Score contribution per author:
α: calibrated so average coauthorship-adjusted count equals average raw count
We analyze alternative ways to assign the default position for digital goods like search engines. When two competing firms vie for the default through bidding, the higher‐quality firm typically wins but delivers lower utility than the rival due to heightened monetization from exploiting consumer switching costs. The distribution of consumer switching costs plays a crucial role in driving the bidding outcome and welfare results. Paradoxically, increasing via regulation the rival's default share tends to raise profit and harm consumers, at least in the short run. Letting consumers choose the default benefits them in the short run, but harms the weaker firm.