Market having two distinct user groups that provide each other with network benefits
A two-sided market, also called a two-sided network, is an intermediaryeconomic platform having two distinct user groups that provide each other with network benefits. The organization that creates value primarily by enabling direct interactions between two (or more) distinct types of affiliated customers is called a multi-sided platform.[1] This concept of two-sided markets has been mainly theorised by the French economists Jean Tirole and Jean-Charles Rochet and Americans Geoffrey G Parker and Marshall Van Alstyne.
Two-sided networks can be found in many industries, sharing the space with traditional product and service offerings. Example markets include credit cards (composed of cardholders and merchants); health maintenance organizations (patients and doctors); operating systems (end-users and developers); yellow pages (advertisers and consumers); video-game consoles (gamers and game developers); recruitment sites (job seekers and recruiters); search engines (advertisers and users); and communication networks, such as the Internet. Examples of well known companies employing two-sided markets include such organizations as American Express (credit cards), eBay (marketplace), Taobao (marketplace in China), Facebook (social medium), LinkedIn (professional media), Mall of America (shopping mall), Match.com (dating platform), AIESEC (leadership development for youth by placing talent in companies), Monster.com (recruitment platform), and Sony (game consoles).
Benefits to each group demand economies of scale. Consumers, for example, prefer credit cards honored by more merchants, while merchants prefer cards carried by more consumers. Two-sided markets are particularly useful for analyzing the chicken-and-egg problem of standards battles, such as the competition between VHS and Beta. They are also useful in explaining many free pricing or "freemium" strategies where one user group gets free use of the platform in order to attract the other user group.[2][3][4][5][6]
Overview
Two-sided markets represent a refinement of the concept of network effects. There are both same-side and cross-side network effects. Each network effect can be either positive or negative. An example of a positive same-side network effect is end-user PDF sharing or player-to-player contact in PlayStation 3; a negative same-side network effect appears when there is competition between suppliers in an online auction market or competition for dates on Match.com. The concept of network effects was first proposed in 1985 by Katz and Shapiro who distinguished between direct and indirect network effects. They defined direct network effects as consumers benefiting directly from others buying the network good and indirect network effects as consumers benefiting from others buying the network good due to the increase in complementary goods.
Multi-sided platforms exist because there is a need for an intermediary in order to match both parts of the platform in a more efficient way. Indeed, this intermediary will minimize the overall cost, for instance, by avoiding duplication, or by minimizing transaction costs. This intermediary will make possible exchanges that would not occur without them and create value for both sides. Two-sided platforms, by playing an intermediary role, produce certain value for both users (parties) that are interconnected through it, and therefore those sides (parties) may both be evaluated as customers (unlike in the traditional seller-buyer dichotomy).
Structural characteristics
A two-sided network typically has two distinct user groups. Members of at least one group exhibit a preference regarding the number of users in the other group; these are called cross-side network effects. Each group's members may also have preferences regarding the number of users in their own group; these are called same-side network effects. Cross-side network effects are usually positive, but can be negative (as with consumer reactions to advertising). Same-side network effects may be either positive (e.g., the benefit from swapping video games with more peers) or negative (e.g., the desire to exclude direct rivals from an online business-to-business marketplace). This network effect present the agency relationship between buyers and seller, and the platform need to alter compensation properly to satisfy both parties.[7]
For example, in marketplaces such as eBay or Taobao,[8] buyers and sellers are the two groups. Buyers prefer a large number of sellers, and, meanwhile, sellers prefer a large number of buyers, such that the members in one group can easily find their trading partners from the other group. Therefore, the cross-side network effect is positive. On the other hand, a large number of sellers mean severe competition among sellers. Therefore, the same-side network effect is negative.[8]Figure 1 depicts these relationships.
Figure 1: Cross-side and same-side network effects in a two-sided network.
