Reference Hub1
Evolutionary Stages of e-Tailors and Retailers: Firm Value Determinants Model

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

Jae K. Lee, Heegoo Kang, Hoe K. Lee, Han S. Lee
Copyright: © 2002 |Volume: 10 |Issue: 3 |Pages: 21
ISSN: 1062-7375|EISSN: 1533-7995|ISSN: 1062-7375|EISBN13: 9781615201419|EISSN: 1533-7995|DOI: 10.4018/jgim.2002070102
Cite Article Cite Article

MLA

Lee, Jae K., et al. "Evolutionary Stages of e-Tailors and Retailers: Firm Value Determinants Model." JGIM vol.10, no.3 2002: pp.15-35. http://doi.org/10.4018/jgim.2002070102

APA

Lee, J. K., Kang, H., Lee, H. K., & Lee, H. S. (2002). Evolutionary Stages of e-Tailors and Retailers: Firm Value Determinants Model. Journal of Global Information Management (JGIM), 10(3), 15-35. http://doi.org/10.4018/jgim.2002070102

Chicago

Lee, Jae K., et al. "Evolutionary Stages of e-Tailors and Retailers: Firm Value Determinants Model," Journal of Global Information Management (JGIM) 10, no.3: 15-35. http://doi.org/10.4018/jgim.2002070102

Export Reference

Mendeley
Favorite Full-Issue Download

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.

Request Access

You do not own this content. Please login to recommend this title to your institution's librarian or purchase it from the IGI Global bookstore.