Will endless choice create unlimited demand?

Article  by  Heritiana RANAIVOSON  •  Published 20.09.2010  •  Updated 11.10.2010
The Long Tail theory was born in the pages of Wired in 2004, and has had a huge impact on the analysis of online content consumption in the wake of its emergence. And now the question is, to what extent does - or might - the development of a Long Tail influence the creative industries?

Summary

Introduction

The "Long Tail theory" first appeared in 2004 in Wired, an American technology magazine. It is due to Chris Anderson, Wired’s editor-in-chief. After the publishing of the article, the theory rapidly spread and became one of the main theories used to predict the likely forthcoming influence of the Internet on content consumption and the new framework for online strategies led by content producers and distributors. Accordingly, the book, which was published in 2006, soon became a bestseller in its category[+] NoteChris Anderson, The Long Tail: Why the Future of Business is Selling Less of More, Hyperion, New York, 2006.X [1]. And a research on Google of the expression ‘long tail’ gives more than 20,000,000 hits (last accessed: 26/04/2010). The most notable effect of this success can be seen in the use of the theory by various kinds of actors, including managers, consultants and academics.
 
The theory however remains debated and is far from being accepted by all. The main issue related to the Long Tail theory is primarily: can we observe so far a long tail for online consumption of content and, if not, is there at least a trend towards it? Another crucial issue that more generally concerns the influence of the Internet is: to what extent does, or would, the development of a Long Tail influence the creative industries?
Back to summary

The Long Tail theory: why and how

Chris Anderson notes that bestsellers have dominated so far consumption practices, particularly for creative content. The situation however should change thanks to the Internet and the ongoing development of the Long Tail. The Long Tail phenomenon can be described as made of two related trends:
  • Hits are becoming less important in relative and even absolute terms. As a result, there will no longer be a monopoly of the hit, e.g. over attention, sales and profits
  • The Tail is getting longer and longer. That means that there are more and more works with a small audience, which are going to be made available (and to more and more consumers)
The products that belong to the Tail are in general not profitable enough to be distributed and marketed in the physical world. This is the Pareto principle (a.k.a. the 20/80 rule): 20% of the contents make 80% of sales (and, since there are referencing and stocking costs, represent 100% of profits). As a result in the physical world the great majority of products are not available, which constitute the Tail. For this reason some consumers cannot find the product they would enjoy. According to Anderson it is proved by the fact that as soon as one increases the diversity of supplied products, consumption spreads to a greater number of products. On the Internet there is a Tail, which is getting longer and longer.
 
 
The Long Tail is essentially the result of a technological revolution. There are basically three complementary reasons for the Internet to enable the development of the Long Tail:
  • The developments of personal computer and of the Internet, which make it more and more easy and cheap for the casual individual to produce and distribute (and also market) different kinds of content
  • The fall of costs linked to the access to products. As a result, consumers have now access to an unlimited supply
  • The possibility to aggregate enough consumers to build niches markets that are large enough. Geographical constraints are now less binding.
A direct consequence is that according to Anderson, with the Internet there is no longer an issue of scarcity. In the physical world, space is scarce, e.g. it is not possible to broadcast all songs on one radio station or to store all existing DVDs on a supermarket’s shelves. Such limitations no longer exist on the Internet. This may – and from Anderson’s point of view this will – benefit to the consumers since they have access to a greater diversity of content. As a result this will increase their consumption of content, to the benefit of content producers and distributors. The precise implication will be examined in the final section but it is easy to see that the Long Tail theory is an optimistic theory about the changes brought by the Internet.
Back to summary

Long Tail Vs Superstars

As Anderson’s thesis gained recognition in the Internet world and among academics, more and more people tried to figure out whether there was such a thing as a Long Tail, or on the contrary the Internet led to an even more importance of the bestsellers, the so-called Superstars. The latter is best explained by the Superstars theory.
 
