Patent Grant
10346887
Embodiments of the invention relate, generally, to assigning, calculating, or determining a provider quality score.
The internet has transformed the way people communicate. Many websites exist for supplying both objective information of a provider of a good, service or experience, but also for allowing users to populate subjective information, such as reviews or likes. With the amount of websites providing such information, Applicant has discovered problems with current methods of using such information to determine with which providers of goods, service, and/or experiences, they should engage in a business relationship. Through applied effort, ingenuity, and innovation, Applicant has solved the identified problems by developing a solution that is embodied by the present invention, which is described in detail below.
In general, embodiments of the present invention provided herein include systems, methods and computer readable media for calculating a provider quality score.
In one embodiment of the present invention, a method is provided including capturing one or more metrics relating to a provider, wherein the one or more metrics are indicative of a third parties evaluation of at least one of a product, service or experience provided by the provider, a performance of a provider, or the provider itself, capturing a number indicative of a quantity of the one or more captured metrics, and calculating a provider quality score based on the one or more metrics and the number indicative of a quantity of the one or more captured metrics, wherein the provider score provides an indication of future provider performance and future third party reaction to the provider.
In another embodiment, the metrics are review information, and the method further may comprise calculating an average review score based on the one or more metrics and the number indicative of a quantity of metrics. In another embodiment, the method may further comprise detecting one or more web sources related to provider information, and determining whether the one or more web sources provide metrics related to the provider. In another embodiment, the method may further comprise detecting a provider website, rating a quality of the provider website, and factoring the quality of the provider website into the provider quality score calculation. In another embodiment, the method may further comprise accessing prior performance data, wherein prior performance data comprises one or more of data related to a previous provider promotion, data related to a previous promotion promoted by a related provider, or data related to a previous promotion promoted by a different promotion service by the provider, and factoring the prior performance data into the provider quality score calculation.
In another embodiment, the method may further comprise capturing positive press review information related to a provider, determining if the positive press review information is from an acceptable source, and factoring the positive press review information into the provider quality score calculation. In another embodiment, the method may further comprise capturing a number of “likes” related to a provider from one or more web sources, and factoring in the number of “likes” into the provider quality score application.
In another embodiment, the method may further comprise in an instance in which the average review score is greater than a first predetermined threshold, and the number of reviews is greater than a second predetermined threshold, performing a first quality analysis. In another embodiment, the method may further comprise in an instance in which the average review score is less than the first predetermined threshold, or the number of reviews is less than the second predetermined threshold, performing a second quality analysis.
In another embodiment, the first quality analysis comprises in an instance in which the average review score is greater than a third predetermined threshold and in an instance in which the number of reviews is greater than a fourth predetermined threshold, performing a third quality analysis. In another embodiment, the third quality analysis comprises determining whether the provider is associated with a positive press review, in an instance in which the provider is associated with a positive press review, assigning a first provider quality score.
In another embodiment, the third quality analysis comprises determining whether the provider is associated with a positive press review, in an instance in which the provider is not associated with a positive press review, assigning a second provider quality score. In another embodiment, the first quality analysis comprises in an instance in which the average review score is less than a third predetermined threshold or in an instance in which the number of reviews is less than a fourth predetermined threshold, performing a fourth quality analysis.
In another embodiment, the fourth quality analysis comprises in an instance in which the average review score is at least than a fifth predetermined threshold and in an instance in which the number of reviews is at least a sixth predetermined threshold, assigning a third provider quality score. In another embodiment, in an instance in which the average review score is less than the fifth predetermined threshold or in an instance in which the number of reviews is less than a sixth predetermined threshold, the method may further comprise determining a number of “likes”. In another embodiment, the method may further in an instance in which the average review score is at least the fifth predetermined threshold and in an instance in which the number of “likes” is at least a seventh predetermined threshold, assigning a fourth provider quality score.
In another embodiment, the method may further comprise in an instance in which the average review score is less than the fifth predetermined threshold or in an instance in which the number of “likes” is less than the seventh predetermined threshold, assigning a fifth provider quality score. In another embodiment, the second quality analysis comprises in an instance in which the average review score is less than an eighth predetermined threshold or in an instance in which the number of reviews is less than a tenth predetermined threshold, assigning a tenth provider quality score. In another embodiment, the method may further comprise in an instance in which the average review score is greater than an eighth predetermined threshold and in an instance in which the number of reviews is greater than a tenth predetermined threshold,
performing a fifth quality analysis. In another embodiment, the fifth quality analysis comprises
in an instance in which the average review score is less than a ninth predetermined threshold,
assigning an ninth provider quality score. In another embodiment, the fifth quality analysis comprises in an instance in which the average review score is greater than a ninth predetermined threshold, performing a sixth quality analysis. In another embodiment, the sixth quality analysis comprises capturing a number of “likes” from one or more web sources, and determining whether the provider is associated with a positive press review from one or more web sources.
