Advertisement

The New Rivalry in Infrastructure

  • Mark A. Jamison
Part of the Studies in Industrial Organization book series (SIOR, volume 22)

Abstract

Chapter 1 explains the basic economic models that economists use to analyze utility markets. These models focus on how customer preferences, customer income, firm costs, and in-market strategic interactions constrain the choices firms make and determine the effects of firms’ choices. Chapter 1 concludes by illustrating that all of these models, with the primary exception of the Hotelling circle model, exclude strategic interactions outside the markets of the firm of interest. This exclusion affects the usefulness of these models for today’s utility markets because, as this chapter illustrates, today’s utilities operate in diverse markets and often face different sets of actual and potential rivals in each market. These diverse patterns of actual and potential rivalry, which I identify as multilateral rivalry or MLR in Chapter 1, affect firms’ choices of markets, products, quality, and prices. As I explain in Chapters 3–6, the effects on economic models are particularly pronounced in competition for the market, where policy makers have applied contestable market theory.

Keywords

Wall Street Journal Central Office Telecommunication Company Natural Monopoly Cable Television 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Endnotes

  1. 1.
    Figure 1 is adapted from Sappington and Weisman (1996, p. 22).Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    The Modification of Final Judgement (MFJ) divided the US into 160 local access transport areas or LATAs. (United States v. Western Electric Company, Inc., 525 F. Supp. 1336, 1353–7 (D. D.C. 1981); hereafter, MFJ.) Under the terms of the MFJ, Bell Operating Companies are generally prohibited from carrying calls across LATA boundaries. (MFJ, 552 F. Supp. at 229, §IV.(K).)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    International long distance has effectively provided income to governments because the companies have been state owned.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    In most countries, the cash flow from long distance to cover local network costs has been hidden because a single company provided both local and long distance.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    “Data Beats Voice on BT Lines,” Financial Times, 5 November 1998.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Adapted from Jamison (1999, p. 21). Sources: Treasury Department (1998, Tables 2, 723, 914, 921, 929, and 930); Federal Communications Commission (1998, p. 16); and Collis, Bane and Bradley (1997).Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Adapted from Jamison (1999a, p. 22).Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    “Enjoying the Convergence Game,” Financial Times, 9 June 1999.Google Scholar
  9. 10.
    “Italians Fall in Love with Mobile Phone,” Financial Times,13 August 1999. “ Adapted from Jamison (1999a, pp. 22–26).Google Scholar
  10. 12.
    “Inside the Tangles of AT&T’s Web Strategy,” The Wall Street Journal, 13 August 1999, Eastern Edition.Google Scholar
  11. 13.
    “Sprint PCS Plans Wireless Data Net, Linking Cell Phones, Access to Internet,” The Wall Street Journal, 12 August 1999, Eastern Edition.Google Scholar
  12. 14.
    “SBC will Launch Service ‘Bundles’ in Two Markets,” The Wall Street Journal, 24 August 1999, Eastern Edition.Google Scholar
  13. 15.
    Willig addressed the issue of how AT&T should price connections to its fledgling competitor, MCI. Baumol addressed the issue of how a larger rail system should price access to a competitor that wants to compete for a portion of the market.Google Scholar
  14. 16.