Neither cross-side network effects nor same-side network effects are sufficient for an organization to be a multi-sided platform. Examining traditional supermarkets, it is clear that shoppers prefer a higher number of suppliers and a larger variety of goods, while suppliers value a higher number of buyers. Nevertheless, a traditional supermarket does not qualify as a multi-sided platform because it does not enable direct contact between shoppers and suppliers. On the other hand, such network effects are not required for a firm to be seen as a multi-sided platform. One example is the situation in which niche event organizers implement a ticketing service managed by a small on-line ticket provider in their websites. Consumers affiliate with the on-line ticket provider only when they go to the website to buy the ticket. However, cross-side network effects and same-side network effects are common in multi-sided platforms.[1]
In two-sided networks, users on each side typically require very different functionality from their common platform. In credit card networks, for example, consumers require a unique account, a plastic card, access to phone-based customer service, a monthly bill, etc. Merchants require terminals for authorizing transactions, procedures for submitting charges and receiving payment, "signage" (decals that show the card is accepted), etc. Given these different requirements, platform providers may specialize in serving users on just one side of a two-sided network. A key feature of two-sided markets is the novel pricing strategies and business models they employ. In order to attract one group of users, the network sponsor may subsidize the other group of users. Historically, for example, Adobe's portable document format (PDF) did not succeed until Adobe priced the PDF reader at zero, substantially increasing sales of PDF writers.
In the operating systems market for home computers, created in the early 1980s with the introduction of the Macintosh and IBM PC, Microsoft decided to steeply discount the software development toolkit (SDKs) for its operating system, relative to Apple pricing at that time, lowering the barrier to entry to the home computer market for software businesses.[citation needed] This resulted in a big increase in the number of applications being developed for home computers, with the Microsoft Windows/IBM PC being the operating system/computer type combination of choice for both software businesses and software users.
Competition
Because of network effects, successful platforms enjoy increasing returns to scale. Users will pay more for access to a bigger network, so margins improve as user bases grow. This sets network platforms apart from most traditional manufacturing and service businesses. In traditional businesses, growth beyond some point usually leads to diminishing returns: Acquiring new customers becomes harder as fewer people, not more, find the firm's value proposition appealing.
Fueled by the promise of increasing returns, competition in two-sided network industries can be fierce. Platform leaders can leverage their higher margins to invest more in R&D or lower their prices, driving out weaker rivals. As a result, mature two-sided network industries are usually dominated by a handful of large platforms, as is the case in the credit card industry. In extreme situations, such as PC operating systems, a single company emerges as the winner, taking almost all of the market.[10]
Pricing
Platform managers must choose the right price to charge each group in a two-sided network and ignoring network effects can lead to mistakes. In figure 2, pricing without taking network effects into account means finding prices that maximize the areas of the two blue rectangles. Adobe initially used this approach when it launched PDF and charged for both reader and writer software.[11]
Figure 2:Traditional pricing logic seeks the biggest revenue rectangle (price × quantity) under each demand curve.
In two-sided networks, such pricing logic can be misguided. If firms account for the fact that adoption on one side of the network drives adoption on the other side, they can do better. Demand curves are not fixed: with positive cross-side network effects, demand curves shift outward in response to growth in the user base on the network's other side. When Adobe changed its pricing strategy and made its reader software freely available, its managers uncovered a key rule of two-sided network pricing. They subsidized the more price sensitive side, and charged the side whose demand increased more strongly in response to growth on the other side. As illustrated in figure 3, giving consumers a free reader created demand for the document writer, the network's "money side".
Figure 3: So long as the revenue gained (red box) exceeds the revenue lost (light blue box), a discounting strategy is profitable. The subsidy largely changes network size.
Similarly, gaming manufacturers very often subsidize the gamers and sell their consoles at substantial losses (e.g. Sony's PS3 lost $250 per unit sold[13]) in order to penetrate the market and receive royalties of software sold for their gaming console.
On the other hand, even though two-sided pricing strategies generally increase total platform profits compared to traditional one-sided strategies, the actual end value of the two-sided pricing strategy is contingent on market characteristics and may not offset the costs of implementation. For example, profits of an application provider increase with the implementation of a two-sided pricing strategy of the platform provider only if the application is subsidized by the provider.[14] Platform providers should also be more cautious when the giveaway product has appreciable unit costs, as with tangible goods. Free-PC incurred $80M in losses in 1999 when it decided to give away computers and Internet access at no cost to consumers who agreed to view Internet-delivered ads that could not be minimized or hidden. Unfortunately, willingness to pay does not materialize on the money side, as few marketers were eager to target consumers who were so cost conscious.[15]
Strategic issues
If building a bigger network is one reason to subsidize adoption, then stimulating value adding innovations is the other.[16] Consider, for example, the value of an operating system with no applications. While Apple initially tried to charge both sides of the market, like Adobe did in figure 2, Microsoft uncovered a second pricing rule: subsidize those who add platform value. In this context, consumers, not developers are the money side.