The Superstars theory intends to explain, notably for creative content, why there can be at the same time a large variety of available products and a concentration of consumption on a very limited set of products (the so-called Superstars).
 
According to Rosen[+] NoteSherwin Rosen, (1981). “The economics of superstars”. American Economic Review 71, 845–858.X [2] two features explain the existence and the predominance of Superstars. On the one hand for some categories of products the substitutability between different products is low: a product that is only slightly better than the others will nevertheless provide far larger revenue. Rosen gives the example of surgeons: if one is just a bit better than the other ones (e.g. in terms of the rate of success) everybody wants to get operated by her/him, which allows her/him to ask for much higher fees.
 
On the other hand distribution and consumption technologies based on low marginal costs (i.e. when it costs next to nothing to allow one more consumer to consume) tend to favour Superstars by expanding their market. Thus amplification allowed live performers (e.g. singers) to play in front of bigger and bigger audiences. On the demand side when a consumer has to choose between two spectacles, one is going to choose the one that is (even slightly) better. If all consumers choose the same spectacle, in the end it gets huge revenues and its competitor far lower revenues. The main limitation of Rosen’s approach is that it relies on the assumption that all consumers know and agree on which products are the best ones.
 
With a very different approach Adler[+] NoteMosh Adler (1985), “Stardom and talent”, American Economic Review 75, 208–212.X [3] argues that every consumer needs to consume the same products as the others because the satisfaction related to their consumption increases with their knowledge of the products. The primary reason is that consumers are uncertain about the quality of the products. As a result the product for which there is the most (and possibly but not necessarily positive) information available is the most likely to be consumed.
 
An interesting point here is that consumption in turn brings information on the product’s quality: all this reinforces the Superstar’s notoriety and success. Information is thus at the core of Adler’s approach of the Superstar’s theory. Such an idea has been since deepened by the theory of informational cascades[+] NoteBikhchandani, Sushil, Hirshleifer, David, Welch, Ivo (1992), “A Theory of Fads, Fashion, Custom, and Cultural Change as Informational Cascades”, The Journal of Political Economy, 100, 5, 992-1026.X  or by Frank and Cook’s book[+] NoteFrank, Robert .H., Cook, Philip .J. (1995), The Winner-Take-All Society, The Free Press, New York.X [4].
 
Having published their research papers in the eighties neither Rosen nor Adler could foresee the impact of the Internet on the Superstars. However the digital technologies allow a decrease of marginal costs and thus, according to Rosen’s arguments, favour concentration of consumption. On the other hand, using Adler’s approach, the Internet may favour the Superstars by allowing an even greater amount of information on them to circulate at a greater pace. In every case Internet would favour a concentration of consumption on a restricted set of products, which is quite the contrary of the Long Tail theory.
Back to summary

Empirical confirmations of a tendency towards a Long Tail and some critical assessments

Starting from such antagonistic predictions on the impact of the Internet on the consumption of creative content, and following the success of the Long Tail theory, many studies have been conducted to address its relevance. A representative sample of them is summed in the end table.
 
Some studies conclude that the Long Tail phenomenon can be observed for some sectors. Thus Anderson used data on online sales of digitized music tracks (on Rhapsody), DVDs (on Netflix) and books (on Amazon). In all cases, he finds that the Long Tail (i.e. the products that are not available in offline retail stores) represents an important share of sales. Thus Long Tail music tracks, DVDs and books represent respectively 40%, 21% and 25% of sales. Moreover these shares are expected to grow as time goes by.
 
