Competing with complementors: An empirical look at Amazon.com

Research Summary: Platform owners sometimes enter complementors' product spaces and compete against them. Using data from Amazon.com to study Amazon's entry pattern into third‐party sellers' product spaces, we find that Amazon is more likely to target successful product spaces. We also find that Amazon is less likely to enter product spaces that require greater seller efforts to grow, suggesting that complementors' platform‐specific investments influence platform owners' entry decisions. While Amazon's entry discourages affected third‐party sellers from subsequently pursuing growth on the platform, it increases product demand and reduces shipping costs for consumers. We consider the implications of these findings for complementors in platform‐based markets. Managerial Summary: Platform owners can exert considerable influence over their complementors' welfare. Many complementors with successful products are pushed out of markets because platform owners enter their product spaces and compete directly with them. To mitigate such risks, complementors could build their businesses by aggregating nonblockbuster products or focusing on products requiring significant platform‐specific investments to grow. They should also develop capabilities in new product discovery so that they could continually bring innovative products to their platforms.

[1]  Juan Alcácer,et al.  Learning by Supplying , 2012 .

[2]  T. Kretschmer,et al.  When Less Can Be More – Setting Technology Levels in Complementary Goods Markets , 2015 .

[3]  Peng Huang,et al.  Appropriability Mechanisms and the Platform Partnership Decision: Evidence from Enterprise Software , 2013, Manag. Sci..

[4]  Frank T. Rothaermel,et al.  Technological discontinuities and interfirm cooperation: what determines a startup's attractiveness as alliance partner? , 2002, IEEE Trans. Engineering Management.

[5]  R. Kapoor,et al.  Coordinating and competing in ecosystems: How organizational forms shape new technology investments , 2013 .

[6]  Feng Zhu,et al.  Ad Revenue and Content Commercialization: Evidence from Blogs ∗ , 2011 .

[7]  Michael Waldman,et al.  The Strategic Use of Tying to Preserve and Create Market Power in Evolving Industries , 1998 .

[8]  David B. Yoffie,et al.  With friends like these: the art of managing complementors. , 2006, Harvard business review.

[9]  Scott A. Fay,et al.  An Empirical Study of the Impact of Nonlinear Shipping and Handling Fees on Purchase Incidence and Expenditure Decisions , 2006 .

[10]  Chi-Hyon Lee,et al.  Preferential Linkage and Network Evolution: A Conceptual Model and Empirical Test in the U.S. Video Game Sector , 2004 .

[11]  J. March,et al.  Learning from Samples of One or Fewer , 1991 .

[12]  Brian Wu,et al.  When Suppliers Climb the Value Chain: A Theory of Value Distribution in Vertical Relationships , 2015, Manag. Sci..

[13]  O. Williamson.  The Vertical Integration of Production: Market Failure Considerations , 1971 .

[14]  B. Nalebuff.  Bundling as an Entry Barrier , 2004 .

[15]  Ramon Casadesus-Masanell,et al.  Competing Complements , 2007 .

[16]  T. Kretschmer,et al.  Generational Transitions in Platform Markets , 2016 .

[17]  M. Lieberman.  Determinants of Vertical Integration: An Empirical Test , 1991 .

[18]  Rahul Kapoor,et al.  Collaborating with Complementors: What Do Firms Do? , 2014 .

[19]  Joseph T. Mahoney,et al.  The choice of organizational form: Vertical financial ownership versus other methods of vertical integration , 1992 .

[20]  D. Teece.  Profiting from technological innovation: Implications for integration, collaboration, licensing and public policy , 1993 .

[21]  Carmelo Cennamo,et al.  Platform competition: Strategic trade‐offs in platform markets , 2013 .

[22]  Anoop Madhok,et al.  Process Capabilities and Value Generation in Alliance Portfolios , 2009, Organ. Sci..

[23]  A. Gawer,et al.  Platform Owner Entry and Innovation in Complementary Markets: Evidence from Intel , 2005 .

[24]  Michael Luca,et al.  Aggregation of consumer ratings: an application to Yelp.com , 2012 .

[25]  Joseph Farrell,et al.  Innovation, Rent Extraction, and Integration in Systems Markets , 2000 .

[26]  K. Eisenhardt,et al.  Resource-based View of Strategic Alliance Formation: Strategic and Social Effects in Entrepreneurial Firms , 1996 .

