Internet shopbots are automated tools that allow customers to easily search for prices and product characteristics from online retailers. Some market observers have predicted that shopbots will benefit consumers at the expense of retailers. In this view, shopbots will radically reduce consumer search costs and reduce retailer opportunities to differentiate their products; as a result, they will drive retailer margins toward zero. However, a review of the literature suggests that while shopbots may place pressure on retailer margins in some circumstances, retailers retain numerous opportunities to differentiate their products, leverage brand names, set strategic prices, and reduce the effectiveness of consumer search at shopbots. The article closes by identifying significant questions for future research.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
“Attack of the Robots”
. 1998. The Wall Street Journal, December 7, p. R14-R14.
2.
Bailey, Joseph P. 1998a. “Intermediation and Electronic Markets: Aggregation and Pricing in Internet Commerce”. Doctoral dissertation. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge.
3.
Bailey, Joseph P.1998b. “Electronic Commerce: Prices and Consumer Issues for Three Products: Books, Compact Discs, and Software”. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development98 (4).
4.
Bakos, J. Yannis
. 1997. “Reducing Buyer Search Costs: Implications for Electronic Marketplaces”. Management Science43 (12): 1613-1630.
5.
Bakos, J. Yannis
. 1998. “The Emerging Role of Electronic Marketplaces on the Internet”. Communications of the ACM41 (8): 35-42.
6.
Baye, Michael
and John Morgan. 2001. “Information Gatekeepers on the Internet and the Competitiveness of Homogeneous Product Markets”. American Economic Review91 (3): 454-474.
7.
Bergan, Mark
, Shantanu Dutta, and Steven Mark Shugan. 1996. “Branded Variants: A Retail Perspective”. Journal of Marketing Research33 (1): 9-19.
8.
Brown, Jeffrey R.
and Austan Goolsbee. 2000. “Does the Internet Make Markets More Competitive?Evidence From the Life Insurance Industry”. Working Paper 7996. National Bureau of Economic Research, October.
9.
Brynjolfsson, Erik
and Michael Smith. 2000a. “Frictionless Commerce? A Comparison of Internet and Conventional Retailers”. Management Science46 (4): 563-585.
10.
Brynjolfsson, Erik and Michael Smith. 2000b. “The Great Equalizer? Customer Choice Behavior at Internet Shopbots”. Working Paper. Sloan School of Management, MIT, Cambridge, MA.
11.
Chen, Yuxin and K. Sudhir. 2001. “When Shopbots Meet Emails: Implications for Price Competition on the Internet”. Working Paper. New York University.
12.
Clay, Karen
, Ramayya Krishnan, and Eric Wolff. 2001. “Price Strategies on the Web: Evidence From the Online Book Industry”. Journal of Industrial Economics49 (4): 521-540.
13.
Dellaert, Benedict G. C.
and Barbara E. Kahn. 1999. “How Tolerable Is Delay? Consumers’ Evaluations of Internet Web Sites After Waiting”. Journal of Interactive Marketing13 (1): 41-54.
14.
Ellison, Glen and Sara Fisher Ellison. 2001. “Search, Obfuscation, and Price Elasticities on the Internet”. Working Paper. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge.
15.
Greenwald, Amy R.
and Jeffrey O. Kephart. 1999. “Shopbots and Pricebots”. Paper presented at the International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, July-August, Stockholm.
16.
Iyer, Ganesh and Amit Pazgal. 2001. “Internet Shopping Agents: Virtual Co-Location and Competition”. Working Paper. University of California at Berkeley.
17.
Johnson, Eric J., Wendy Moe, Peter Fader, Steven Bellman, and Jerry Lohse. 2000. “On the Depth and Dynamics of Online Search Behavior”. Working Paper 00-019. Wharton Marketing Department, Philadelphia.
18.
Kirsner, Scott. 1999. “Shopping Bots Are Back”. Retrieved from CNN.com
19.
Konana, Prebhudev
, Alok Gupta, and Andrew B. Whinston. 2000. “Integrating User Preferences and Real-Time Workload in Information Services”. Information Systems Research11 (2): 177-196.
20.
Lynch, John G.
and Dan Ariely. 2000. “Wine Online: Search Cost Affect Competition on Price, Quality, and Distribution”. Marketing Science19 (1): 83-103.
21.
Milgrom, Paul
and John Roberts. 1986. “Price and Advertising Signals of Product Quality”. Journal of Political Economy94 (4): 796-821.
22.
Montgomery, Alan L., Kartik Hosanagar, Ramayya Krishnan, and Karen Clay. 2001. “Designing a Better Shopbot”. Working Paper. Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh.
23.
Morwitz, Vicki
, Eric A. Greenleaf, and Eric J. Johnson. 1998. “Divide and Prosper: Consumers’Reactions to Partitioned Prices”. Journal of Marketing Research35 (November): 453-463.
24.
Pan, Xing, Brian T. Ratchford, and Venkatesh Shankar. 2001. “Why Aren’t the Prices of the Same Item the Same at Me.com and You.com? Drivers of Price Dispersion Among E-Tailers”. Working Paper. University of Maryland, College Park.
25.
Salop, S.
and J. E. Stiglitz. 1982. “The Theory of Sales: A Simple Model of Equilibrium Price Dispersion With Identical Agents”. American Economic Review72 (5): 1121-1130.
26.
Shugan, Steven M.1980. “The Cost of Thinking”. Journal of Consumer Research7 (September): 99-111.
27.
Smith, Michael
, Joseph Bailey, and Erik Brynjolfsson. 2000. “Understanding Digital Markets”. In Understanding the Digital Economy. Eds. Erik Brynjolfsson and Brian Kahin. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 99-136.
28.
Smith, Michael
and Erik Brynjolfsson. 2001. “Customer Decision-Making at an Internet Shopbot: Brand Matters”. Journal of Industrial Economics49 (4): 541-558.
29.
Stahl, Dale O.1989. “Oligopolistic Pricing With Sequential Consumer Search”. American Economic Review79 (4): 700-712.
30.
Tedeschi, Bob
. 2001. “E-Commerce Report: Comparison Sites Struggling as Well”. The New York Times, February 5.
31.
Urban, Glen L., Fareena Sultan, and William Qualls. 1999. “Design and Evaluation of a Trust Based Advisor on the Internet”. Working Paper. Sloan School of Management, MIT, Cambridge, MA.
32.
Varian, Hal R.1980. “A Model of Sales”. American Economic Review70 (4): 651-659.
33.
Wernerfelt, Birger
. 1988. “Umbrella Branding as a Signal of New Product Quality: An Example of Signaling by Posting a Bond”. RAND Journal of Economics19 (3): 458-466.