Such results are confirmed, with some nuances, by Elberse and Oberholzer-Gee[+] NoteAnita Elberse and Felix Oberholzer-Gee. "Superstars and Underdogs: An Examination of the Long Tail Phenomenon in Video Sales.", Harvard Business School Working Paper, No. 07-015, 2006.X [5] for sales of video; by Leskovec et al.[+] NoteJure Leskovec, Lada A. Adamic, and Bernardo A. Huberman, 2007. "The dynamics of viral marketing", ACM Trans. Web, 1, 1, Article 5 (May 2007), 39 pages.X [6] for online sales of recommended books, DVDs, music and video in VHS; by the online music site e-music[+] NoteeMusic Sales Data Supports "Long Tail" Concept Approximately 75% of Tracks Sold in 2008; Catalogue Crosses Five Million, Marketwire, 15 Jan 2009.X [7] and by Benghozi[+] NotePierre-Jean Benghozi, "Effet Long Tail ou effet podium : une analyse empirique des ventes de produits culturels en France", Mars 2008. The author also discusses the fact that the Long Tail would get a more significant share at particular times of the year according to the types of good and of retail outlet, i.e. the Long Tail phenomenon for videos is emphasized during the winter for offline sales and during spring for online sales.X [8] on the French case for sales of CD and DVD.
 
On the other hand, there have been some critical assessments. Chief economist at PRS for Music (the royalty collection in the UK), Page expressed repeatedly doubts on the validity of the Long Tail theory when applied to the recording industry. He notably showed the absence of a Long Tail for sales of digitized music tracks as well as for swaps on peer-to-peer networks (see the following graph). Benhamou shows that the Internet had not a great impact on book sales in France in 2005[+] NoteFrançoise Benhamou, "Éléments de réflexion et propositions à propos de la diversité culturelle, rapport pour le Groupe d’analyse stratégique des industries culturelles", (Gasic)/DEPS, janvier 2008.X [9]. Most of all there was no major change in the structure of sales. Such researches are very interesting but flawed by the kind of data they rely on, either very restricted like for Benhamou or not clearly defined like for Page.
 

Page’s arguments: there is a Long Tail neither for legal singles downloads nor for illegal P2P swaps
 
A very interesting counterargument comes from Elberse[+] NoteAnita Elberse, "Should you invest in the Long Tail?", Harvard Business Review, 2008.X [10]. She shows that although the Tail is getting longer (i.e. more titles are available and consumed at least once), transactions are very concentrated online and sometimes even more than offline, e.g. 1% of all titles on Rhapsody represent 32% of all plays. A reason however is that the number of available products is so huge that it appears very concentrated in relative terms (i.e. in percentages) while it is not so much in absolute terms (i.e. in number of titles). Thus 1% of all titles on Rhapsody represent around 10,000 different titles, which is far more than what is broadcast on any radio during, say, one month.
 
As a result studies seem to show a tendency towards the development of a Long Tail for the creative industries. It is therefore interesting to try to cast a glance at the implications of the Long Tail on the creative industries.
Back to summary

The forthcoming implications of the Long Tail

The impact of the Long Tail on the creative industries is intrinsically related to some features of every industry such as the importance of digitization and dematerialization for the industry. Thus a Long Tail is more likely to be observed for MP3 than for CD; but also for the recording industry than for the film industry since digital revenues account for 27% of all revenues for recorded music against 5% for film. It is worth however considering what the implications of the Long Tail theory are for the creative industries and notably what could be the winners and the losers of the development of a Long Tail.
 
For the Long Tail theory to be working there should be devices designed to help the consumers searching for information. In other words one needs filters that bring them what one was looking for or what one will enjoy discovering. In the offline world one of the main filters for content is advertising and more generally all signalling activities, i.e. the products that are going to be selected (e.g. published, released, broadcast) are generally the ones that stand forward for some reason (e.g. the notoriety of their creator, the use of costly special effects for a movie).
 
The Internet gives far more means than before to discover new products not only because of the great diversity of available content but also because search costs are lower and it has become easier to sample pieces of content. Devices to find or discover information on creative content include search engines, sampling (for example with movie trailers), word of mouth (e.g. through blogs) and recommendation systems based on the opinions or the behaviours of other consumers.
 