[27]  Dan Wang,et al.  Exposed: Venture Capital, Competitor Ties, and Entrepreneurial Innovation , 2014 .

[28]  J. Gans,et al.  The Product Market and the Market for 'Ideas': Commercialization Strategies for Technology Entrepreneurs , 2002 .

[29]  G. Pisano.  The R&D Boundaries of the Firm: An Empirical Analysis , 1990 .

[30]  Mingzhe Li,et al.  Advertising versus Brokerage Model for Online Trading Platforms , 2012, MIS Q..

[31]  Douglas J. Miller,et al.  An empirical examination of transaction- and firm-level influences on the vertical boundaries of the firm , 2003 .

[32]  Nicholas Economides,et al.  Two-Sided Competition of Proprietary vs. Open Source Technology Platforms and the Implications for the Software Industry , 2005, Manag. Sci..

[33]  G. Huber.  Organizational Learning: The Contributing Processes and the Literatures , 1991 .

[34]  Michael D. Smith,et al.  How Video Rental Patterns Change as Consumers Move Online , 2012, Manag. Sci..

[35]  N. Rajagopalan,et al.  Are all ‘sharks’ dangerous? new biotechnology ventures and partner selection in R&D alliances , 2012 .

[36]  O. Williamson.  Transaction-Cost Economics: The Governance of Contractual Relations , 1979, The Journal of Law and Economics.

[37]  T. DiPrete,et al.  7. Assessing Bias in the Estimation of Causal Effects: Rosenbaum Bounds on Matching Estimators and Instrumental Variables Estimation with Imperfect Instruments , 2004 .

[38]  Jonathan Levin,et al.  Vertical Integration and Market Structure , 2012 .

[39]  Claudio Panico,et al.  What drives a platform's strategy? Usage, membership and competition effects , 2015 .

[40]  Haiyang Li,et al.  Innovation search of new ventures in a technology cluster: the role of ties with service intermediaries , 2010 .

[41]  Carmelo Cennamo,et al.  Value Creation and Free-Riding in Platform Markets: The Asymmetric Impact of Competition on Quality Across the Platform Life Cycle , 2015 .

[42]  K. Eisenhardt,et al.  Big fish or big pond? Seller's dilemma in intermediary selection , 2016 .

[43]  Tobias Kretschmer,et al.  The Effects of Rewarding User Engagement – The Case of Facebook Apps , 2012, Inf. Syst. Res..

[44]  Steven Tadelis,et al.  The Limits of Reputation in Platform Markets: An Empirical Analysis and Field Experiment , 2015 .

[45]  Margaret E. Slade,et al.  Vertical integration and firm boundaries : the evidence , 2007 .

[46]  N. Rajagopalan,et al.  Response to mason and drakeman's commentary on “fishing for sharks: Partner selection in biopharmaceutical R&D alliances” , 2014 .

[47]  J. Chevalier,et al.  Measuring Prices and Price Competition Online: Amazon.com and BarnesandNoble.com , 2003 .

[48]  F. Rothaermel.  Complementary Assets, Strategic Alliances, and the Incumbent's Advantage: An Empirical Study of Industry and Firm Effects in the Biopharmaceutical Industry , 2001 .

[49]  Benjamin L. Edelman,et al.  Does Google Leverage Market Power Through Tying and Bundling , 2015 .

[50]  Geoffrey G. Parker,et al.  Two-Sided Network Effects: A Theory of Information Product Design , 2010, Manag. Sci..

[51]  M. Sarkar,et al.  Alliance entrepreneurship and firm market performance , 2001 .

[52]  Shiva Agarwal,et al.  Sustaining Superior Performance in Business Ecosystems: Evidence from Application Software Developers in the iOS and Android Smartphone Ecosystems , 2017, Organ. Sci..

[53]  Kannan Srinivasan,et al.  Firm Strategies in the 'Mid Tail' of Platform-Based Retailing , 2010, Mark. Sci..

[54]  Benjamin L. Hallen,et al.  How Do Social Defenses Work? A Resource-Dependence Lens on Technology Ventures, Venture Capital Investors, and Corporate Relationships , 2014 .

[55]  K. Eisenhardt,et al.  Origin of Alliance Portfolios: Entrepreneurs, Network Strategies, and Firm Performance , 2009 .

