The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Bundling and Competition on the Internet
Abstract
The Internet has signi.cantly reduced the marginal cost of producing and distributing digital information goods. It also coincides with the emergence of new competitive strategies such as large-scale bundling. In this paper, we show that bundling can create “economies of aggregation” for information goods if their marginal costs are very low, even in the absence of network externalities or economies of scale or scope. We extend the Bakos-Brynjolfsson bundling model (1999) to settings with several different types of competition, including both upstream and downstream, as well as competition between a bundler and single good and competition between two bundlers. Our key results are based on the “predictive value of bundling,” the fact that it is easier for a seller to predict how a consumer will value a collection of goods than it is to value any good individually. Using a model with fully rational and informed consumers, we use the Law of Large Numbers to show that this will be true as long as the goods are not perfectly correlated and do not affect each other's valuations significantly. As a result, a seller typically can extract more value from each information good when it is part of a bundle than when it is sold separately. Moreover, at the optimal price, more consumers will find the bundle worth buying than would have bought the same goods sold separately. Because of the predictive value of bundling, large aggregators will often be more pro.table than small aggregators, including sellers of single goods. We find that these economies of aggregation have several important competitive implications: 1. When competing for upstream content, larger bundlers are able to outbid smaller ones, all else being equal. This is because the predictive value of bundling enables bundlers to extract more value from any given good. 2. When competing for downstream consumers, the act of bundling information goods makes an incumbent seem “tougher” to single-product competitors selling similar goods. The resulting equilibrium is less profitable for potential entrants and can discourage entry in the bundler's markets, even when the entrants have a superior cost structure or quality. 3. Conversely, by simply adding an information good to an existing bundle, a bundler may be able to profitably enter a new market and dislodge an incumbent who does not bundle, capturing most of the market share from the incumbent firm and even driving the incumbent out of business. 4. Because a bundler can potentially capture a large share of profits in new markets, single-product firms may have lower incentives to innovate and create such markets. At the same time, bundlers may have higher incentives to innovate. For most physical goods, which have nontrivial marginal costs, the potential impact of large-scale aggregation is limited. However, we find that these effects can be decisive for the success or failure of information goods. Our results have particular empirical relevance to the markets for software and Internet content and suggest that aggregation strategies may take on particular relevance in these markets.
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
The emerging role of electronic marketplaces on the Internet
Bakos, Y. (1998) · Communications of the ACM · doi:10.1145/280324.280330 · Cited by 1,386 · cited 1×
“Most earlier work in this area—such as papers by Bakos (1997, 1998), Brynjolfsson and Smith (1999), Clemons et al. (1998), Degeratu et al. (1998), Lynch and Ariely (1998)—has focused on the effects of low search costs in online environments.”
BackgroundSelf-citation
Cited by
Goldfarb, A., & Tucker, C. (2019) · Journal of Economic Literature · doi:10.1257/jel.20171452 · Cited by 2,744
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
Strategic Bundling of Products and Prices: A New Synthesis for Marketing
Stremersch, S., & Tellis, G. J. (2002) · Journal of Marketing · doi:10.1509/jmkg.66.1.55.18455 · Cited by 788
A Comparison of Online and Offline Consumer Brand Loyalty
Danaher, P. J., Wilson, I. W., & Davis, R. A. (2003) · Marketing Science · doi:10.1287/mksc.22.4.461.24907 · Cited by 342
Consumers online: intentions, orientations and segmentation
Jayawardhena, C., Tiu Wright, L., & Dennis, C. (2007) · International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management · doi:10.1108/09590550710750377 · Cited by 210
Metadata
- Authors
- Bakos, Y., & Brynjolfsson, E.
- Venue
- Marketing Science
- Published
- 2000-02
- Volume
- 19
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 63-82
- ISSN
- 0732-2399 (ISSN-L)
- 1526-548X
- OpenAlex
- W3123294608
- Cited by
- 541
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 87.22
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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: Bundling and Competition on the Internet. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1287/mksc.19.1.63.15182
- The paper
- Bakos, Y., & Brynjolfsson, E. (2000). Bundling and Competition on the Internet. Marketing Science. https://doi.org/10.1287/mksc.19.1.63.15182
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.