    Figure 5 is adapted from Porter (1985, p. 354).Google Scholar
  15. 17.
    Investments listed represent stakes greater than or equal to 20% ownership.Google Scholar
  16. 18.
    Since then, BellSouth has made several major investments in Latin American cellular markets.Google Scholar
  17. 19.
    “StarMedia to take Internet Craze to Latin America with an IPO,” The Wall Street Journal, 12 May 1999.Google Scholar
  18. 20.
    “AOL and Apple Team Up to Offer Instant Messaging,” The Wall Street Journal, 30 July 1999, Eastern Edition.Google Scholar
  19. 21.
    “Time Wamer Sells Stake in Titus,” Financial Times,2 July 1999.Google Scholar
  20. 22.
    “MediaOne Accepts $54 Billion AT&T Bid,” The Wall Street Journal, 3 May 1999, Eastern Edition.Google Scholar
  21. 23.
    “AT&T to Pay $5 Billion for IBM Network,” The Wall Street Journal, 9 December 1998, Eastern Edition.Google Scholar
  22. 24.
    “Antennae Attract Vies to Satellite TV,” The Wall Street Journal, 1 December 1998, Eastem Edition.Google Scholar
  23. 25.
    “BT, China Telecom Sign Pact,” The Wall Street Journal Europe, 15 June 1999.Google Scholar
  24. 26.
    “Mobile-Phone Companies Target Korea,” The Wall Street Journal, 9 November 1998, Eastem Edition.Google Scholar
  25. 27.
    Commonwealth Telephone Enterprise was previously a rural telephone company operating near Bell Atlantic’s exchanges.Google Scholar
  26. 28.
    “Why is Bell Atlantic Leading the Cheers for New Local Rival?” The Wall Street Journal, 13 January 1999, Eastern Edition.Google Scholar
  27. 29.
    “HK Conglomerate Confirms Stake in PLDT,” Financial Times, 3 November 1998.Google Scholar
  28. 30.
    “GTS to Purchase Esprit Telecom for $645 Million,” The Wall Street Journal, 9 December 1998, Eastern Edition.Google Scholar
  29. 31.
    “Intel Strategy Moves Ahead,” Financial Times,7 July 1999.Google Scholar
  30. 32.
    “Microsoft to Buy 11% Stake in Globo Cabo,” The Wall Street Journal, 17 August 1999, Eastem Edition.Google Scholar
  31. 33.
    “Microsoft-AOL War heats Up Over Net Access,” The Wall Street Journal, 5 August 1999, Eastern Edition.Google Scholar
  32. 34.
    “Microsoft Invests $200 Million in Qwest,” The Wall Street Journal, 15 December 1998, Eastem Edition.Google Scholar
  33. 35.
    “Enjoying the Convergence Game,” Financial Times, 9 June 1999.Google Scholar
  34. 36.
    Qwest Communications International is a new entrant that initially provided international fiber optic networks.Google Scholar
  35. 37.
    “Qwest is Set to Announce Accord with KPMG for Services on Web,” The Wall Street Journal, 21 June 1999, Eastern Edition.Google Scholar
  36. 38.
    “Qwest Agrees to Invest $90 Million for Stake in Advanced Radio,” The Wall Street Journal, 2 June 1999, Eastern Edition.Google Scholar
  37. 39.
    “Cablevision Files Suit Alleging Violations by BEC Energy Unit,” The Wall Street Journal, 15 December 1998, Eastern Edition.Google Scholar
  38. 40.
    “Enron to Unveil Pact Involving RealNetworks,” The Wall Street Journal,21 January 1999, Eastem Edition.Google Scholar
  39. 41.
    “Sony Offers Wireless Local Loop,” The Wall Street Journal Europe, 21 June 1999.Google Scholar
  40. 42.
    “Groups Sign ‘Minor’ Phone Deals in Brazil,” Financial Times, 19 January 1999.Google Scholar
  41. 43.
    “9 Telecom Takeover,” Financial Times, 29 October 1998.Google Scholar
  42. 44.
    “Telefonica, IDT Form Venture,” The Wall Street Journal Europe, 13 August 1999.Google Scholar
  43. 45.
    “Sweden, Norway Set to Sign Pact to Merge State Phone Carriers,” The Wall Street Journal, 29 March 1999, Eastern Edition.Google Scholar
  44. 46.
    “AirTouch Set to Decide Winner in $55bn Battle,” Financial Times, 16–17 January 1999.Google Scholar
  45. 47.
