{"title":"非金融企业的进入与零售支付市场的竞争","authors":"Jooyong Jun","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2628481","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"We investigate the effects of a non-financial firm’s entry on competition in the retail payments market, from the perspective of duopoly between an incumbent and an entrant in conditions of vertical restraints. Considering the cross-platform externalities in payment processing, differentiated preferences for payment platforms, and competitive bottleneck on the consumer side, we derive the following results. When only the entry of a vertically integrated (or end-to-end service) provider is allowed, either all merchants choose to multi-home or no entry occurs, regardless of the regulatory requirement. On the other hand, if the entry of a downstream-only (or front-end service) provider is possible, a partial multi-homing equilibrium result can emerge for some conditions under which the entry of an end-to-end service provider does not occur. In addition, due to the lowered entry cost, the overall welfare is greater when the entry of downstream-only service is possible although the entire increase in welfare goes to the entrant. Without regulation, however, the vertically integrated incumbent does not voluntarily provide the back-end service to the entrant when the merchant’s benefit from the payments service is not sufficiently high. It suggests the need for proper regulatory measures to reach a socially desirable outcome from the new entry in the retail payments market.","PeriodicalId":11837,"journal":{"name":"ERN: Other IO: Empirical Studies of Firms & Markets (Topic)","volume":"95 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2015-07-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Entry of Non-Financial Firms and Competition in the Retail Payments Market\",\"authors\":\"Jooyong Jun\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/ssrn.2628481\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"We investigate the effects of a non-financial firm’s entry on competition in the retail payments market, from the perspective of duopoly between an incumbent and an entrant in conditions of vertical restraints. Considering the cross-platform externalities in payment processing, differentiated preferences for payment platforms, and competitive bottleneck on the consumer side, we derive the following results. When only the entry of a vertically integrated (or end-to-end service) provider is allowed, either all merchants choose to multi-home or no entry occurs, regardless of the regulatory requirement. On the other hand, if the entry of a downstream-only (or front-end service) provider is possible, a partial multi-homing equilibrium result can emerge for some conditions under which the entry of an end-to-end service provider does not occur. In addition, due to the lowered entry cost, the overall welfare is greater when the entry of downstream-only service is possible although the entire increase in welfare goes to the entrant. Without regulation, however, the vertically integrated incumbent does not voluntarily provide the back-end service to the entrant when the merchant’s benefit from the payments service is not sufficiently high. It suggests the need for proper regulatory measures to reach a socially desirable outcome from the new entry in the retail payments market.\",\"PeriodicalId\":11837,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ERN: Other IO: Empirical Studies of Firms & Markets (Topic)\",\"volume\":\"95 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2015-07-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ERN: Other IO: Empirical Studies of Firms & Markets (Topic)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2628481\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ERN: Other IO: Empirical Studies of Firms & Markets (Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2628481","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Entry of Non-Financial Firms and Competition in the Retail Payments Market
We investigate the effects of a non-financial firm’s entry on competition in the retail payments market, from the perspective of duopoly between an incumbent and an entrant in conditions of vertical restraints. Considering the cross-platform externalities in payment processing, differentiated preferences for payment platforms, and competitive bottleneck on the consumer side, we derive the following results. When only the entry of a vertically integrated (or end-to-end service) provider is allowed, either all merchants choose to multi-home or no entry occurs, regardless of the regulatory requirement. On the other hand, if the entry of a downstream-only (or front-end service) provider is possible, a partial multi-homing equilibrium result can emerge for some conditions under which the entry of an end-to-end service provider does not occur. In addition, due to the lowered entry cost, the overall welfare is greater when the entry of downstream-only service is possible although the entire increase in welfare goes to the entrant. Without regulation, however, the vertically integrated incumbent does not voluntarily provide the back-end service to the entrant when the merchant’s benefit from the payments service is not sufficiently high. It suggests the need for proper regulatory measures to reach a socially desirable outcome from the new entry in the retail payments market.