請用此 Handle URI 來引用此文件:
http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/42824
完整後設資料紀錄
DC 欄位 | 值 | 語言 |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor.advisor | 湯明哲(Ming-Je Tang) | |
dc.contributor.author | Cheng-Yuan Lu | en |
dc.contributor.author | 呂澄源 | zh_TW |
dc.date.accessioned | 2021-06-15T01:24:51Z | - |
dc.date.available | 2009-07-28 | |
dc.date.copyright | 2009-07-28 | |
dc.date.issued | 2009 | |
dc.date.submitted | 2009-07-22 | |
dc.identifier.citation | 一、 英文期刊
1. Aaker, D. A., ”Managing Assets and Skills: The Key to a Sustainable Competitive Advantage”, California Management Review, Winter, 1989. 2. Barney, J. B., “How a Firm’s Capabilities Affect Boundary Decisions”, Sloan Management Review, Spring, 1999. 3. Brandenburger, A. M. and Nalebuff, B. J., “The Right Game: Use Game Theory to Shape Strategy”, Harvard Business Review, July-August, 1995. 4. Cockburn, I., Henderson R., and Stern S., “Untangling the Origins of Competitive Advantages”, Strategic Management Journal, Oct.-Nov., Vol. 21, No. 10/11, 2000. 5. Collis, D. J. and Montgomery, C. A., “Creating Corporate Advantage”, Harvard Business Review, May-June, 1998. 6. Demsetz, H., “Barriers to entry”, The American Economic Review, Vol. 72, No. 1, 1982. 7. Dess, G. G. and Lumpkin, G. T., “The Role of Entrepreneurial Orientation in Stimulating Effective Corporate Entrepreneurship”, Academy of Management Executive, Vol. 19, No. 1, 2005. 8. Dyer, J. H. and Singh, H., “The Relational View: Cooperative Strategy and Sources of Inter-organizational Competitive Advantage”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 23, No. 4, 1998. 9. Eaton, B. C. and Lipsey, R. G., “Exit barriers are entry barriers: The durability of capital as a barrier to entry”, Bell Journal of Economics, Vol. 11, No. 2, 1980. 10. Eisenhardt, K. M., “Building Theories from Case Study Research”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 14, No. 4, 1989. 11. Gorecki, P. K., “The determinants of entry by domestic and foreign enterprises in Canadian manufacturing industries: Some comments and empirical results”, Review of Economics and Statistics, November, 1976. 12. Hamel, G. and Prahalad, C. K., “Strategic Intent”, Harvard Business Review, May-June, 1989. 13. Hamel, G. and Prahalad, C. K., “Strategy: As Stretch and Leverage”, Harvard Business Review, March-April, 1993. 14. Hamel, G. and Prahalad, C. K., “The Core Competence of the Corporation”, Harvard Business Review, May, 1990 15. Han, J. K., Kim, N., and Kim, H. B., “Entry barriers: A dull-, one-, or two-edged sword for incumbents? Unraveling the paradox from a contingency perspective”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 65, No. 1, 2001. 16. Karakaya, F. and Stahl, M. J., “Barriers to entry and market entry decision in consumer and industrial goods markets”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 53, No. 2, 1989. 17. Katz, M. and Shapiro, C., “Network Externalities, Competition, and Compatibility,” American Economic Review, Vol.75 No.3, 1985. 18. Katz, M. and Shapiro, C., “System Competition and Network Effect,” Journal of Economic Perspectives, Vol.8, No.2, 1994. 