[go: up one dir, main page]

IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/itsb14/106843.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Bundling incentives in markets with product complementarities: The case of triple-play

Author

Listed:
  • Macieira, João
  • Pereira, Pedro
  • Vareda, João
Abstract
We analyze firms' incentives to bundle and tie in the telecommunications industry. As a first step, we develop a discrete-choice demand model where firms sell products that may combine several services in bundles, and consumers choose assortments of different types of products available from various vendors. Our approach extends standard discrete-choice demand models of differentiated product to allow for both flexible substitution patterns and to map demand for each choice alternative onto the demand for each service or bundle that a firm may sell. We exploit these properties to examine bundling behavior when firms choose: (i) prices, and (ii) which products to sell. Using consumer-level data and survey data from the Portuguese telecommunications industry, we estimate our demand model and identify firm incentives to bundle and tie in this industry. We use the model to perform several policy related conterfactuals and evaluate their impact on prices and product provision.

Suggested Citation

  • Macieira, João & Pereira, Pedro & Vareda, João, 2014. "Bundling incentives in markets with product complementarities: The case of triple-play," 20th ITS Biennial Conference, Rio de Janeiro 2014: The Net and the Internet - Emerging Markets and Policies 106843, International Telecommunications Society (ITS).
  • Handle: RePEc:zbw:itsb14:106843
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/106843/1/816836604.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jean‐Pierre Dubé & Jeremy T. Fox & Che‐Lin Su, 2012. "Improving the Numerical Performance of Static and Dynamic Aggregate Discrete Choice Random Coefficients Demand Estimation," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 80(5), pages 2231-2267, September.
    2. Ben Shiller & Joel Waldfogel, 2009. "Music for a Song: An Empirical Look at Uniform Song Pricing and its Alternatives," NBER Working Papers 15390, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    3. Anderson, Simon P. & Leruth, Luc, 1993. "Why firms may prefer not to price discriminate via mixed bundling," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 11(1), pages 49-61, March.
    4. Hanming Fang & Peter Norman, 2006. "To bundle or not to bundle," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 37(4), pages 946-963, December.
    5. Small, Kenneth A, 1987. "A Discrete Choice Model for Ordered Alternatives," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 55(2), pages 409-424, March.
    6. Fosgerau, Mogens & McFadden, Daniel & Bierlaire, Michel, 2010. "Choice probability generating functions," MPRA Paper 24214, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    7. Che‐Lin Su & Kenneth L. Judd, 2012. "Constrained Optimization Approaches to Estimation of Structural Models," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 80(5), pages 2213-2230, September.
    8. Aviv Nevo, 2000. "Mergers with Differentiated Products: The Case of the Ready-to-Eat Cereal Industry," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 31(3), pages 395-421, Autumn.
    9. Chenghuan Sean Chu & Phillip Leslie & Alan Sorensen, 2011. "Bundle-Size Pricing as an Approximation to Mixed Bundling," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 101(1), pages 263-303, February.
    10. Schmalensee, Richard, 1984. "Gaussian Demand and Commodity Bundling," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 57(1), pages 211-230, January.
    11. Nevo, Aviv, 2001. "Measuring Market Power in the Ready-to-Eat Cereal Industry," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 69(2), pages 307-342, March.
    12. Jerry A. Hausman, 1996. "Valuation of New Goods under Perfect and Imperfect Competition," NBER Chapters, in: The Economics of New Goods, pages 207-248, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    13. Schmalensee, Richard, 1982. "Commodity Bundling by Single-Product Monopolies," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 25(1), pages 67-71, April.
    14. Timothy F. Bresnahan & Robert J. Gordon, 1996. "The Economics of New Goods," NBER Books, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc, number bres96-1.
    15. Katherine Ho & Justin Ho & Julie Holland Mortimer, 2012. "The Use of Full-Line Forcing Contracts in the Video Rental Industry," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 102(2), pages 686-719, April.
    16. Salinger, Michael A, 1995. "A Graphical Analysis of Bundling," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 68(1), pages 85-98, January.
