IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/itsb18/190357.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Snack-media platform market segmentation based on user heterogeneity: A Q-methodology approach

Author

Listed:
  • Kim, Suwon

Abstract

The entire media market competing for user attention is currently leaning toward snack-media, and it has become an undoubtedly important media industry sector. As its economic impacts grow, the snack-media market structure has become increasingly critical as a national concern. The near-monopolistic market, dominated by the global giant platforms, e.g. YouTube, should not be desirable for all the stakeholders in the local ICT and media industry. Given that network effects potentially reinforce the market dominance of the global giants, differentiation should be the most viable option for the local snack-media platforms. This study aims to segment the snack-media market based on user heterogeneity and to discuss corresponding strategies of the local platforms, adopting Q-methodology. The results revealed five user types, and they were located in a positioning map with two axes of the level of efficiency-pursuit and centered gratification. The local snack-media platforms' counter-strategies were suggested corresponding to the taxonomy.

Suggested Citation

  • Kim, Suwon, 2018. "Snack-media platform market segmentation based on user heterogeneity: A Q-methodology approach," 22nd ITS Biennial Conference, Seoul 2018. Beyond the boundaries: Challenges for business, policy and society 190357, International Telecommunications Society (ITS).
    • Handle: RePEc:zbw:itsb18:190357
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/190357/1/B4_1_Kim.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Carsten Hahn & Michael D. Johnson & Andreas Herrmann & Frank Huber, 2002. "Capturing Customer Heterogeneity Using A Finite Mixture Pls Approach," Schmalenbach Business Review (sbr), LMU Munich School of Management, vol. 54(3), pages 243-269, July.
    2. Evans David S., 2003. "Some Empirical Aspects of Multi-sided Platform Industries," Review of Network Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 2(3), pages 1-19, September.
    3. Banerji, A. & Dutta, Bhaskar, 2009. "Local network externalities and market segmentation," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 27(5), pages 605-614, September.
    4. Bourreau, Marc & Dogan, Pinar, 2001. "Regulation and innovation in the telecommunications industry," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 25(3), pages 167-184, April.
    5. Anthony Boardman & Shaun Hargreaves-Heap, 1999. "Network Externalities and Government Restrictions on Satellite Broadcasting of Key Sporting Events," Journal of Cultural Economics, Springer;The Association for Cultural Economics International, vol. 23(3), pages 165-179, August.
    6. Kim, Byung–Cheol & Lee, Jeongsik “Jay” & Park, Hyunwoo, 2017. "Two-sided platform competition with multihoming agents: An empirical study on the daily deals market," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 36-53.
    7. Gonçalves, Vânia & Evens, Tom & Alves, Artur Pimenta & Ballon, Pieter, 2014. "Power and control strategies in online video services," 25th European Regional ITS Conference, Brussels 2014 101438, International Telecommunications Society (ITS).
    8. Christiaan Hogendorn & Stephen Ka Yat Yuen, 2009. "Platform Competition With ‘Must‐Have’ Components," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 57(2), pages 294-318, June.
    9. Gardner, Jacob & Lehnert, Kevin, 2016. "What's new about new media? How multi-channel networks work with content creators," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 59(3), pages 293-302.
    10. M. Bourreau & P. Dogan, "undated". "Innovation and Regulation in the Telecommunications Industry," Working Paper 33652, Harvard University OpenScholar.
    11. Mark Armstrong Author-Email: mark.armstrong@ucl.ac.uk Author-Workplace-Name: University College of London, 2006. "Competition in Two-Sided Markets," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 37(3), pages 668-691, Autumn.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Claire M. Weiller & Michael G. Pollitt, 2013. "Platform markets and energy services," Working Papers EPRG 1334, Energy Policy Research Group, Cambridge Judge Business School, University of Cambridge.
    2. Dittmann, Heidi & Kuchinke, Björn A., 2016. "Sharing Economy and Regulation," 27th European Regional ITS Conference, Cambridge (UK) 2016 148665, International Telecommunications Society (ITS).
    3. Pinar Ozcan & Filipe M. Santos, 2015. "The market that never was: Turf wars and failed alliances in mobile payments," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(10), pages 1486-1512, October.
    4. Bourreau, Marc & Dogan, Pinar, 2005. "Unbundling the local loop," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 49(1), pages 173-199, January.
    5. Massaro, Maria & Pogorel, Gérard, 2015. "Next generation of radio spectrum management licensed shared access and the trade-off between static and dynamic efficiency," 2015 Regional ITS Conference, Los Angeles 2015 146322, International Telecommunications Society (ITS).
    6. Samuel Rutz, 2010. "Interchange Fees as a Mechanism to Raise Rivals' Costs - Some Evidence from Switzerland," Swiss Journal of Economics and Statistics (SJES), Swiss Society of Economics and Statistics (SSES), vol. 146(II), pages 507-532, June.
    7. Marleen Marra, 2019. "Pricing and Fees in Auction Platforms with Two-Sided Entry," Working Papers hal-03393068, HAL.
    8. D’Annunzio, Anna, 2017. "Vertical integration in the TV market: Exclusive provision and program quality," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 114-144.
    9. Gawer, Annabelle, 2014. "Bridging differing perspectives on technological platforms: Toward an integrative framework," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(7), pages 1239-1249.
    10. Kim, Sung-min, 2014. "Policy on the media platform industry: The analysis of pricing policies of internet media with two-sided market theory," 25th European Regional ITS Conference, Brussels 2014 101395, International Telecommunications Society (ITS).
    11. Jerbashian, Vahagn, 2015. "The telecommunications industry and economic growth: How the market structure matters," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 515-523.
    12. Pekka S��skilahti, 2015. "Monopoly Pricing of Social Goods," International Journal of the Economics of Business, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 22(3), pages 429-448, November.
    13. repec:hal:spmain:info:hdl:2441/5kht5rc22p99sq5tol4efe4ssb is not listed on IDEAS
    14. Ghezzi, Antonio & Cortimiglia, Marcelo Nogueira & Frank, Alejandro Germán, 2015. "Strategy and business model design in dynamic telecommunications industries: A study on Italian mobile network operators," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 90(PA), pages 346-354.
    15. Christian Jaag & Urs Trinkner, 2011. "A General Framework for Regulation and Liberalization in Network Industries," Chapters, in: Matthias Finger & Rolf W. Künneke (ed.), International Handbook of Network Industries, chapter 3, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    16. Jabbour, Chady & Rey-Valette, Hélène & Maurel, Pierre & Salles, Jean-Michel, 2019. "Spatial data infrastructure management: A two-sided market approach for strategic reflections," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 69-82.
    17. Bauer, Johannes M. & Shim, Woohyun, 2012. "Regulation and digital innovation: Theory and evidence," 23rd European Regional ITS Conference, Vienna 2012 60364, International Telecommunications Society (ITS).
    18. Dierk Bauknecht, 2011. "Incentive Regulation and Network Innovations," RSCAS Working Papers 2011/02, European University Institute.
    19. Baranes, Edmond & Bourreau, Marc, 2005. "An Economist's Guide to Local Loop Unbundling," MPRA Paper 2510, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    20. Renata Sliwa, 2015. "Facility-based competition — toward more deregulation in telecommunications sector," Ekonomia i Prawo, Uniwersytet Mikolaja Kopernika, vol. 14(2), pages 261-273, June.
    21. Fiedler, Ingo C, 2010. "Antitrust in two-sided markets: Is competition always desirable?," Berkeley Olin Program in Law & Economics, Working Paper Series qt5dp3q033, Berkeley Olin Program in Law & Economics.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:zbw:itsb18:190357. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.itsworld.org/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.