English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Two firms produce a product that can be of high or low quality, which is not known to customers. One of the firms accuses another that it produces a low-quality product, while this information (or rumour) can be either true or not. Consumers believe rumours with some probability, but if they believe, they may also conclude that general quality in the market is low. I show that, as long as both firms stay in the market, the firm that spreads rumours is worse off relative to the case without rumours. Surprisingly, this holds even if consumers believe that this firm produces a high-quality product with certainty.

‘A plague on both your houses’: why to preserve your rival reputation