Figure 4: In this market, consumers care more about access to critical features. The main effect of a subsidy is to change network value.
Which market represents the money side and which market represents the subsidy side depends on this critical tradeoff: increasing network size versus growing network value. The size rule lets people increase adoption more while the value rule lets people increase price more.
Although recently developed in terms of economic theory, two-sided networks help to explain many classic battles, for example, Betamax vs. VHS, Mac vs. Windows, CBS vs. RCA in color TV, American Express vs. Visa, and more recently Blu-ray vs. HD DVD.
In the case of color TV, CBS and RCA offered rival formats but initially neither gained market traction. Viewers had little reason to buy expensive color TVs in the absence of color programming. Likewise, broadcasters had little reason to develop color programming when households lacked color TVs. RCA won the battle in two ways. It flooded the market with low cost black-and-white TVs incompatible with the CBS format but compatible with its own. Broadcasters then needed to use the RCA format to reach established viewers. RCA also subsidized Walt Disney's Wonderful World of Color, which gave consumers reason to buy the new technology.
Multihoming
When two-sided markets contain more than one competing platform, the condition of users affiliating with more than one such platform is called multihoming. Instances arise, for example, when consumers carry credit cards from more than one banking network or they continue using computers based on two different operating systems. This condition implies an increase of "homing" costs, which comprise all the expenses network users incur in order to establish and maintain platform affiliation. These ongoing costs of platform affiliation should be distinguished from switching costs, which refer to the one time costs of terminating one network and adopting another.
Their significance in industry and antitrust law arises from the fact that the greater the multihoming costs, the greater is the tendency toward market concentration. Higher multihoming costs reduce user willingness to maintain affiliation with competing networks providing similar services.
Winner takes all
Attracted by the prospects of large margins, platforms can try to compete to be the winner-take-all in two-sided markets with strong network effects. That means that one platform serves the mature networked market. Examples of the standards battles include VHS vs Betamax, Microsoft vs Netscape and the DVD market. Not all two-sided markets with strong positive network effects are optimally supplied by a single platform. Markets must have high multi-homing costs and similar consumers' needs.[10]
Even if the market has characteristics that could lead it to be dominated by one platform, companies can choose to cooperate rather than competing to be the winner-take-it-all. For instance, DVD companies pooled their technologies creating the DVD format in 1995.[17]
If the market naturally supports a monopoly platform, intense short-run fighting among competing platforms can be motivated by the desire to capture future monopoly profits.
Regulation
The network effects associated with two-sided markets lead to regulatory interest. Any regulatory intervention can also lead to the waterbed effect. This is due to the fact that interference of pricing on one side of the market will have repercussions on the price paid by the other side of the market. These regulatory authorities try to determine the marginal cost and demand for these markets in order to establish the socially optimal price. For example, legislation allows the Reserve Bank of Australia to directly determine the interchange fee at bank associations with many other countries following in this direction.[18] ATMs were more valuable to banks if they reached more consumers and consumers derived higher utility if they could reach more banks. The benefits of compatibility and collaboration were realized early on which led to the formation of networks that served groups of banks. This resulted in interchange fees which were federally regulated to zero early on then subsequently deregulated in the late 90s.[18] Following the deregulation, a surge in the number of ATMs available occurred and despite the increase in prices, consumer usage rose.
Threat of envelopment
Since platforms frequently have overlapping user bases, it is not uncommon for a platform to be "enveloped" by an adjacent provider.[19]
Usually, this occurs when a rival platform provides the same functionality of a platform as a part of a multiplatform bundle. If the money-side perceives that such multiplatform bundles delivers more value at a lower price, a stand-alone platform is in danger. If one cannot reduce price on the money-side or enhance one's value proposition, one can try to change one's business model or find a "bigger brother" to help. The last option when facing envelopment is to resort to legal remedies, since antitrust law for two-sided networks is still in dispute. However, in many cases a stand-alone business facing envelopment has little choice but to sell out to the attacker or exit the field.[6]
↑ Thomas R. Eisenmann, Geoffrey Parker, Marshall W. Van Alstyne (2006). Strategies for Two-Sided Markets, Harvard Business Review.
