IRMA-International.org: Creator of Knowledge
Information Resources Management Association
Advancing the Concepts & Practices of Information Resources Management in Modern Organizations

Evolutionary Stages of e-Tailers and Retailers: Firm Value Determinants Model

Evolutionary Stages of e-Tailers and Retailers: Firm Value Determinants Model
View Sample PDF
Author(s): Jae K. Lee (Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology, Korea), Heegoo Kang (Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology, Korea), Hoe K. Lee (Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology, Korea) and Han S. Lee (iB Farm Corporation, Korea)
Copyright: 2004
Pages: 25
Source title: Advanced Topics in Global Information Management, Volume 3
Source Author(s)/Editor(s): M. Gordon Hunter (University of Lethbridge, Canada) and Felix B. Tan (Auckland University of Technology, New Zealand)
DOI: 10.4018/978-1-59140-251-0.ch010

Purchase

View Evolutionary Stages of e-Tailers and Retailers: Firm Value Determinants Model on the publisher's website for pricing and purchasing information.

Abstract

We have studied the evolutionary stages of pure e-tailers, click & mortar (C&M) and brick & mortar (B&M) retailers for three points of time: June 1999, June 2000, and June 2001. To evaluate the dynamic stages of e-tailing business as an innovative venture, we propose four stages: exploration, breakeven, growth, and maturity. The stages are measured by the impact of revenue and income on the firm value, and a regression model is adopted to formulate the model. To empirically examine the stages of e-tailers and retailers, we have collected 14 e-tailers, 112 C&M, and 75 B&M from the U.S. stock markets. According to this study, the proposed stage model explains the evolution of pure e-tailers very meaningfully. E-tailers were in the late exploration stage in 1999, breakeven stage in 2000, and growth stage in 2001. Unlike our hypothetical expectation, the stage model could not adequately explain the effect of online business to C&M. In this regard, the impact of online channel to traditional retailers was not revolutionary. In 1999 and 2000, the primary contributing factor to firm value of C&M was income, but in 2001, it was revenue. According to this result, investors were very conservative to the risky investment on the click business of traditional retailers. However, it turned out that C&M has performed better than B&M in terms of revenue, income, income/revenue, stock price, and market capitalization. It is noteworthy that the revenue effect of C&M in 2001 was significantly higher than that of B&M.

Related Content

Francisco José García-Peñalvo, Alfredo Corell, Ricardo Rivero-Ortega, María J. Rodríguez-Conde, Nicolás Rodríguez-García. © 2021. 18 pages.
Amadeo José Argüelles, Hiram David Cortés, Octavio Elias Piñal Ramirez, Oscar Alfredo Bustamante. © 2021. 31 pages.
Li Yang, Alicia García-Holgado, Fernando Martínez-Abad. © 2021. 21 pages.
Santiago González Izard, Juan Antonio Juanes Méndez. © 2021. 16 pages.
Marcos Cabezas-González, Sonia Casillas-Martín. © 2021. 23 pages.
María Goretti Alonso de Castro, Francisco José García-Peñalvo. © 2021. 23 pages.
Claudia Orozco. © 2021. 23 pages.
Body Bottom