Research on Motivation and Regulation of Big Data "Slaughter" Behavior
Pages 407 - 411
Abstract
Big data "killing" as a new manifestation of price discrimination in the era of big data refers to the service provider as a party with information superiority, using the large amount of customer information flow to distinguish the pricing of each individual consumer. Consumer surplus value may be captured, which seriously reduces the level of consumer welfare. Internet companies with monopoly status such as Amazon, Didi, and Orbitz have all been expelled to adopt a pricing strategy of big data. However, the existing literature mainly discusses how to regulate big data at the legal level, and there is less discussion about big data killing itself as a kind of primary price discrimination phenomenon. This article aims to address the following two questions: 1) What is the motivation behind the vendor's big data killing strategy? 2) How to regulate from the perspective of network economics for big data killing? In the discussion of the first problem, using the mathematical modeling method to start the profit maximization by the monopolist, the local aggregation coefficient in the network is used to describe the risk of the manufacturer adopting the big data killing strategy, so that it is not adopted. The profit of the killing strategy and the expected profit of adopting the killing strategy are the motivation of the manufacturer to adopt the big data killing strategy. In the discussion of the second question, taking the comparison between the expected profit of the killing strategy and the profit under normal operation as the starting point, explore how to use the degree of communication between consumers and rationally introduce the competitive market to smash the big data. Conduct regulation. Finally, this paper studies the interdisciplinary issue and provides the relevant government departments with the idea of regulating big data killing strategies under the perspective of network economics.
References
[1]
Luce, R. Duncan, and Albert D. Perry. A method of matrix analysis of group structure[J]. Psychometrika 14.2 (1949): 95--116.
[2]
Wasserman, Stanley, and Katherine Faust. Social network analysis: Methods and applications[M]. Vol. 8. Cambridge university press, 1994.
[3]
Opsahl, Tore, and Pietro Panzarasa. Clustering in weighted networks[J]. Social networks 31.2 (2009): 155--163.
[4]
Luczkovich, Joseph J., et al. Defining and measuring trophic role similarity in food webs using regular equivalence[J]. Journal of Theoretical Biology 220.3 (2003): 303--321.
[5]
Watts, Duncan J., and Steven H. Strogatz. Collective dynamics of 'small-world' networks[J]. nature 393.6684 (1998): 440.
[6]
Coleman, James S. Social capital in the creation of human capital[J]. American journal of sociology 94 (1988): S95-S120.
[7]
Cox, Andrew. Understanding buyer and supplier power: a framework for procurement and supply competence[J]. Journal of Supply Chain Management 37.1 (2001): 8--15.
[8]
Inderst, Roman, and Christian Wey. Buyer power and supplier incentives[J]. European Economic Review 51.3 (2007): 647--667.
Index Terms
- Research on Motivation and Regulation of Big Data "Slaughter" Behavior
Recommendations
Reselling or marketplace channel? A manufacturer’s strategic decisions for differentiated brands considering channel’s service level
Highlights- A brand manufacturer has premium and economy brands with different acceptance.
- Strategic online mode decisions between reselling channel and marketplace channel.
- Manufacturer prefers hybrid mode for high brand, low service ...
AbstractBrand differentiation is an effective strategy commonly used by large-scale brand manufacturers to produce multiple brands of a particular product type. To avoid undesirable inter-brand competition, a brand manufacturer prefers to adopt multiple ...
Comments
Information & Contributors
Information
Published In

January 2020
441 pages
ISBN:9781450372947
DOI:10.1145/3377571
Copyright © 2020 ACM.
Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]
In-Cooperation
- Ritsumeikan University: Ritsumeikan University
Publisher
Association for Computing Machinery
New York, NY, United States
Publication History
Published: 03 May 2020
Check for updates
Author Tags
Qualifiers
- Research-article
- Research
- Refereed limited
Conference
IC4E 2020
IC4E 2020: 2020 the 11th International Conference on E-Education, E-Business, E-Management, and E-Learning
January 10 - 12, 2020
Osaka, Japan
Contributors
Other Metrics
Bibliometrics & Citations
Bibliometrics
Article Metrics
- 0Total Citations
- 100Total Downloads
- Downloads (Last 12 months)8
- Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0
Reflects downloads up to 08 Mar 2025
Other Metrics
Citations
View Options
Login options
Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.
Sign in