英语论文网

to merchant as merchant service fee. Merchants prices their goods and services at a higher level and pass a portion of their costs to the consumers. The interchange rates determined by the banks which are members of the payment systems with four party schemes show a very similar effect with horizontal agreements. As a result of this situation, the exchange rate has been exposed to criticism and complaints of many customer groups. According to the merchants, the interchange fee is an unfair payment and has a negative impact for consumers since it is reflected in the prices of goods and services. The interchange fee is defined as an unjust tax by a sector. Jointly determination of the interchange rate by the member banks forms a basis for the opinion that this fee is well above the competitive level. Interchange fee has formed the subject of monopoly lawsuits in many parts of the world and it has been even the regulatory justification of the government (Lerner et al, 2006, p.573).

Two-Sided Market Approach To Interchange Fees
Interchange fee is the one of the issues that should be considered differently in two-sided market theory. On the contrary of many competition authorities' approach, interchange fees are not cartel agreement for determining the price aimed profit maximization. Because a price-fixing cartel restricts output in order to raise prices. As a result of this situation some consumers will deprive of the product and there will be a reduction in social welfare. Termination of the cartel will lead to a decrease in prices and an increase in output. But termination of four party schemes will lead to damage to both sides of market (Lerner et al, 2006, p.613; Muris, 2005, pp.15-16).

There is an opinion that the interchange commission stabilizes the demand. According to this, in order to increase the participation in the platform, facilities such has installment shopping, bonuses and delay in installments are offered to the card holders. The costs of caused by these facilities are reflected in the customer group that causes less network externality and with a low elasticity of demand due to the nature of the two-sided markets. These costs passed to one side of the market are compensated by the sales revenues increased as a result of the expansion of the scale of the platform (Muris, 2005, p.12).

6.3. Turkish Competition Authority to the Interchange Fees
Despite considering the exchange fee as an infringement, the Competition Authority did not opt for the complete prohibition with the reason that it acts as an intermediary in providing the interaction in both sides of the market. Instead, it has set the determination of an interchange rate by the industries that have not sufficient maturity and competence such as debit card yet of which at least they can bear the cost. However, it stipulated the removal of some cost items from the calculation items to prevent this application from producing excessive load on the merchants and consumers who do not use card (Gündüz, 2009, p.59).

Summary
Two-sided markets should be analyzed in detail in terms of competition since the structure of these markets is very complex. These complexities arise from interrelated demand between two sides and indirect network externalities. The way of internalizing indirect network externalities is getting two different customer groups on board via intermediaries.

Interr