[56]  M. Whinston.  Tying, Foreclosure, and Exclusion , 1989 .

[57]  G. Baker,et al.  Contractibility and Asset Ownership: On-Board Computers and Governance in U.S. Trucking , 2000 .

[58]  M. Leiblein,et al.  Do make or buy decisions matter? The influence of organizational governance on technological performance , 2002 .

[59]  Benjamin Edelman,et al.  Mastering the intermediaries. , 2014, Harvard business review.

[60]  Thomas R. Eisenmann,et al.  Platform Envelopment , 2010 .

[61]  David R. Clough,et al.  Tie Dissolution in Market Networks: A Theory of Vicarious Performance Feedback , 2020, Administrative Science Quarterly.

[62]  D. Rubin.  Using Propensity Scores to Help Design Observational Studies: Application to the Tobacco Litigation , 2001, Health Services and Outcomes Research Methodology.

[63]  M. Iansiti,et al.  Entry into Platform-Based Markets , 2012 .

[64]  Marvin B. Lieberman,et al.  Acquisition vs. Internal Development as Modes of Market Entry , 2009 .

[65]  G. Hoetker.  How Much You Know versus How Well I Know You: Selecting a Supplier for a Technically Innovative Component , 2005 .

[66]  Joseph T. Mahoney,et al.  Testing Organizational Economics Theories of Vertical Integration , 2007 .

[67]  Monic Sun,et al.  How Does the Variance of Product Ratings Matter? , 2010, Manag. Sci..

[68]  D. Rubin,et al.  Constructing a Control Group Using Multivariate Matched Sampling Methods That Incorporate the Propensity Score , 1985 .

[69]  J. Rochet,et al.  Platform competition in two sided markets , 2003 .

[70]  B. Sianesi,et al.  PSMATCH2: Stata module to perform full Mahalanobis and propensity score matching, common support graphing, and covariate imbalance testing , 2003 .

[71]  Joanne E. Oxley,et al.  The Scope and Governance of International R&D Alliances , 2003 .

[72]  J. Angrist.  Mostly Harmless Econometrics , 2008 .

[73]  K. Eisenhardt,et al.  Swimming with Sharks: Technology Ventures, Defense Mechanisms and Corporate Relationships , 2008 .

[74]  Andrei Hagiu.  Pricing and commitment by two‐sided platforms , 2006 .

[75]  M. Armstrong.  Competition in Two-Sided Markets ¤ , 2005 .

[76]  Monica C. Higgins,et al.  Which ties matter when? the contingent effects of interorganizational partnerships on IPO success , 2003 .

[77]  T. Shakespeare,et al.  Observational Studies , 2003 .

[78]  J. Oxley.  Appropriability Hazards and Governance in Strategic Alliances: A Transaction Cost Approach , 1997 .

[79]  R. Oaxaca,et al.  Results on the bias and inconsistency of ordinary least squares for the linear probability model , 2006 .

[80]  Ramon Casadesus-Masanell,et al.  Wintel: Cooperation and Conflict , 2007, Manag. Sci..

[81]  Demand Externalities from Co-Location , 2012 .

[82]  Ashish Agarwal,et al.  Platform Integration and Demand Spillovers in Complementary Markets: Evidence from Facebook's Integration of Instagram , 2017, Manag. Sci..

[83]  Ramon Casadesus-Masanell,et al.  Mixed Source , 2009, Manag. Sci..

[84]  Ralph M. Bradburd,et al.  The empirical determinants of vertical integration , 1988 .

[85]  Candace E Young-Ybarra,et al.  Strategic Flexibility in Information Technology Alliances: the Influence of Transaction Cost Economics and Social Exchange Theory , 1999 .

[86]  Hanna Halaburda,et al.  When Does a Platform Create Value by Limiting Choice? , 2010 .

[87]  Feng Zhu,et al.  Responses to Entry in Multi-Sided Markets: The Impact of Craigslist on Local Newspapers , 2014, Manag. Sci..

[88]  David T. Levy.  The Transactions Cost Approach to Vertical Integration: An Empirical Examination , 1985 .

[89]  M. Whinston.  Exclusivity and Tying in U.S. v. Microsoft: What We Know, and Don't Know , 2001 .

[90]  Constance E. Helfat,et al.  Vertical Integration and Risk Reduction , 1987 .