Table 23 Oct 2026From “Subsidizing one platform side can be a network design decision”

How does the card change a review decision in a worked example?

Table 2How does the card change a review decision in a worked example?

Field	Declared test	Constructed review record
Supplier cohorts	Twelve eligible supplier organizations, S01 to S12, receive the fee waiver. Twelve others, S13 to S24, meet the same stated eligibility criteria and keep the usual fee during the same window. Membership is fixed before either group registers.	Ten of twelve suppliers register in the waiver cohort; six of twelve register in the comparison cohort. This is a participation observation.
Other side and useful outcome	Ten existing buyer accounts, B01 to B10, can access both groups. Count a buyer once per group if it completes a second order from that group's suppliers during the review window. The denominator remains these ten accounts. For this constructed decision, continue only if at least six of the ten buyers make a repeat order during the thirteen-week window. This invented operating hurdle is neither a sourced benchmark nor a recommended threshold.	Four of ten buyers complete a repeat order from the waiver cohort; four of ten do so from the comparison cohort. The cohort with more supplier registrations has the same observed repeat-order buyer count.
Comparison and horizon	Observe both groups during weeks 1 to 13. The synthetic plan allows four weeks for onboarding; it declares no further adoption lag or defensive avoided-loss objective.	The thirteen-week window is complete and the declared onboarding allowance has elapsed. There is no predeclared lag that would justify extending this test.
Fee baseline and burden	The billing record retains the usual fee that would have been charged. Authorization covers at most EUR 1,200 of waived fees and 24 support hours for the waiver cohort over the whole window. Record the two units separately.	Waived fees total EUR 900; support totals 18 hours. The comparison cohort uses 9 support hours and receives no waiver. The waiver cohort remains within both authorization limits.
Quality and record trail	Count completed orders under the same acceptance definition for both groups. Link supplier and buyer IDs, commercial authorization, waiver entries and order records to the same thirteen-week window.	The constructed record contains those joins and identifies no interruption that would make the comparison unusable. It reports no quality outcome. It does not establish random assignment or eliminate selection and cross-group spillovers.
Review owner and action	The marketplace pricing lead reviews participation, repeat orders, quality, burden and the remaining identification limits together.	The observed four-of-ten repeat-order count does not meet the example's six-of-ten continuation hurdle. Stop offering this specific waiver for the next window to limit further exposure and opportunity cost, while honoring existing terms. This is a management response to a predeclared hurdle, not a conclusion about effectiveness.

Swipe or scroll horizontally if the table is wider than your screen.

Source: Table from this essay. Sources and interpretation are given in the article.

PNG4:3, 1600 × 1200, with the title, the source line and the attribution set in the image isoglu-2026-subsidizing-one-platform-side-is-a-network-design-decision-fig04.png

From the essay

Pricing & revenue architecture

Subsidizing one platform side can be a network design decision

A lower price can attract participation without creating useful network value. Name the side, response, burden, horizon, and stop rule before continuing.

3 Oct 2026

Read the essay

This exhibit belongs to an essay: the numbers live here, the argument lives there.

Cite or embed

APA 7

Isoglu, S. (2026). How does the card change a review decision in a worked example? [Table]. isoglu.com. https://isoglu.com/insights/exhibits/isoglu-2026-subsidizing-one-platform-side-is-a-network-design-decision-fig04/

BibTeX

@misc{isoglu-2026-subsidizing-one-platform-side-is-a-network-design-decision-fig04,
  author = {Isoglu, Sinan},
  title = {{How does the card change a review decision in a worked example?}},
  year = {2026},
  howpublished = {Table 2, isoglu.com},
  url = {https://isoglu.com/insights/exhibits/isoglu-2026-subsidizing-one-platform-side-is-a-network-design-decision-fig04/},
  note = {From the essay {Subsidizing one platform side can be a network design decision}}
}

Embed this exhibit

Copy this HTML to use the PNG exhibit on your site with its source line and a link back to the exhibit page.

<figure>
  <a href="https://isoglu.com/insights/exhibits/isoglu-2026-subsidizing-one-platform-side-is-a-network-design-decision-fig04/">
    <img src="https://isoglu.com/social/isoglu-2026-subsidizing-one-platform-side-is-a-network-design-decision-fig04.png" alt="Table 2: How does the card change a review decision in a worked example?" width="3200" height="2400">
  </a>
  <figcaption>Table 2: How does the card change a review decision in a worked example?. Source: Table from this essay. Sources and interpretation are given in the article. <a href="https://isoglu.com/insights/exhibits/isoglu-2026-subsidizing-one-platform-side-is-a-network-design-decision-fig04/">View exhibit</a>.</figcaption>
</figure>