Multimarket contact, cross-market externalities and platform competition

IF 4.5 3区 经济学 Q1 ECONOMICS
Eric Darmon , Thomas Le Texier , Zhiwen Li , Thierry Penard
{"title":"Multimarket contact, cross-market externalities and platform competition","authors":"Eric Darmon ,&nbsp;Thomas Le Texier ,&nbsp;Zhiwen Li ,&nbsp;Thierry Penard","doi":"10.1016/j.infoecopol.2025.101133","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Antitrust authorities are concerned with the dominant market position of Tech Giants such as Google, Meta, or Amazon. These digital conglomerates are characterized by platform-based business models and multimarket contact (MMC). In traditional one-sided markets, theory and empirical evidence show that MMC tends to relax competition. In this paper, we revisit this result in the context of platform competition with competitive bottleneck and cross-market externalities, and provide new insights into the impact of MMC on platform competition. In this context, when platforms charge the two groups of users (bilateral pricing), we find that MMC always decreases the profitability of platforms regardless of the nature and magnitude of cross-market externalities. Then we consider the case in which platforms can only charge one group of users (unilateral pricing). When platforms charge the side on which they are not directly competing for users (i.e. the side that is not the competitive bottleneck), MMC may relax competition only if cross-group externalities and cross-market externalities are both sufficiently small. From a competition policy perspective, our paper provides insights into how antitrust authorities should review conglomerate mergers in digital markets and assesses the effects of the diversification strategies of digital platforms in the context of cross-market externalities and competitive bottleneck.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":47029,"journal":{"name":"Information Economics and Policy","volume":"71 ","pages":"Article 101133"},"PeriodicalIF":4.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Information Economics and Policy","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167624525000071","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Antitrust authorities are concerned with the dominant market position of Tech Giants such as Google, Meta, or Amazon. These digital conglomerates are characterized by platform-based business models and multimarket contact (MMC). In traditional one-sided markets, theory and empirical evidence show that MMC tends to relax competition. In this paper, we revisit this result in the context of platform competition with competitive bottleneck and cross-market externalities, and provide new insights into the impact of MMC on platform competition. In this context, when platforms charge the two groups of users (bilateral pricing), we find that MMC always decreases the profitability of platforms regardless of the nature and magnitude of cross-market externalities. Then we consider the case in which platforms can only charge one group of users (unilateral pricing). When platforms charge the side on which they are not directly competing for users (i.e. the side that is not the competitive bottleneck), MMC may relax competition only if cross-group externalities and cross-market externalities are both sufficiently small. From a competition policy perspective, our paper provides insights into how antitrust authorities should review conglomerate mergers in digital markets and assesses the effects of the diversification strategies of digital platforms in the context of cross-market externalities and competitive bottleneck.
多市场接触、跨市场外部性和平台竞争
反垄断当局担心苹果、Meta或亚马逊等科技巨头的市场主导地位。这些数字企业集团的特点是基于平台的商业模式和多市场联系(MMC)。在传统的单边市场中,理论和实证证据表明,MMC倾向于放松竞争。在本文中,我们在具有竞争瓶颈和跨市场外部性的平台竞争背景下重新审视这一结果,并为MMC对平台竞争的影响提供新的见解。在此背景下,当平台向两组用户收费时(双边定价),我们发现无论跨市场外部性的性质和程度如何,MMC总是降低平台的盈利能力。然后我们考虑平台只能向一组用户收费的情况(单边定价)。当平台向不直接竞争用户的一方(即不是竞争瓶颈的一方)收费时,MMC只有在跨群体外部性和跨市场外部性都足够小的情况下才会放松竞争。本文从竞争政策的角度,探讨了反垄断机构应如何审查数字市场中的企业合并,并在跨市场外部性和竞争瓶颈的背景下评估数字平台多元化战略的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.00
自引率
10.70%
发文量
27
期刊介绍: IEP is an international journal that aims to publish peer-reviewed policy-oriented research about the production, distribution and use of information, including these subjects: the economics of the telecommunications, mass media, and other information industries, the economics of innovation and intellectual property, the role of information in economic development, and the role of information and information technology in the functioning of markets. The purpose of the journal is to provide an interdisciplinary and international forum for theoretical and empirical research that addresses the needs of other researchers, government, and professionals who are involved in the policy-making process. IEP publishes research papers, short contributions, and surveys.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信