The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Understanding Network Effects in Software Markets: Evidence from Web Server Pricing1
Abstract
Prior theoretical research has established that many software products are subject to network effects and exhibit the characteristics of two-sided markets. However, despite the importance of the software industry to the world economy, few studies have attempted to empirically examine these characteristics, or several others which theory suggests impact software price. This study develops and tests a research-grounded model of two-sided software markets that accounts for several key factors influencing software pricing, including network externalities, cross-market complementarities, standards, mindshare, and trial-ability. Applying the model to the context of the market for Web server software, several key findings are offered. First, a positive market share to price relationship is identified, offering support for the network externalities hypothesis even though the market examined is based on open standards. Second, the results suggest that the market under study behaves as a two-sided market in that firms able to capture market share for one product enjoy benefits in terms of both market share and price for the complement. Third, the positive price benefits of securing consumer mindshare, of supporting dominant standards, and from offering a trial product are demonstrated. Last, a negative price shock is also identified in the period after a well-known, free-pricing rival has entered the market. Nonetheless, network effects continued to remain significant during the period. These findings enhance our understanding of software markets, offer new techniques for examining such markets, and suggest the wisdom of allocating resources to develop advantages in the factors studied.
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
Moore, G. C., & Benbasat, I. (1991) · Information Systems Research · doi:10.1287/isre.2.3.192 · Cited by 9,150
Regression Diagnostics: Identifying Influential Data and Sources of Collinearity
Belsley, D. A., Kuh, E., & Welsch, R. E. (1980) · Wiley Series in Probability and Statistics · doi:10.1002/0471725153 · Cited by 7,297
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
Cited by
The Role of Artificial Intelligence and Data Network Effects for Creating User Value
Gregory, R. W., Henfridsson, O., Kaganer, E., & Kyriakou, H. (2021) · Academy of Management Review · doi:10.5465/amr.2019.0178 · Cited by 540
Zhu, K., Kraemer, K. L., Gurbaxani, V., & Xu, S. X. (2006) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.2307/25148771 · Cited by 500
Effects of Freemium Strategy in the Mobile App Market: An Empirical Study of Google Play
Liu, C. Z., Au, Y. A., & Choi, H. S. (2014) · Journal of Management Information Systems · doi:10.1080/07421222.2014.995564 · Cited by 274
Song, P., Xue, L., Rai, A., & Zhang, C. (2018) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.25300/misq/2018/13737 · Cited by 273
Liminal movement by digital platform‐based sharing economy ventures: The case of Uber Technologies
Garud, R., Kumaraswamy, A., Roberts, A., & Xu, L. (2022) · Strategic Management Journal · doi:10.1002/smj.3148 · Cited by 274
Metadata
- Authors
- Gallaugher, J. M., & Wang, Y.-M.
- Venue
- MIS Quarterly
- Publisher
- MIS Quarterly
- Published
- 2002-12-01
- Volume
- 26
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 303-327
- ISSN
- 0276-7783 (ISSN-L)
- 2162-9730
- OpenAlex
- W2147881652
- Cited by
- 263
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 24.38
- 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
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.