↑ J. Gregory Sidak, The Impact of Multisided Markets on the Debate over Optional Transactions for Enhanced Delivery over the Internet, 7 POLÍTICA ECONÓMICA Y REGULATORIA EN TELECOMUNICACIONES 94, 96 (2011).
1 2 Journal of Economic Perspectives—Volume 23, Number 3—Summer 2009—Pages 125–143.
↑ http://ssrn.com/abstract=1496336 Thomas Eisenmann, Geoffrey Parker, and Marshall Van Alstyne (2011). "Platform Envelopment." Strategic Management Journal.
Related Research Articles
In economics, a network effect is the phenomenon by which the value or utility a user derives from a good or service depends on the number of users of compatible products. Network effects are typically positive feedback systems, resulting in users deriving more and more value from a product as more users join the same network. The adoption of a product by an additional user can be broken into two effects: an increase in the value to all other users and also the enhancement of other non-users' motivation for using the product.
A business model describes how an organization creates, delivers, and captures value, in economic, social, cultural or other contexts. The process of business model construction and modification is also called business model innovation and forms a part of business strategy.
Price discrimination is a microeconomic pricing strategy where identical or largely similar goods or services are sold at different prices by the same provider in different market segments. Price discrimination is distinguished from product differentiation by the more substantial difference in production cost for the differently priced products involved in the latter strategy. Price differentiation essentially relies on the variation in the customers' willingness to pay and in the elasticity of their demand. For price discrimination to succeed, a firm must have market power, such as a dominant market share, product uniqueness, sole pricing power, etc. All prices under price discrimination are higher than the equilibrium price in a perfectly competitive market. However, some prices under price discrimination may be lower than the price charged by a single-price monopolist. Price discrimination is utilised by the monopolist to recapture some deadweight loss. This Pricing strategy enables firms to capture additional consumer surplus and maximize their profits while benefiting some consumers at lower prices. Price discrimination can take many forms and is prevalent in many industries, from education and telecommunications to healthcare.
Information goods are commodities that provide value to consumers as a result of the information it contains and refers to any good or service that can be digitalized. Examples of information goods includes books, journals, computer software, music and videos. Information goods can be copied, shared, resold or rented. Information goods are durable and thus, will not be destroyed through consumption. As information goods have distinct characteristics as they are experience goods, have returns to scale and are non-rivalrous, the laws of supply and demand that depend on the scarcity of products do not frequently apply to information goods. As a result, the buying and selling of information goods differs from ordinary goods. Information goods are goods whose unit production costs are negligible compared to their amortized development costs. Well-informed companies have development costs that increase with product quality, but their unit cost is zero. Once an information commodity has been developed, other units can be produced and distributed at almost zero cost. For example, allow downloads over the Internet. Conversely, for industrial goods, the unit cost of production and distribution usually dominates. Firms with an industrial advantage do not incur any development costs, but unit costs increase as product quality improves.
In marketing, product bundling is offering several products or services for sale as one combined product or service package. It is a common feature in many imperfectly competitive product and service markets. Industries engaged in the practice include telecommunications services, financial services, health care, information, and consumer electronics. A software bundle might include a word processor, spreadsheet, and presentation program into a single office suite. The cable television industry often bundles many TV and movie channels into a single tier or package. The fast food industry combines separate food items into a "meal deal" or "value meal".
Distribution is the process of making a product or service available for the consumer or business user who needs it, and a distributor is a business involved in the distribution stage of the value chain. Distribution can be done directly by the producer or service provider or by using indirect channels with distributors or intermediaries. Distribution is one of the four elements of the marketing mix: the other three elements being product, pricing, and promotion.
A closed platform, walled garden, or closed ecosystem is a software system wherein the carrier or service provider has control over applications, content, and/or media, and restricts convenient access to non-approved applicants or content. This is in contrast to an open platform, wherein consumers generally have unrestricted access to applications and content.
In industry, models of the learning or experience curve effect express the relationship between experience producing a good and the efficiency of that production, specifically, efficiency gains that follow investment in the effort. The effect has large implications for costs and market share, which can increase competitive advantage over time.
A business can use a variety of pricing strategies when selling a product or service. To determine the most effective pricing strategy for a company, senior executives need to first identify the company's pricing position, pricing segment, pricing capability and their competitive pricing reaction strategy. Pricing strategies and tactics vary from company to company, and also differ across countries, cultures, industries and over time, with the maturing of industries and markets and changes in wider economic conditions.