    17. Whinston, Michael D, 1990. "Tying, Foreclosure, and Exclusion," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 80(4), pages 837-859, September.
    18. Sjaak Hurkens & Doh-Shin Jeon & Domenico Menicucci, 2019. "Dominance and Competitive Bundling," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 11(3), pages 1-33, August.
    19. Laura Grigolon & Frank Verboven, 2014. "Nested Logit or Random Coefficients Logit? A Comparison of Alternative Discrete Choice Models of Product Differentiation," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 96(5), pages 916-935, December.
    20. Dennis W. Carlton & Joshua S. Gans & Michael Waldman, 2010. "Why Tie a Product Consumers Do Not Use?," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 2(3), pages 85-105, August.
    21. Robert M. Adams & Kenneth P. Brevoort & Elizabeth K. Kiser, 2007. "Who Competes With Whom? The Case Of Depository Institutions," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 55(1), pages 141-167, March.
    22. Matthew Gentzkow, 2007. "Valuing New Goods in a Model with Complementarity: Online Newspapers," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 97(3), pages 713-744, June.
    23. Ben Shiller & Joel Waldfogel, 2011. "Music for a Song: An Empirical Look at Uniform Pricing and Its Alternatives," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 59(4), pages 630-660, December.
    24. Hanming Fang & Peter Norman, 2006. "To bundle or not to bundle," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 37(4), pages 946-963, December.
    25. Daniel McFadden & Kenneth Train, 2000. "Mixed MNL models for discrete response," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 15(5), pages 447-470.
    26. Steven T. Berry, 1994. "Estimating Discrete-Choice Models of Product Differentiation," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 25(2), pages 242-262, Summer.
    27. Tyner, Wally & Adams, John, 1976. "Rural Electrification In India: Biogas Versus Large Scale Power," 1976 Annual Meeting, August 15-18, State College, Pennsylvania 283822, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    28. Chen, Yongmin, 1997. "Equilibrium Product Bundling," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 70(1), pages 85-103, January.
    29. Dennis W. Carlton & Michael Waldman, 2002. "The Strategic Use of Tying to Preserve and Create Market Power in Evolving Industries," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 33(2), pages 194-220, Summer.
    30. Pereira, Pedro & Ribeiro, Tiago & Vareda, João, 2013. "Delineating markets for bundles with consumer level data: The case of triple-play," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 31(6), pages 760-773.
    31. Berry, Steven & Levinsohn, James & Pakes, Ariel, 1995. "Automobile Prices in Market Equilibrium," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 63(4), pages 841-890, July.
    32. Hongju Liu & Pradeep K. Chintagunta & Ting Zhu, 2010. "Complementarities and the Demand for Home Broadband Internet Services," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 29(4), pages 701-720, 07-08.
    33. Haas-Wilson, Deborah, 1987. "Tying Requirements in Markets with Many Sellers: The Contact Lens Industry," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 69(1), pages 170-175, February.
    34. Wen, Chieh-Hua & Koppelman, Frank S., 2001. "The generalized nested logit model," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 35(7), pages 627-641, August.
    35. Steven Berry & Ariel Pakes, 2007. "The Pure Characteristics Demand Model," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 48(4), pages 1193-1225, November.
    36. Bresnahan, Timothy F, 1987. "Competition and Collusion in the American Automobile Industry: The 1955 Price War," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(4), pages 457-482, June.
    37. William James Adams & Janet L. Yellen, 1976. "Commodity Bundling and the Burden of Monopoly," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 90(3), pages 475-498.
    38. Gregory Crawford, 2008. "The discriminatory incentives to bundle in the cable television industry," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 6(1), pages 41-78, March.
    39. Peitz, Martin, 2008. "Bundling may blockade entry," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 26(1), pages 41-58, January.
    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. Reiko Murakami, 2022. "Consumer switching behavior and bundling: an empirical study of Japan’s retail energy markets," International Journal of Economic Policy Studies, Springer, vol. 16(2), pages 443-463, August.
    2. Kuroda, Toshifumi & Ida, Takanori & Koguchi, Teppei, 2015. "The impact of asymmetric regulation on product bundling: The case of fixed broadband and mobile communications in Japan," 2015 Regional ITS Conference, Los Angeles 2015 146318, International Telecommunications Society (ITS).

