TY - JOUR
T1 - Gains and Losses of Key Opinion Leaders’ Product Promotion in Livestream E-commerce
AU - Niu, Baozhuang
AU - Yu, Xinhu
AU - Li, Qiyang
AU - Wang, Yulan
N1 - Funding Information:
The authors are grateful to the editor and reviewers for their helpful comments. This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China ( 72293564, 72125006, 72293560, 71971184 ), the Research Grants Council of Hong Kong (RGC Reference Number: 15505019 ) and the Joint Supervision Scheme of the Hong Kong Polytechnic University , China (Project ID P0035029 (G-SB3K)).
Publisher Copyright:
© 2023 Elsevier Ltd
PY - 2023/6
Y1 - 2023/6
N2 - In livestream e-commerce, many brand-owners use the key opinion leaders (KOLs) for product promotion and sales, especially in the direct-selling channel. Is such a practice really beneficial to the brand-owner? In practice, we even observe that KOLs sell and then return products for a strong network externality. Therefore, to formulate the brand-owner's tradeoffs of using KOLs, we compare the brand-owner's profits with and without a KOL (i.e., brand-owner uses a KOL for product promotion vs. brand-owner invests in product promotion by itself) in a dual-channel system comprised of the brand-owner's direct-selling channel and its traditional retail channel. We find the brand-owner's gains/losses of using the KOL highly depend on the commission rate, retain rate and the network externality intensity. Interestingly, we reveal that the enhanced KOL effect might not be necessarily beneficial to the brand-owner and can even hurt it significantly. As the channel rival, the retailer may benefit from the brand-owner's using the KOL (because its procurement cost may be lowered) and the market expansion (because the use of KOL may spill over to the retail channel).
AB - In livestream e-commerce, many brand-owners use the key opinion leaders (KOLs) for product promotion and sales, especially in the direct-selling channel. Is such a practice really beneficial to the brand-owner? In practice, we even observe that KOLs sell and then return products for a strong network externality. Therefore, to formulate the brand-owner's tradeoffs of using KOLs, we compare the brand-owner's profits with and without a KOL (i.e., brand-owner uses a KOL for product promotion vs. brand-owner invests in product promotion by itself) in a dual-channel system comprised of the brand-owner's direct-selling channel and its traditional retail channel. We find the brand-owner's gains/losses of using the KOL highly depend on the commission rate, retain rate and the network externality intensity. Interestingly, we reveal that the enhanced KOL effect might not be necessarily beneficial to the brand-owner and can even hurt it significantly. As the channel rival, the retailer may benefit from the brand-owner's using the KOL (because its procurement cost may be lowered) and the market expansion (because the use of KOL may spill over to the retail channel).
KW - Channel co-opetition
KW - Dual-channel system
KW - Livestream operation
KW - Network externality
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85147584492&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.omega.2023.102846
DO - 10.1016/j.omega.2023.102846
M3 - Journal article
AN - SCOPUS:85147584492
SN - 0305-0483
VL - 117
JO - Omega (United Kingdom)
JF - Omega (United Kingdom)
M1 - 102846
ER -