Consumers gain thus an access to a greater diversity of products, which allows them to fulfil their need for diversity or to find the product that is the closest to their preferences. As a result consumers are the first (and the most obvious) beneficiaries of the Long Tail. This will however rely on the kind of devices they will use to find products. Thus Google’s ranking depends on (among others) the popularity of the page. Its use might thus lead in fact to more concentration of consumption.
 
Another very important concern is how the Long Tail could be used from the suppliers’ point of view. A common mistake is to believe that, thanks to the Long Tail, every independent producer or distributor is going to thrive on the Internet. This is neither what Anderson claims nor what one could deduce of his idea. In fact their situation is only going to slightly improve. The Long Tail notably implies for them:
  • they are going to be able at a very low cost to keep informed previous customers;
  • they will benefit from lower production and distribution costs;
  • they will be less subject to market exclusion because of physical scarcity.
From an economic point of view, the real winners should be the aggregators, i.e. the firms that group a great diversity of goods and services, making them available to consumers and most of all helping them to choose among this diversity. These are for example iTunes, Amazon or Youtube. The main reason is their ability to bundle: they should be the most capable of appealing to a lot of customers through bestsellers and keep them by providing them ALSO more marginal contents and products. Thus as beneficiaries of the Long Tail phenomenon, Anderson quotes Google in the way the firm earns money through advertising with a more and more important place for advertisers (and related keywords) that each address a relatively low amount of people.
Back to summary

Conclusion

As a conclusion the Long Tail theory relies on a few paradoxes. First its success – considering Anderson’s thesis – might not be the least, as Anderson himself recognizes. Formulated by a journalist it has led to several researches led by scholars. Most of all, its starting points were very common ones, i.e. the role of technology and the importance of information in consumers’ choice. However Anderson turned these starting points upside down to promote his view of a near future when endless choice has created an unlimited demand. Not only is such an outcome economically and culturally appealing. It is also a perceptible trend.
Back to summary

Selected References

Moshe Adler, (1985). "Stardom and talent" in American Economic Review 75, 208–212.
Crhis Anderson, The Long Tail: Why the Future of Business is Selling Less of More, Hyperion, New York, 2006.
Pierre-Jean Benghozi, Long Tail ou effet podium : une analyse empirique des ventes de produits culturels en France, Mars 2008.
Françoise Benhamou, Éléments de réflexion et propositions à propos de la diversité culturelle, rapport pour le Groupe d’analyse stratégique des industries culturelles (Gasic)/DEPS, janvier 2008.
E. Brynjolfsson, Yu Hu and Michael D. Smith, Consumer Surplus in the Digital Economy: Estimating the Value of Increased Product Variety at Online Booksellers, Management Science, 2003.
Anita Elberse, "Should you invest in the Long Tail?", Harvard Business Review, 2008.
Anita Elberse, Anita, and Felix Oberholzer-Gee. "Superstars and Underdogs: An Examination of the Long Tail Phenomenon in Video Sales." Harvard Business School Working Paper, No. 07-015, 2006
Robert H. Frank,  Philip J. Cook, (1995), The Winner-Take-All Society, The Free Press, New York.
Will Page, Eric Garland (2009), “The long tail of P2P”, Economic Insight, PRS for Music, 14, 14.05.09.
Sherwin Rosen, (1981), “The economics of superstars”, American Economic Review 71, 845–858.
 
