Network effects and competition: An empirical analysis of the home video game industry

Strategic Management Journal

Volumn 24, Issue 4, 2003, Pages 375-384

  Shankar, Venkatesh ^a   Bayus, Barry L ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA   (United States)

Author keywords

Network externalities; New empirical industrial organization; Technology lock in

Indexed keywords

COMPETITION; ECONOMICS; MARKETING; MATHEMATICAL MODELS; STRATEGIC PLANNING;

NETWORK EXTERNALITIES; NEW EMPIRICAL INDUSTRIAL ORGANIZATION; TECHNOLOGY LOCK-IN;

INDUSTRIAL MANAGEMENT;

EID: 0037381352     PISSN: 01432095     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/smj.296     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Arthur WB. 1996. Increasing returns and the new world of business. Harvard Business Review 74(4): 100-109.
2. Balasubramanian S, Mahajan V. 2000. The economic leverage of the virtual community. International Journal of Electronic Commerce 5(Spring): 103-138.
3. Barney J. 1991. Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management 17(1): 99-120.
4. Brandenburger A. 1995. Power play (B): Sega in 16-bit video games. Harvard Business School case 9-795-102.
5. Brynjolfsson E, Kemerer C. 1996. Network externalities in microcomputer software: an econometric analysis of the spreadsheet market. Management Science 42(12): 1627-1647.
6. David P. 1985. CLIO and the economics of QWERTY. American Economic Review 75: 332-337.
7. Economides N. 2001. Bibliography on network economics. http://raven.stern.nyu.edu/networks/biblio-hframe.html [12 December 2001].
8. Farrell J, Saloner G. 1985. Standardization, compatibility and innovation. RAND Journal of Economics 16(1). 70-83.
9. Feld S. 1981. The focused organization of social ties. American Journal of Sociology 86(5): 1015-1035.
10. Fudenberg D, Tirole J. 1992. Game Theory. MIT Press: Cambridge, MA.
11. Gabel H. 1991. Competitive Strategies for Product Standards. McGraw-Hill: New York.
12. Glesjer H. 1969. A new test for heteroscedasticity. Journal of the American Statistical Association 64: 316-323.
13. Grindley P. 1995. Standards Strategy and Policy. Oxford University Press: New York.
14. Hill C. 1997. Establishing a standard: competitive strategy and technological standards in winner-take-all industries. Academy of Management Executive 11(2): 7-25.
15. Homans G. 1974. The Human Group. Harcourt Brace Jovanovich: New York.
16. Kadiyali V, Sudhir K, Rao V. 2001. Structural analysis of competitive behavior: new empirical industrial organization methods in marketing. International Journal of Research in Marketing 18 (June): 161-186.
17. Katz M, Shapiro C. 1985. Network externalities, competition and compatibility. American Economic Review 75(3): 424-440.
18. Majumdar S, Venkataraman S. 1998. Network effects and the adoption of new technology: evidence from the U.S. telecommunications industry. Strategic Management Journal 19(11): 1045-1062.
19. Monopolies and Mergers Commission 1995. Video Games: A Report on the Supply of Video Games in the U.K., March. http://www.competition-commission.org/uk/reports/359videograms.htm [26 November 2001].
20. Moorthy S. 1993. Competitive marketing strategies. In Handbooks in Operations Research and Management Science, Vol. 5, Eliashberg J, Lilien G (eds), North-Holland: Amsterdam; 143-190.
21. Mueller M. 1997. Universal Service: Competition, Interconnection, and Monopoly in the Making of the American Telephone System. MIT Press: Cambridge, MA
22. Rosen E. 2000. The Anatomy of Buzz. Doubleday: New York.
23. Rumelt R. 1984. Toward a strategic theory of the firm. In Competitive Strategic Management, Lamb R (ed). Prentice-Hall: Englewood Cliffs, NJ; 556-570.
24. Schilling M. 2002. Technology success and failure in winner-take-all markets: the impact of learning orientation, timing, and network externalities. Academy of Management Journal 45(2): 387-398.
25. Shankar V, Bayus B. 2002. Network effects and competition: an empirical analysis of the home video game industry. Working paper, January. http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=296534. 5 August 2002. 2002.
26. Voortman J. 1993. Curbing aftermarket monopolization. Antitrust Bulletin 39 (Summer): 221: 291.
27. Wall Street Journal. 1995. MCI and sprint set fresh moves in AT&T battle: phone companies to offer new services, discounts in long distance fight. 6 January, A3.
28. Wernerfelt B. 1984. A resource-based view of the firm. Strategic Management Journal 5(2): 171-180.