    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. Belleflamme,Paul & Peitz,Martin, 2015. "Industrial Organization," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9781107687899.
    2. Jidong Zhou, 2017. "Competitive Bundling," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 85, pages 145-172, January.
    3. Gregory S. Crawford & Ali Yurukoglu, 2012. "The Welfare Effects of Bundling in Multichannel Television Markets," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 102(2), pages 643-685, April.
    4. Zhou, Jidong, 2021. "Mixed bundling in oligopoly markets," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 194(C).
    5. Kuroda, Toshifumi & Ida, Takanori & Koguchi, Teppei, 2015. "The impact of asymmetric regulation on product bundling: The case of fixed broadband and mobile communications in Japan," 2015 Regional ITS Conference, Los Angeles 2015 146318, International Telecommunications Society (ITS).
    6. Pereira, Pedro & Ribeiro, Tiago & Vareda, João, 2013. "Delineating markets for bundles with consumer level data: The case of triple-play," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 31(6), pages 760-773.
    7. Alessandro Iaria, & Wang, Ao, 2021. "An Empirical Model of Quantity Discounts with Large Choice Sets," The Warwick Economics Research Paper Series (TWERPS) 1378, University of Warwick, Department of Economics.
    8. Iaria, Alessandro & ,, 2020. "Identification and Estimation of Demand for Bundles," CEPR Discussion Papers 14363, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    9. Sang‐Hyun Kim & Jong‐Hee Hahn, 2022. "On the profitability of interfirm bundling in oligopolies," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(3), pages 657-673, August.
    10. Akifumi Ishihara & Noriyuki Yanagawa, 2013. "Dark Sides of Patent Pools with Compulsory Independent Licensing," CARF F-Series CARF-F-318, Center for Advanced Research in Finance, Faculty of Economics, The University of Tokyo.
    11. Christos Genakos & Kai‐Uwe Kühn & John Van Reenen, 2018. "Leveraging Monopoly Power by Degrading Interoperability: Theory and Evidence from Computer Markets," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 85(340), pages 873-902, October.
    12. Mogens Fosgerau & Julien Monardo & André de Palma, 2024. "The Inverse Product Differentiation Logit Model," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 16(4), pages 329-370, November.
    13. Yongmin Chen & Michael H. Riordan, 2013. "Profitability Of Product Bundling," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 54(1), pages 35-57, February.
    14. Gayer, Amit & Shy, Oz, 2016. "A welfare evaluation of tying strategies," Research in Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(4), pages 623-637.
    15. Neil Gandal & Sarit Markovich & Michael H. Riordan, 2018. "Ain't it “suite”? Bundling in the PC office software market," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(8), pages 2120-2151, August.
    16. Shuai, Jie & Yang, Huanxing & Zhang, Lan, 2022. "Dominant firm and competitive bundling in oligopoly markets," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 421-447.
    17. Sheikhzadeh, Mehdi & Elahi, Ehsan, 2013. "Product bundling: Impacts of product heterogeneity and risk considerations," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 144(1), pages 209-222.
    18. Andrea Mantovani, 2013. "The Strategic Effect of Bundling: A New Perspective," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 42(1), pages 25-43, February.
    19. Bronwyn E. Howell & Petrus H. Potgieter, 2018. "Bundles of trouble: Can competition law adapt to digital pricing innovation?," Competition and Regulation in Network Industries, , vol. 19(1-2), pages 3-24, March.
    20. Gregory Crawford, 2008. "The discriminatory incentives to bundle in the cable television industry," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 6(1), pages 41-78, March.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Bundles; Discrete-Choice Model; Equilibrium Simulation; Differentiated Product; Consumer Level Data;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D43 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design - - - Oligopoly and Other Forms of Market Imperfection
    • K21 - Law and Economics - - Regulation and Business Law - - - Antitrust Law
    • L44 - Industrial Organization - - Antitrust Issues and Policies - - - Antitrust Policy and Public Enterprise, Nonprofit Institutions, and Professional Organizations
    • L96 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Transportation and Utilities - - - Telecommunications

    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:itsb14:106843. 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: http://www.itsworld.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.