    Except in the case of undersea cables, investments of less than 20% ownership are omitted. An exception is made for undersea cables because large consortiums often share them.Google Scholar
  46. 48.
    “MediaOne Group and Cable & Wireless Agree Sale of One 2 One To Deutsche Telekom for Total 8.4 Billion British Pounds,” PRNewswire, 6 August 1999.Google Scholar
  47. 49.
    Adapted from Hunt and Shuttleworth (1996, p. 32).Google Scholar
  48. 50.
    Adapted from Juris (1999b, Figure 2).Google Scholar
  49. 51.
    Adapted from Juris (1999b, Figure 3).Google Scholar
  50. 52.
    “AES to Buy British Plant for $3 Billion,” The Wall Street Journal, 19 August 1999, Eastern Edition.Google Scholar
  51. 53.
    “Cablevision Files Suit Alleging Violations by BEC Energy Unit,” The Wall Street Journal, 15 December 1998, Eastern Edition.Google Scholar
  52. 54.
    “How U.S. Companies and Suharto’s Circle Electrified Indonesia,” The Wall Street Journal, 23 December 1998, Eastern Edition.Google Scholar
  53. 55.
    “AES is Planning to Buy Cilcorp for $885 Million,” The Wall Street Journal, 23 November 1998, Eastern Edition.Google Scholar
  54. 56.
    “Electricity and Natural-Gas Companies are Again Looking for Merger Partners,” The Wall Street Journal, 23 February 1999, Eastern Edition.Google Scholar
  55. 57.
    “Carolina Power & Light to Buy Florida Progress for $5.3 Billion,” The Wall Street Journal, 23 August 1999, Eastern Edition.Google Scholar
  56. 59.
    “Electricity and Natural-Gas Companies are Again Looking for Merger Partners,” The Wall Street Journal, 23 February 1999, Eastern Edition.Google Scholar
  57. 60.
    “Duke Energy, in Latin America Push, Is Buying Dominion Resources Assets,” The Wall Street Journal, 3 August 1999, Eastern Edition.Google Scholar
  58. 61.
    “Duke Energy to Buy A Controlling Stake in Salvadoran Plants,” The Wall Street Journal, 2 August 1999, Eastern Edition.Google Scholar
  59. 62.
    “Duke Energy Agrees to Buy BHP Power in a $315 Million Deal,” The Wall Street Journal, 18 December 1998, Eastern Edition.Google Scholar
  60. 63.
    “Duke Energy Agrees to Pay $1.35 Billion for Gas Unit of Union Pacific Resources,” The Wall Street Journal, 23 November 1998, Eastern Edition.Google Scholar
  61. 64.
    “El Paso Energy Corp. Has Big Power Plans in the Pipeline,” The Wall Street Journal, 26 July 1999, Eastern Edition.Google Scholar
  62. 65.
    “Enron to Unveil Pact Involving RealNetworks,” The Wall Street Journal, 21 January 1999, Eastern Edition.Google Scholar
  63. 66.
    “Water Business is Hot as more Cities Decide to Tap Private Sector,” The Wall Street Journal, 9 November 1998, Eastern Edition.Google Scholar
  64. 67.
    KeySpan is a US generator of electricity and distributor of natural gas.Google Scholar
  65. 68.
    “KeySpan Seeks to Make Telecommunications a Core Business,” The Wall Street Journal, 29 July 1999, Eastern Edition.Google Scholar
  66. 70.
    “Groups Sign ‘Minor’ Phone Deals in Brazil,” Financial Times, 19 January 1999.Google Scholar
  67. 72.
    “National Power to Build 2 U.S. Plants,” The Wall Street Journal, 6 July 1999, Eastern Edition.Google Scholar
  68. 73.
    “Electricity and Natural-Gas Companies are Again Looking for Merger Partners,” The Wall Street Journal, 23 February 1999, Eastern Edition.Google Scholar
  69. 74.
    “Scottish Power Deal could Mark Start of Utility Invasion,” The Wall Street Journal, 8 December 1998, Eastern Edition.Google Scholar
  70. 76.
    “Microturbin + fuel cell = CC-level efficiency,” Power, March/April 1999.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2000

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mark A. Jamison
    • 1
  1. 1.Public Utility Research CenterUniversity of FloridaGainesvilleUSA

Personalised recommendations