Industry
Period
Country
What is measured?
Reference
Developed thesis (in relation to the Long Tail theory)
Publishing
2001-2003
Usa
Offline and online (on Amazon) sales of books
Brynjolffson et al. (2003)[+] NoteE. Brynjolfsson, Yu Hu and Michael D. Smith, Consumer Surplus in the Digital Economy: Estimating the Value of Increased Product Variety at Online Booksellers, Management Science, 2003.X [11]
A significant portion of online sales come from unique products that are not available in brick-and-mortar stores. While the 80/20 rule fits the distribution of product sales quite well in offline stores, for online stores it is rather 72/28. In the end unique products will find new consumers online and will become more and more profitable. In other words the tail will become longer and fatter.
Video, recording, publishing, etc.
mid-2000's
Usa
Online sales of digitized music tracks (on Rhapsody), DVDs (on Netflix) and books (on Amazon)
Anderson (2006)[+] NoteChirs Anderson, The Long Tail: Why the Future of Business is Selling Less of More, Hyperion, New York, 2006.X [12]
The Long Tail (products that are not available in offline retail stores) represents an important and growing share of sales (and of profits), e.g. 40% for music tracks, 21% for DVDs and 25% for books.
Video
Jan 2000 - August 2005
Usa
Sales of a sample of 3700 titles in DVD format and (partly overlapping) 3000 titles in VHS format
Elberse and Oberholzer-Gee (2006)[+] NoteAnita Elberse and Felix Oberholzer-Gee, "Superstars and Underdogs: An Examination of the Long Tail Phenomenon in Video Sales.", Harvard Business School Working Paper, No. 07-015, 2006.X [13]
There is a long tail effect in that the number of titles that sell only a few copies every week increases although there is a substantial increase in the number of non-selling titles. Also among the best-performing titles it is an ever-smaller number of films that accounts for the bulk of sales. However while sales decrease for all films this effect is more pronounced among best-selling titles.
Publishing
Sept 2005 - April 2006
Usa
Online daily sales of 3210 books across all major book categories (on Amazon.com and Barnes & Noble.com)
Ghose and Gu (2006)[+] NoteAnindya Ghose and Bin Gu, “Search Costs, Demand Structure and Long Tail in Electronic Markets: Theory and Evidence”, NET Institute Working Paper #06-19, October 2006.X [14]
Search costs vary significantly across online retailers (for unidntified reasons). Search costs for unpopular books are much higher than popular books. Amazon could benefit substantially more from price decreases than Barnes & Noble due to relatively lower search cost of price information incurred by consumers: more incentive for Amazon to reduce prices on unpopular books and then take advantage of the Long Tail. Actually the average price for unpopular books is significantly lower at Amazon. Online bookstores may be better off reducing search costs for unpopular books to take advantage of the emerging Long Tail.
Television
1950's - Today
Usa
The number of available TV Channels
Bear Stearns (2007)[+] NoteBear Stearns, Entertainment Industry. A Longer Look at the Long Tail, June 2007.X [15]
As the number of TV channels increased, overall demand also increased but more slowly, hits became less bigger (in terms of audience), the demand went more towards the tail (channels other than the Big 3), with the tail (Ad-supported cable) becoming more important than the Big 3. Analogy with nowadays' situation, especially as far as UGC is concerned.
-
-
-
Simulation of the influence of recommenders on sales diversity
Fleter and Hosanagar (2007)[+] NoteDaniel M Fleder, Kartik Hosanagar, “Blockbuster Culture’s Next Rise or Fall: The Impact of Recommender Systems on Sales Diversity”, NET Institute Working Paper #07-10, September 2007.X [16]
Recommender systems (as designed in the simulation) tend to concentrate sales. Among the possible explanations: diversity may increase at the individual level and decrease in aggregate / recommenders may increase concentration in the newer world of search and many offerings but reduce it relative to an older world of bestseller lists and featured products.