19. Kerin, R. A., Varadarajan P. V., and Peterson R. A., “First-Mover Advantage: A Synthesis, Conceptual Framework, and Research Propositions”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 56, No. 4, 1992. 20. Kim, W. C. and Mauborgne, R. A., “Value Innovation: The Strategic Logic of High Growth”, Harvard Business Review, July, 2004. 21. Liebowitz, S. J. and Margolis, S. E., “Network Externalities: An Uncommon Strategy”, Journal of Economics Perspectives, Vol.8, No.2, 1994 22. Lovas, B. and S. Ghoshal, “Strategy as Guided Evolution”, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 21, No. 9, 2000. 23. Schilling, M. A., “Technological Leapfrogging: Lesson from the U.S. Video Game Console Industry”, California Management Review, Vol. 45, No. 3, Spring, 2003. 24. Nelson, R. R., “Why Do Firms Differ, and How Does It Matter?”, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 12, 1991. 25. Porter, M. E., “How Competitive Forces Shape Strategy”, Harvard Business Review, March -April, 1979. 26. Prahalad C. K. and Hamel, G., “The Core Competence of the Corporation”, Harvard Business Review, May-June, 1990. 27. Robertson, T. S. and Gatignon, H., “How innovators thwart new entrants into their markets”, Planning Review, Sep.-Oct., 1991. 28. Rohlfs, J. H., “A Theory of Interdependent Demand for a Communications Service,” The Bell Journal of Economics and Management Science, Vol. 5, No. 1, Spring, 1974. 29. Schoemaker, J. H. P., “How to Link Strategic Vision to Core Capability”, Sloan Management Review, Fall, 1992. 30. Shankar, V. and Bayus, B. L., “Network Effects and Competition: An Emperical Analysis of The Home Video Game Industry,”Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 24, No. 4, 2003. 31. Sun, H., “Entry modes of multinational corporations into China’s market: A socioeconomic analysis”, International Journal of Social Economics, Vol. 26, No. 5, 1999. 32. Taylor, C. R., Zou, S. and Osland, G. E., “Foreign market entry strategies of Japanese MNCs”, International Marketing Review, Vol. 17, No. 2, 2000. 33. Volberda, H. and Lewin, A., “Co-evolutionary Dynamics Within and Between Firms: From Evolution to Co-evolution”, Journal of Management Studies, Vol. 40, No. 8, 2003. 二、 英文書籍 1. Bain, J. S., Barriers to New Competition, Harvard University Press, 1956. 2. Besanko, D., Dranove D., and Shanley M., Economic of Strategy, Second Edition, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 2000. 3. Brandenburger, A. M. and Nalebuff, B. J., Co-opetition, Broadway Business, 1998. 4. Clausewitz, C. V. and Heuser, B., On War, Abridged edition, New York: Oxford University Press, 2008. 5. D’Aventi, R. A., Hypercompetition, New York: Free Press, 1994. 6. Evans, D. S. and Schmalensee, R., Catalyst Code: The Strategies Behind the World's Most Dynamic Companies, Boston: Harvard Business School Press, 2007. 7. Grindley, P., Standards, Strategy, and Policy: Casebook and Stories, New York: Oxford University Press, 1995. 8. Harrigan, K. R., Strategic Flexibility: A Management Guide for Changing Times, Lexington, MA: Lexington Books, 1985. 9. Koch, J. V., Industrial Organization and Prices, 1974. 10. Merriam, S. B., Qualitative Research and Case Study Applications in Education: Revised and Expanded from I Case Study Research in Education/I, Rev Sub Edition, Jossey-Bass, 1997. 11. Oster, S. M., Modern Competitive Analysis, New York: Oxford University Press, 1999. 12. Porter, M. E., Competitive Advantage: Creating and Sustaining Superior Performance, New York: Free Press, 1985. 13. Porter, M. E., Competitive Strategy: Techniques for Analyzing Industries and Competitors, New York: Free Press. 1980. 14. Porter, M. E., On Competition, Updated and Expanded Edition, Boston: Harvard Business School Press, 2008. 15. Ries, A. and Trout, J., Marketing Warfare, McGraw-Hill, 1997. 16. Rohlfs, J. H., Bandwagon Effects in High Technology Industries, The MIT Press, 2001. 17. Shapiro, C. and Varian, H. R., Information Rules: A Strategic Guide to the Network Economy, Boston: Harvard Business School Press, 1999. 18. Shepherd, W. G., The Economics of Industrial Organization, 4th Edition, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1997. 19. Yin, R. K., Case Study Research: Design and Methods, Beverly Hills, Calif.: Sage Publications, Inc., 1984. 三、 中文書籍 1. 余朝權,產業競爭分析專論,台北:五南,1994。 2. 吳思華,策略九說,第三版,台北:臉譜出版社,2000。 3. 傅鏡暉,線上遊戲產業Happy 書,台北:遠流文化,2003。 4. 湯明哲,策略精論:基礎篇,台北:天下文化,2003。 四、 中英文專題報告 1. CNNIC,中國互聯網路發展狀況統計報告,CNNIC中國互聯網路資訊中心,2009年1月。 2. ESA, 2008 Sales, Demographic and Usage Data: Essential Facts About The Computer And Video Game Industry, The Entertainment Software Association, 2008. 3. GPC & IDC,2008年中國遊戲產業調查報告,中 國 出 版 工 作 者 協 會 遊 戲 出 版 物 工 作 委 員 會(GPC)與國際資料公司(IDC),2009。 4. iResearch,中國線上遊戲研究報告2005年簡版,iResearch艾瑞市場諮詢有限公司,2006年1月。 5. iResearch,中國網上支付行業發展報告簡版2008-2009年,iResearch艾瑞市場諮詢有限公司,2009年2月。 6. iResearch,中國網路遊戲行業發展報告簡版2008-2009年,iResearch艾瑞市場諮詢有限公司,2009年4月。 7. iResearch & 17173,iResearch-17173第八屆中國網路遊戲調研報告,iResearch艾瑞市場諮詢有限公司,2009年。 8. JETRO, Japanese Video Game Industry, Japanese Economy Division, 2007. 9. KOrea Game Industry Agency, 2007 The Rise Of Korean Games:Guide to Korean Game Industry and Culture, Ministry of Culture & Tourism, Korea, 2008. 10. PricewaterhouseCoopers, Global Entertainment and Media Outlook: 2008–2012, New York: PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, 2008. 11. 工研院IEK電子分項,三網合一趨勢下關鍵零組件發展機會分析,經濟部技術處,2005年。 12. 經濟部數位內容產業推動辦公室,2007台灣數位內容產業白皮書,經濟部工業局。 13. 資策會MIC,數位家電發展趨勢,財團法人資訊工業策進會資訊市場情報中心,2003年1月。 14. 資策會MIC,中國電信與中國網通之寬頻服務發展現況,財團法人資訊工業策進會資訊市場情報中心,2004年8月。 15. 資策會MIC,爭霸遊戲平台~迎接無縫隙的遊戲時代,財團法人資訊工業策進會資訊市場情報中心,2006年7月。 16. 資策會MIC,2006年日本線上遊戲發展,財團法人資訊工業策進會資訊市場情報中心,2006年11月。 17. 資策會MIC,2006年台灣資訊市場,財團法人資訊工業策進會資訊市場情報中心,2006年。 18. 資策會MIC,家用遊戲機發展動態分析,財團法人資訊工業策進會資訊市場情報中心,2007年5月。 19. 資策會MIC,2008年南韓消費性電子市場—個人消費電子市場、遊戲市場,財團法人資訊工業策進會資訊市場情報中心,2008年。 20. 資策會MIC,中國大陸寬頻營運產業發展現況與趨勢,財團法人資訊工業策進會資訊市場情報中心,2009年5月。 21. 資策會MIC,2009年日本資訊市場-電子商務、數位內容、網站社群,財團法人資訊工業策進會資訊市場情報中心,2009年。 22. 資策會MIC,2009年南韓資訊市場—資訊軟體市場,財團法人資訊工業策進會資訊市場情報中心,2009年。 23. 資策會MIC,台灣資通訊產業發展現況,財團法人資訊工業策進會資訊市場情報中心,2009年。 五、 中文碩、博士論文 1. 吳俊,台灣線上遊戲公司經營模式之研究,國立雲林科技大學企業管理碩士論文,2004。 2. 徐國峰,台灣電腦遊戲廠商進入中國大陸之策略研究,國立台灣大學國際企業學研究所碩士論文,2002。 3. 黃國洲,我國電腦遊戲產業之新產品開發策略考量,私立元智大學資訊傳播學系碩士班網路傳播組碩士論文,2003。 4. 蕭文河,網路效應對廠商競爭地位影響之研究-以台灣線上遊戲廠商為例,私立朝陽科技大學企業管理學研究所碩士論文,2004。 5. 蔡佩紜,數位內容產業之國際競爭策略-以數位遊戲為例,國立台灣大學國際企業學研究所碩士論文,2007。 六、 網站 1. 17173.com(搜狐福州分公司) http://www.17173.com/ 2. CNNIC中國互聯網路信息中心 http://www.cnnic.cn/ 3. DIGITIMES電子時報 http://www.digitimes.com.tw 4. The Entertainment Software Association http://www.theesa.com/ 5. iResearch艾瑞市場諮詢 http://www.iresearch.com.cn 6. Internet World Stats http://www.internetworldstats.com/ 7. VGChartz http://vgchartz.com/ 8. 中國新聞出版總署 http://www.gapp.gov.cn/ 9. 巴哈姆特電玩資訊站 http://www.gamer.com.tw/ 10. 拓樸產業研究所 http://www.topology.com.tw/TRI/default.asp 11. 朝鮮日報 http://chinese.chosun.com 12. 經濟部工業局數位內容產業推動服務網 http://proj3.moeaidb.gov.tw/nmipo/ 13. 經濟部技術處產業技術知識服務計畫 IT IS http://www.itis.org.tw/ 14. 資策會MIC產業情報研究所 http://mic.iii.org.tw/intelligence 15. 遊戲NPC http://www.yxnpc.com/ 16. 遊戲基地 http://www.gamebase.com.tw/ 17. 電玩巴士 http://www.tgbus.com 18. 數位之牆 http://www.digitalwall.com/ 19. 聯合新聞網精選閱讀 http://mag.udn.com/ 20. 韓國遊戲產業振興院 http://www.chinakogia.cn/ 21. 鐵之狂傲遊戲網 http://www.gamez.com.tw/ | |
dc.identifier.uri | http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/42824 | - |
dc.description.abstract | 線上遊戲由於架構在網際網路之上,固定成本高,邊際成本隨著產出下降,同時人際互動是遊戲過程的重要元素,既有玩家愈多、互動愈頻繁,對於吸引新進玩家的後續動能就愈強,具有明顯的網路效應。在這樣的產業經濟特性下,廠商的一般性策略就是搶佔先行者優勢並迅速做大,儘快獨占鼇頭,才有生存發展的空間。本研究的目的在於探討下列問題:(1)在位者是否需要或如何運用進入阻絕策略構築更強大的進入障礙?(2)如果已錯失首動優勢,新進者是否仍有機會避開或打破進入障礙,取得長期的競爭優勢、甚至取代既有龍頭廠商?(3)新進者的進入策略是什麼?(4)全球盛行線上遊戲的主要國家(中、韓、台、日、美),其產業結構與廠商行為有何不同?(5)產業內以及相關產業間的競合態勢如何?如何運用競合策略進入?
研究結果發現,在位者所掌握的網路效應並不足以完全阻絕新進者的進入,仍然需要運用其他阻絕策略構築更強大的進入障礙。對於新進廠商來說,面對已掌握網路效應優勢的在位者,必須清楚認知,已點火啟動的網路效應就像龍捲風般狂烈,正面對抗的下場不是被摧毀、就是得到付出龐大代價後的慘勝,得不償失,因此,必須避免採用正面對決或模仿等註定失敗的進入策略。新進廠商的進入策略應以另闢戰場為主要思維,視自身資源多寡,採取側翼攻擊戰或游擊戰,避開或打破進入障礙。另闢戰場的方式包括:新的商業模式、新的市場區隔、或者是運用競合策略創造出新的賽局。 透過線上遊戲與主機遊戲、電信寬頻產業之間的競合關係分析,研究發現,由於線上遊戲與主機遊戲的商業模式之間存在著巨大的鴻溝;與電信寬頻之間的競合賽局,則由於電信業者掌握了客戶、通路與金流,並且以平台策略稀釋並壓低個別遊戲業者的談判力,電信業者的附加價值較高,成為最大的得利者。線上遊戲業者無法經由連結這兩個產業的賽局而創造出有利於己的新賽局。 | zh_TW |
dc.description.abstract | Online games built on the Internet inherently have the properties of high fixed costs and declining marginal costs as output increases. At the same time the interaction between players is an important element in the game. The more players are in the game and the more frequent interaction is between players, the stronger kinetic energy attracts new players. It shows significant network effect. With the economic characteristics, the generic strategy is to seize first-mover advantage and to get big as soon as possible. Only the leaders can survive and develop further. The purpose of this study is to explore the following issues: (1) Whether the incumbent can rely on the network effect to block all possible entries without exploiting other entry deterrence strategies to build higher entry barriers? (2) If the new entrants have missed the first-mover advantage, would they have any chance to avoid or break the entry barriers, to achieve long-term competitive advantage, or even to replace the existing leading vendors? (3) What is the entry strategy for the new entrants? (4) What are the major differences of the industry structure and vendor conduct within the major online game countries (China, South Korea, Taiwan, Japan, and the United States)? (5) How to use the co-opetition strategy to get successful entry?
The results showed that the network effect is not sufficient to completely block the entry of new entrants. The incumbent still need to exploit other entry deterrence strategies to build higher entry barriers. In the face of the network effect already in the possession of the incumbent, the new entrants must be clear understanding of the tornado-like power of the ignited network effect. The fate of head-on confrontation is either to be destroyed or to miserably win after paying a huge price. Therefore, they must avoid the use of a positive match or imitate as the entry strategy doomed to failure. The new firms should take creating alternative battlefields as the main way of thinking when forming entry strategy, depending on the size of their own resources to take flank attack or guerrilla warfare, avoiding or breaking the barriers to entry. To set up an alternative way of the battlefield include: new business models, new market segments, or the use of co-opetition strategies to create a new game. Through the analysis of co-opetition relationship between online games, console games, and broadband telecommunications industry, the study found that, as there exists huge chasm between the business model of online games and that of console games; and telecom operators control the customers, channels, and payment streams, and dilute the bargaining power of individual game vendor with a platform strategy, who hold higher added-value and will benefit most greatly. Online game vendors cannot create a more favorable new game by linking those two industries. | en |
dc.description.provenance | Made available in DSpace on 2021-06-15T01:24:51Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 ntu-98-P96746004-1.pdf: 3493343 bytes, checksum: 304b333da94c286bbc4775c3ab54f995 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2009 | en |
dc.description.tableofcontents | 誌謝 i
中文摘要 ii 英文摘要 iii 表次 v 圖次 vi 第一章 緒論 1 第一節 研究動機與問題 1 第二節 研究目的 2 第三節 研究方法與架構 2 第四節 研究限制 5 第二章 文獻探討 6 第一節 網路效應 6 第二節 產業分析 8 第三節 競合策略 12 第四節 平台觸媒策略 16 第五節 進入障礙與動態攻防 22 第六節 相關論文 30 第三章 線上遊戲產業分析 31 第一節 產業範疇 31 第二節 數位遊戲全球市場概況 34 第三節 線上遊戲全球市場概況 39 第四節 線上遊戲產業發展歷史 42 第五節 中國線上遊戲產業分析 43 第六節 韓國線上遊戲產業分析 61 第七節 台灣線上遊戲產業分析 66 第八節 日本線上遊戲產業分析 71 第九節 美國線上遊戲產業分析 75 第四章 線上遊戲產業之競合與動態競爭策略分析 80 第一節 主機遊戲與線上遊戲產業之競合 80 第二節 電信寬頻與線上遊戲產業之競合 100 第三節 中國盛大動態競爭策略 111 第五章 線上遊戲產業之興業策略分析 120 第一節 中國巨人(征途)興業策略 120 第二節 英國Playfish on Facebook興業策略 125 第三節 未來興業策略 130 第六章 結論與建議 131 第一節 研究結論 131 第二節 研究建議 136 參考文獻 138 | |
dc.language.iso | zh-TW | |
dc.title | 全球線上遊戲產業競合與興業策略分析 | zh_TW |
dc.title | A Study on Co-opetition and Entry Strategy in the Global Online Game Industry | en |
dc.type | Thesis | |
dc.date.schoolyear | 97-2 | |
dc.description.degree | 碩士 | |
dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee | 陳業寧,吳學良 | |
dc.subject.keyword | 線上遊戲,產業分析,網路效應,競合策略,價值網,平台策略,進入阻絕,進入策略,首動優勢, | zh_TW |
dc.subject.keyword | Online Game,Industry Analysis,Network Effect,Co-opetition,Value Net,Platform Strategy,Entry Deterrence Strategy,Entry Strategy,First Mover Advantage, | en |
dc.relation.page | 147 | |
dc.rights.note | 有償授權 | |
dc.date.accepted | 2009-07-23 | |
dc.contributor.author-college | 管理學院 | zh_TW |
dc.contributor.author-dept | 國際企業管理組 | zh_TW |
顯示於系所單位: | 國際企業管理組 |
文件中的檔案:
檔案 | 大小 | 格式 | |
---|---|---|---|
ntu-98-1.pdf 目前未授權公開取用 | 3.41 MB | Adobe PDF |
系統中的文件,除了特別指名其著作權條款之外,均受到著作權保護,並且保留所有的權利。