Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Article (40)
- Part of Periodical (2)
- Book (1)
- Contribution to a Periodical (1)
Has Fulltext
- yes (44)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (44)
Keywords
- Corporate Finance (2)
- Tax (2)
- pricing (2)
- Advertising (1)
- App Tracking Transparency Framework (1)
- Apple (1)
- Audience Segments (1)
- Automated Feedback (1)
- Brand focus (1)
- CCPA (1)
Institute
Digitale Technologien begünstigen den Einsatz einer dynamischen Preisgestaltung, also von Preisen, die für ein prinzipiell gleiches Produkt unangekündigt variieren. Dabei werden in der öffentlichen Diskussion unterschiedliche Ausgestaltungsformen dynamischer Preise oftmals vermischt, was eine sinnvolle Analyse der Vor- und Nachteile der dynamischen Preisgestaltung erschwert. Das Ziel des Beitrags ist die Darstellung der ökonomischen Grundlagen und die Diskussion sowie Klassifikation der Ausgestaltungsmöglichkeiten der dynamischen Preisgestaltung. Darüber hinaus erfolgt eine Bewertung der Vor- und Nachteile der dynamischen Preisgestaltung aus Käufer- und Verkäufersicht. Abschließend werden Implikationen für die betriebswirtschaftliche Forschung diskutiert.
A common element of market structure analysis is the spatial representation of firms’ competitive positions on maps. Such maps typically capture static snapshots in time. Yet, competitive positions tend to change. Embedded in such changes are firms’ trajectories, that is, the series of changes in firms’ positions over time relative to all other firms in a market. Identifying these trajectories contributes to market structure analysis by providing a forward-looking perspective on competition, revealing firms’ (re)positioning strategies and indicating strategy effectiveness. To unlock these insights, we propose EvoMap, a novel dynamic mapping framework that identifies firms’ trajectories from high-frequency and potentially noisy data. We validate EvoMap via extensive simulations and apply it empirically to study the trajectories of more than 1,000 publicly listed firms over 20 years. We find substantial changes in several firms’ positioning strategies, including Apple, Walmart, and Capital One. Because EvoMap accommodates a wide range of mapping methods, analysts can easily apply it in other empirical settings and to data from various sources.
Regulators worldwide have been implementing different privacy laws. They vary in their impact on the value for advertisers, publishers and users, but not much is known about these differences. This article focuses on three important privacy laws (i.e., General Data Protection Regulation [GDPR], California Consumer Privacy Act [CCPA] and Personal Information Protection Law [PIPL]) and compares their impact on the value for the three primary actors of the online advertising market, namely, advertisers, publishers and users. This article first compares these three privacy laws by developing a legal strictness score. It then uses the existing literature to derive the effects of the legal strictness of each privacy law on each actor’s value. Finally, it quantifies the three privacy laws’ impact on each actor’s value. The results show that GDPR and PIPL are similar and stricter than CCPA. Stricter privacy laws bring larger negative changes to the value for actors. As a result, both GDPR and PIPL decrease the actors’ value more substantially than CCPA. These value declines are the largest for publishers and are rather similar for users and advertisers. Scholars and practitioners can use our findings to explore ways to create value for multiple actors under various privacy laws.
Customer loyalty is a critical measure for success, showing if a firm's product is received well by its customers. To understand its development over time, two fundamental questions must be answered: (I) How will current customers' loyalty develop, and (II) will new customers' loyalty differ from current customers' loyalty? The authors empirically answer these questions based on a data set including ~500 B2B web technologies with jointly ~325 million customers spanning over 24 years. They show that loyalty hardly develops and, if so, it rather decreases than increases. The loyalty of current customers rarely changes and, if so, rather increases than decreases. New customers are most likely less loyal than current customers. These results show that by failing to account for these underlying developments, stakeholders, in most cases, draw the wrong conclusions about product value measured via customer lifetime value.