Video, recording and publishing
June 5 2001 - May 16 2003
Usa
Online sales of books, DVDs, music and videos according to recommendations (and only these sales through the recommendation system)
Leskovec et al. (2007)[+] NoteJure Leskovec, Lada A. Adamic, and Bernardo A. Huberman, 2007. "The dynamics of viral marketing".ACM Trans. Web, 1, 1, Article 5 (May 2007), 39 pages.X [17]
A significant portion of sales come from products that sell very few times. Top 100: 11,4% of all sales; top 1000: 27%; 67% of the products have only a single purchase and they account for 30% af all sales.
Wedding industry
June - Sept 2006
Usa
The number of clicks on the different wedding vendors listed on a website dedicated to the organization of weddings
Tucker and Zhang (2007)[+] NoteChris Tucker and Jianhua Zhang, “Long Tail or Sleep Tail? A Field Investigation into How Online Popularity Information Affects the Distribution of Customer Choices”, MIT Sloan School Paper 4655-07, 2007.X [18]
A steep tail effect: customers are more likely to click on the most popular vendors when the popularity information is publicized and made salient through ranking the vendors on the page by popularity. This effect complements rather than competes with the long tail effect.
Recording and video
2002 - 2005
France
Online and offline sales of CD and DVD
Benghozi (2008)[+] NotePierre-Jean Benghozi, Long Tail ou effet podium : une analyse empirique des ventes de produits culturels en France, Mars 2008.X [19]
For the CDs, hits sell more offline than online; more obscure titles are sold online. Increasing Long Tail effect for online sales of CDs compared to offline. DVD sales are less concentrated online compared to offline
Publishing
2005
France
Sales of the 693 books of the 2005 publishing season
Benhamou (2008)[+] NoteFrançoise Benhamou, Éléments de réflexion et propositions à propos de la diversité culturelle, rapport pour le Groupe d’analyse stratégique des industries culturelles, (Gasic)/DEPS, janvier 2008.X [20]
Online sales stand as a very limited share of sales only and the Internet does not bring major changes in the structure of sales
Recording and video
3 months in 2006 (Rhapsody); 6 months in 2006 (Quickflix); Jan 2005 - April 2007 (Nielsen SoundScan)
Usa
Plays of music tracks (on Rhapsody); sales of recordings (Nielsen SoundScan); rentals of DVDs (on Quickflix)
Elberse (2008)[+] NoteAnita Elberse, "Should you invest in the Long Tail?", Harvard Business Review, 2008.X [21]
The Tail is getting longer (more titles are available and consumed at least once). However digital transactions are concentrated (e.g. The top 1% - around 10,000 titles - represent 32% of all plays on Rhapsody; the top 1% - around 160 titles - represent 18% of all rentals in Quickflix. Digital transactions can be even more concentrated than physical ones (e.g. according to Nielsen Soundscan in relative terms).
Recording
n/a
UK
Online sales of a sample of digitized music tracks (no information on the outlet)
 80% of the tracks sold nothing at all. Moreover, approximately 80% of sales revenue came from around 3% of the tracks that sold at least once. Finally, only 40 tracks sold more than 100,000 copies, accounting for 8% of the business.
Recording
n/a
n/a
Music files swapped on peer-to-peer networks
Page and Garland (2009)[+] NoteWill Page and Eric Garland, (2009), “The long tail of P2P”, Economic Insight, PRS for Music, 14, 14.05.09.X [22]
In the P2P market observed by BigChampagne, 95% of the inventory accounted for only 20% of the swaps.
Recording
n/a
n/a
Sales of music tracks on mobile phones (by 24/7 Entertainment)
Van Buskirk (2008)[+] NoteEliot Van Buskirk, "Does The Long Tail Apply to Mobile Music?", Wired, 2008.X [23]
24/7 Entertainment provides 4.5 million songs to mobile music services. 66% of those songs have never been purchased or downloaded.
Recording
2008
Worldwide
Online sales of music tracks on eMusic
75% of eMusic's five millions tracks sold at least once during 2008 based on a recent analysis of worldwide sales data.
Back to summary
  • 1. Chris Anderson, The Long Tail: Why the Future of Business is Selling Less of More, Hyperion, New York, 2006.
  • 2. Sherwin Rosen, (1981). “The economics of superstars”. American Economic Review 71, 845–858.
  • 3. Mosh Adler (1985), “Stardom and talent”, American Economic Review 75, 208–212.
  • 4. Frank, Robert .H., Cook, Philip .J. (1995), The Winner-Take-All Society, The Free Press, New York.
  • 5. Anita Elberse and Felix Oberholzer-Gee. "Superstars and Underdogs: An Examination of the Long Tail Phenomenon in Video Sales.", Harvard Business School Working Paper, No. 07-015, 2006.
  • 6. Jure Leskovec, Lada A. Adamic, and Bernardo A. Huberman, 2007. "The dynamics of viral marketing", ACM Trans. Web, 1, 1, Article 5 (May 2007), 39 pages.
  • 7. eMusic Sales Data Supports "Long Tail" Concept Approximately 75% of Tracks Sold in 2008; Catalogue Crosses Five Million, Marketwire, 15 Jan 2009.
  • 8. Pierre-Jean Benghozi, "Effet Long Tail ou effet podium : une analyse empirique des ventes de produits culturels en France", Mars 2008. The author also discusses the fact that the Long Tail would get a more significant share at particular times of the year according to the types of good and of retail outlet, i.e. the Long Tail phenomenon for videos is emphasized during the winter for offline sales and during spring for online sales.
  • 9. Françoise Benhamou, "Éléments de réflexion et propositions à propos de la diversité culturelle, rapport pour le Groupe d’analyse stratégique des industries culturelles", (Gasic)/DEPS, janvier 2008.
  • 10. Anita Elberse, "Should you invest in the Long Tail?", Harvard Business Review, 2008.
  • 11. E. Brynjolfsson, Yu Hu and Michael D. Smith, Consumer Surplus in the Digital Economy: Estimating the Value of Increased Product Variety at Online Booksellers, Management Science, 2003.
  • 12. Chirs Anderson, The Long Tail: Why the Future of Business is Selling Less of More, Hyperion, New York, 2006.
  • 13. Anita Elberse and Felix Oberholzer-Gee, "Superstars and Underdogs: An Examination of the Long Tail Phenomenon in Video Sales.", Harvard Business School Working Paper, No. 07-015, 2006.
  • 14. Anindya Ghose and Bin Gu, “Search Costs, Demand Structure and Long Tail in Electronic Markets: Theory and Evidence”, NET Institute Working Paper #06-19, October 2006.
  • 15. Bear Stearns, Entertainment Industry. A Longer Look at the Long Tail, June 2007.
  • 16. Daniel M Fleder, Kartik Hosanagar, “Blockbuster Culture’s Next Rise or Fall: The Impact of Recommender Systems on Sales Diversity”, NET Institute Working Paper #07-10, September 2007.
  • 17. Jure Leskovec, Lada A. Adamic, and Bernardo A. Huberman, 2007. "The dynamics of viral marketing".ACM Trans. Web, 1, 1, Article 5 (May 2007), 39 pages.
  • 18. Chris Tucker and Jianhua Zhang, “Long Tail or Sleep Tail? A Field Investigation into How Online Popularity Information Affects the Distribution of Customer Choices”, MIT Sloan School Paper 4655-07, 2007.
  • 19. Pierre-Jean Benghozi, Long Tail ou effet podium : une analyse empirique des ventes de produits culturels en France, Mars 2008.
  • 20. Françoise Benhamou, Éléments de réflexion et propositions à propos de la diversité culturelle, rapport pour le Groupe d’analyse stratégique des industries culturelles, (Gasic)/DEPS, janvier 2008.
  • 21. Anita Elberse, "Should you invest in the Long Tail?", Harvard Business Review, 2008.
  • 22. Will Page and Eric Garland, (2009), “The long tail of P2P”, Economic Insight, PRS for Music, 14, 14.05.09.
  • 23. Eliot Van Buskirk, "Does The Long Tail Apply to Mobile Music?", Wired, 2008.
  • 24. eMusic Sales Data Supports "Long Tail" Concept Approximately 75% of Tracks Sold in 2008; Catalogue Crosses Five Million, Marketwire, 15 Jan 2009.
Would you like to add or correct something? Contact the editorial staff