. Econom. (1993) 24(1):1–18Crossref, Google Scholar
• Savage S. J., Wirth M. Price, programming and potential competition in US cable television markets. J. Regulatory Econom. (2005) 27(1):25–46Crossref, Google Scholar
• Shelanski H. A. Adjusting regulation to competition: Toward a new model for U.S. telecommunications policy. Yale J. Regulation (2007) 24(1):55–106Google Scholar
• Short J. L., Toffel M. W. Coerced confessions: Self-policing in the shadow of the regulator. J. Law, Econom., Organ. (2007) 24(1):45–71Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wallsten S. Broadband penetration: An empirical analysis of state and federal policies. (2005) . Working Paper 05-12, American Enterprise Institute–Brookings Joint Center for Regulator Studies, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
• Waterman D., Weiss A. The effects of vertical integration between cable television systems and pay cable networks. J. Econometrics (1996) 72(1–2):357–395Crossref, Google Scholar
• Williamson O. E.Markets and Hierarchies: Analysis and Antitrust Implications (1975) (The Free Press, New York) Google Scholar
• Wilson R., Aumann R. J., Hart S. Strategic models of entry deterrence. Handbook of Game Theory (1992) 1(Elsevier Science, New York) 305–329Google Scholar
• Xiao M., Orazem P. Is your neighbor your enemy? Strategic entry into the U.S. broadband market. (2009) . Working paper, University of Arizona, TucsonGoogle Scholar