Competitive Manufacturers Product-Sharing Strategies: P2P Sharing or B2C Sharing?

With the rapid development of the sharing economy, many traditional manufacturers gravitate toward the paradigm shift to embrace product/service sharing with B2C (i.e., business-to-consumer) and P2P (i.e., peer-to-peer) sharing models. We develop a duopoly model to investigate the strategic decisions of competing manufacturers regarding three product-sharing strategies: no-sharing (i.e., sales-only), P2P sharing (i.e., sharing products on a P2P platform in addition to sales), and B2C sharing (i.e., renting products with add-ons on a B2C platform in addition to sales). The findings reveal that P2P sharing and B2C sharing play distinct roles in a competitive environment. P2P sharing has a scale effect, incentivizing manufacturers to expand market share and increase profitability. B2C sharing has a price discrimination effect, enabling the high-quality manufacturer to enhance price competitiveness and achieve higher profits. Moreover, the equilibrium outcomes for manufacturers depend on the quality difference and the add-on value. When the add-on value is low and the quality difference is high, both manufacturers prefer the P2P sharing strategy. Otherwise, manufacturers are more inclined to differentiate their sharing strategies, with the low-quality manufacturer favoring P2P sharing and the high-quality manufacturer preferring B2C sharing. Furthermore, compared with manufacturers adopting the no-sharing strategy, the low-quality manufacturer and the high-quality manufacturer are in (i) a lose–win situation when both adopt the P2P strategy; (ii) a win–win situation when manufacturers prefer the differentiated strategy. Notably, irrespective of the sharing strategy adopted, consumer surplus and social welfare are invariably augmented relative to the no-sharing scenario. The relative magnitudes of consumer surplus and social welfare under different equilibrium strategies are influenced by the quality difference and the add-on value. By extending the model, we derive further insights and demonstrate that the main results are robust under some conditions.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Production and Operations Management
Published
2025-04-18
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/10591478251331407
Citations
4
Primary Topic
Sharing Economy and Platforms
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
8.29

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Competitive Manufacturers Product-Sharing Strategies: P2P Sharing or B2C Sharing?

Min Huang, Lin Tian, Xiaohang Yue, Yu Zhang
4 citations
Production and Operations Management
Sharing Economy and Platforms
8.29
article

Competitive Manufacturers Product-Sharing Strategies: P2P Sharing or B2C Sharing?

Min Huang, Lin Tian, Xiaohang Yue, Yu Zhang
article en
4 citations

Abstract

With the rapid development of the sharing economy, many traditional manufacturers gravitate toward the paradigm shift to embrace product/service sharing with B2C (i.e., business-to-consumer) and P2P (i.e., peer-to-peer) sharing models. We develop a duopoly model to investigate the strategic decisions of competing manufacturers regarding three product-sharing strategies: no-sharing (i.e., sales-only), P2P sharing (i.e., sharing products on a P2P platform in addition to sales), and B2C sharing (i.e., renting products with add-ons on a B2C platform in addition to sales). The findings reveal that P2P sharing and B2C sharing play distinct roles in a competitive environment. P2P sharing has a scale effect, incentivizing manufacturers to expand market share and increase profitability. B2C sharing has a price discrimination effect, enabling the high-quality manufacturer to enhance price competitiveness and achieve higher profits. Moreover, the equilibrium outcomes for manufacturers depend on the quality difference and the add-on value. When the add-on value is low and the quality difference is high, both manufacturers prefer the P2P sharing strategy. Otherwise, manufacturers are more inclined to differentiate their sharing strategies, with the low-quality manufacturer favoring P2P sharing and the high-quality manufacturer preferring B2C sharing. Furthermore, compared with manufacturers adopting the no-sharing strategy, the low-quality manufacturer and the high-quality manufacturer are in (i) a lose–win situation when both adopt the P2P strategy; (ii) a win–win situation when manufacturers prefer the differentiated strategy. Notably, irrespective of the sharing strategy adopted, consumer surplus and social welfare are invariably augmented relative to the no-sharing scenario. The relative magnitudes of consumer surplus and social welfare under different equilibrium strategies are influenced by the quality difference and the add-on value. By extending the model, we derive further insights and demonstrate that the main results are robust under some conditions.

Production and Operations ManagementVol. 34(12)
Fudan University (CN), University of Wisconsin–Milwaukee (US), Northeastern University (CN)
Northeastern University
Openalex Percentile: Top 3%
Sharing Economy and Platforms
8.29
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.