To Share or Not to Share? The Optimal Technology Investment in a Virtual Product Supply Chain

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

a) I suggest that the author make appropriate changes to the abstract, keeping in mind that most readers will read your full paper if they are interested in what you write in the abstract. Therefore he needs to be attractive.

b) Moving towards the 'Introduction' part, which is fine but authors have to justify the  importance of the article in context to their proposed title that why it is necessary.

c) The literature review section, which the authors have divided into four sections according to categories, is fine, but the lack of discussion related to the technical level of the study or the methodology can make it difficult for the non-specialist reader to understand the paper. Also, the authors should include more literature comparisons to compare where your study differs from these papers in the analysis of the results.

d) Methodology of the article is clear and justified from the literature. Better to cite latest and relevant studies from similar topic.

e) There is extensive English revision required.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The article is interesting and well-structured. The research methodology is presented correctly, the scientific element of the research is emphasized, the scientific considerations are presented in a clear and understandable way.

Please note the following:

Wrong style of citing literature

There is an incorrect passage in the text that needs to be removed, lines 29-37

Unreadable drawings - e.g. fig. 2

Mathematical formulas as a continuity of a text - it is worth exposing them in a separate line

Are all items in the attachment necessary? In my opinion, it is worth choosing and presenting only the key ones, because the attachment is very long

References repeat the names of the same authors excessively, as if other researchers did not deal with this topic, it is worth extending the review to include other studies

 

After removing the "strange fragments", improving the editing and quality of the drawings and supplementing the references, the article is ready for publication

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf