Maintaining a Level Playing Field When Big Tech Disrupts the Financial Services Sector
SSRN, ISSN: 1556-5068
2021
- 2Citations
- 2,010Usage
- 1Captures
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Article Description
Google, Apple, Facebook and Amazon (the “GAFAs”) have been slow to disrupt the financial services sector, but they are likely to do so in the coming years. The precise nature of the disruption and the appropriate regulatory response is not clear-cut, but the GAFAs’ advantages will stem from their control of the main customer access points, such as mobile operating systems, search engine results pages, app stores, and marketplaces. This paper discusses the GAFAs’ anticipated disruption in the financial services sector in the context of competition law enforcement and the emerging regulatory regimes in the EU and UK that seek to curb the GAFAs' market power. If the new rules are drafted carefully, consumers can benefit from the innovations of the GAFAs and others without suffering the long-run effects of their further accumulation of market power. The new rules should ensure that the GAFAs do not benefit from an asymmetry of regulatory obligations whereby they are not subject to the same rules as their financial services competitors. The GAFAs’ should not be able to leverage their market power from core activities into financial services such that their financial services competitors are hindered in reacting to the GAFAs’ competitive threat.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85179511642&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3855430; https://www.ssrn.com/abstract=3855430; https://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3855430; https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3855430; https://ssrn.com/abstract=3855430
Elsevier BV
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know