The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Firm Strategies in the “Mid Tail” of Platform-Based Retailing
Open accessAbstract
While millions of products are sold on its retail platform, Amazon.com itself stocks and sells only a very small fraction of them. Most of these products are sold by third-party sellers who pay Amazon a fee for each unit sold. Empirical evidence clearly suggests that Amazon tends to sell high-demand products and leave long-tail products for independent sellers to offer. We investigate how a platform owner such as Amazon, facing ex ante demand uncertainty, may strategically learn from these sellers' early sales which of the “mid-tail” products are worthwhile for its direct selling and which are best left for others to sell. The platform owner's “cherry-picking” of the successful products, however, gives an independent seller the incentive to mask any high demand by lowering his sales with a reduced service level (unobserved by the platform owner). We analyze this strategic interaction between a platform owner and an independent seller using a game-theoretic model with two types of sellers—one with high demand and one with low demand. We show that it may not always be optimal for the platform owner to identify the seller's demand. Interestingly, the platform owner may be worse off by retaining its option to sell the independent seller's product, whereas both types of sellers may benefit from the platform owner's threat of entry. The platform owner's entry option may reduce consumer surplus in the early period, although it increases consumer surplus in the later period. We also investigate how consumer reviews influence the market outcome.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Platform Competition in Two-Sided Markets
Rochet, J.-C., & Tirole, J. (2003) · Journal of the European Economic Association · doi:10.1162/154247603322493212 · Cited by 5,642
The long tail: why the future of business is selling less of more
(2007) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.44-2783 · Cited by 2,869
How Does Popularity Information Affect Choices? A Field Experiment
Tucker, C., & Zhang, J. (2011) · Management Science · doi:10.1287/mnsc.1110.1312 · Cited by 322
Cited by
A strategic framework for artificial intelligence in marketing
Huang, M.-H., & Rust, R. T. (2021) · Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science · doi:10.1007/s11747-020-00749-9 · Cited by 2,059
Digital marketing: a framework, review, and research agenda
Kannan, P. K., & Li, H. “. (2017) · International Journal of Research in Marketing · doi:10.1016/j.ijresmar.2016.11.006 · Cited by 1,707
Agency Selling or Reselling? Channel Structures in Electronic Retailing
Abhishek, V., Jerath, K., & Zhang, Z. J. (2016) · Management Science · doi:10.1287/mnsc.2015.2230 · Cited by 1,082
Self-citationCompeting with complementors: An empirical look at Amazon.com
Zhu, F., & Liu, Q. (2018) · Strategic Management Journal · doi:10.1002/smj.2932 · Cited by 546
Kwark, Y., Chen, J., & Raghunathan, S. (2017) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.25300/misq/2017/41.3.05 · Cited by 350
Metadata
- Authors
- Jiang, B., Jerath, K., & Srinivasan, K.
- Venue
- Marketing Science
- Published
- 2011-09
- Volume
- 30
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 757-775
- ISSN
- 0732-2399 (ISSN-L)
- 1526-548X
- OpenAlex
- W2103970467
- Cited by
- 443
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 11.67
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Firm Strategies in the “Mid Tail” of Platform-Based Retailing. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1287/mksc.1110.0656
- The paper
- Jiang, B., Jerath, K., & Srinivasan, K. (2011). Firm Strategies in the “Mid Tail” of Platform-Based Retailing. Marketing Science. https://doi.org/10.1287/mksc.1110.0656
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.