Marshall W. Van Alstyne is the Allen and Kelly Questrom Professor in IS at Boston University and a research associate at the MIT Initiative on the Digital Economy. He co-developed the theory of two-sided markets with Geoffrey G Parker. His work focuses on the economics of information. This includes a sustained interest in information markets and in how information and technology affect productivity with a new emphasis on “platforms” as an extension of the work on two-sided markets.
Catalyst Code: The Strategies Behind the World's Most Dynamic Companies is a book by Market Platform Dynamics founder David S. Evans and MIT economist Richard L. Schmalensee published in 2007.
In computing, an open platform describes a software system which is based on open standards, such as published and fully documented external application programming interfaces (API) that allow using the software to function in other ways than the original programmer intended, without requiring modification of the source code. Using these interfaces, a third party could integrate with the platform to add functionality. The opposite is a closed platform.
Platform envelopment refers to one platform provider moving into another one's market, combining its own functionality with the target's, to form a multi-platform bundle. The markets which evolve rapidly are rich in enveloping opportunities and the companies in these markets are under the continuous threat of becoming obsolete. Mobile phones used to be a separate market but the boundaries between them and music players are beginning to blur. A stand-alone business when threatened with an envelopment attack has few options but to change the business model or sell off the business to the attacker. RealPlayer was a dominant player in the streaming video business and had created a two sided market out of which the consumers were the subsidized side. The content providers were the money side which paid Real for their streaming software. Microsoft launched an envelopment attack on Real by providing the streaming server software clubbed with their Windows NT operating system. The content providers saw no point in continuing using Real and moved to windows platform threatening the existence of Real. Windows could afford to do so since the provision of such a service boosted their sales of the OS and the mass adoption of the Windows Media Player on the consumer side which was the only compatible player with the windows streaming platform.
Platform evangelism is the application of technology evangelism to a multi-sided platform. It seeks to accelerate the growth of a platform's commercial ecosystem of complementary goods, created by independent developers, as a means to the end of maximizing the platform's market share. This initiative focuses on providing developers the resources to innovate, participate, and provide feedback to grow the platform.
Geoffrey G Parker is a scholar whose work focuses on distributed innovation, energy markets, and the economics of information. He co-developed the theory of two-sided markets with Marshall Van Alstyne.
The economics of digitization is the field of economics that studies how digitization, digitalisation and digital transformation affects markets and how digital data can be used to study economics. Digitization is the process by which technology lowers the costs of storing, sharing, and analyzing data. This has changed how consumers behave, how industrial activity is organized, and how governments operate. The economics of digitization exists as a distinct field of economics for two reasons. First, new economic models are needed because many traditional assumptions about information no longer hold in a digitized world. Second, the new types of data generated by digitization require new methods for their analysis.
Social media use by businesses includes a range of applications. Although social media accessed via desktop computers offer a variety of opportunities for companies in a wide range of business sectors, mobile social media, which users can access when they are "on the go" via tablet computers or smartphones, benefit companies because of the location- and time-sensitive awareness of their users. Mobile social media tools can be used for marketing research, communication, sales promotions/discounts, informal employee learning/organizational development, relationship development/loyalty programs, and e-commerce.
Many markets are structured as platform ecosystems, they can be open or closed platforms, where a stable core mediates the relationship between a wide range of complements and prospective end-users.
The Platform Canvas is a conceptual framework dedicated to explain the mechanisms of multi-sided platform organizations, and how value is created, captured and delivered in the platform economy. Multi-sided platforms, also called two-sided markets, like Amazon, Uber and Airbnb, create value primarily by enabling direct interactions between distinct groups of affiliated customers. The framework serves as a strategic management tool to assist academics, entrepreneurs and managers identify the essential elements in platform businesses, understand the interrelations of these element and recognize the dynamics of associated network effects. The 12 components of the canvas highlight the internal and external factors of the business model, and the orchestration of the affiliated ecosystems.
A digital platform is a software-based online infrastructure that facilitates user interactions and transactions.
References
Sangeet Paul Choudary (2013) "Platform Thinking" A Comprehensive Guide to Platform Business Models <-- can't be found
This page is based on this Wikipedia article Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply. Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.