In another embodiment, the method may further comprise in an instance in which the provider is not associated with a positive press review or in an instance in which the number of likes is less than an eleventh predetermined threshold, assigning an eighth provider quality score. In another embodiment, the method may further comprise in an instance in which the provider is associated with a positive press review, and in an instance in which the number of likes is greater than an eleventh predetermined threshold, performing a seventh quality analysis. In another embodiment, the seventh quality analysis comprises in an instance in which the average review score is greater than a twelfth predetermined threshold and in an instance in which the number of “likes” is greater than a thirteenth predetermined threshold, assigning a sixth provider quality score.
In another embodiment, the seventh quality analysis comprises in an instance in which the average review score is less than a twelfth predetermined threshold or in an instance in which the number of “likes” is less than a thirteenth predetermined threshold, assigning a seventh provider quality score. In another embodiment, the method may further comprise determining whether a provider is associated with an online presence, and in an instance where the provider is not associated with an online presence, assigning a minimum provider quality score.
In another embodiment of the present invention, an apparatus is provided. The apparatus may comprise at least one processor and at least one memory including computer program code, the at least one memory and the computer program code configured to, with the at least one processor, cause the apparatus at least to capture one or more metrics relating to a provider, wherein the one or more metrics are indicative of a third parties evaluation of at least one of a product, service or experience provided by the provider, a performance of a provider, or the provider itself, capture a number indicative of a quantity of the one or more captured metrics, and calculate a provider quality score based on the one or more metrics and the number indicative of a quantity of the one or more captured metrics, wherein the provider score provides an indication of future provider performance and future third party reaction to the provider.
In another embodiment, the metrics are review information, wherein the at least one memory and computer program code are configured to, with the at least one processor, cause the apparatus to calculate an average review score based on the one or more metrics and the number indicative of a quantity of metrics. In another embodiment, the at least one memory and computer program code are configured to, with the at least one processor, cause the apparatus to detect one or more web sources related to provider information, and determine whether the one or more web sources provide metrics related to the provider.
In another embodiment, the at least one memory and computer program code are configured to, with the at least one processor, cause the apparatus to detect a provider website, rate a quality of the provider website, and factor the quality of the provider website into the provider quality score calculation. In another embodiment, the at least one memory and computer program code are configured to, with the at least one processor, cause the apparatus to access prior performance data, wherein prior performance data comprises one or more of data related to a previous provider promotion, data related to a previous promotion promoted by a related provider, or data related to a previous promotion promoted by a different promotion service by the provider, and factor the prior performance data into the provider quality score calculation.
In another embodiment the at least one memory and computer program code are configured to, with the at least one processor, cause the apparatus to capture positive press review information related to a provider, determine if the positive press review information is from an acceptable source, and factor the positive press review information into the provider quality score calculation. In another embodiment, the at least one memory and computer program code are configured to, with the at least one processor, cause the apparatus to capture a number of “likes” related to a provider from one or more web sources, and factor in the number of “likes” into the provider quality score application. In another embodiment, the at least one memory and computer program code are configured to, with the at least one processor, cause the apparatus to in an instance in which the average review score is greater than a first predetermined threshold, and the number of reviews is greater than a second predetermined threshold, perform a first quality analysis.
In another embodiment, the at least one memory and computer program code are configured to, with the at least one processor, cause the apparatus to in an instance in which the average review score is less than the first predetermined threshold, or the number of reviews is less than the second predetermined threshold, perform a second quality analysis. In another embodiment, the first quality analysis comprises in an instance in which the average review score is greater than a third predetermined threshold and in an instance in which the number of reviews is greater than a fourth predetermined threshold, performing a third quality analysis.
In another embodiment, the third quality analysis comprises determining whether the provider is associated with a positive press review, in an instance in which the provider is associated with a positive press review, assigning a first provider quality score. In another embodiment, the third quality analysis comprises determining whether the provider is associated with a positive press review, in an instance in which the provider is not associated with a positive press review, assigning a second provider quality score. In another embodiment, the first quality analysis comprises in an instance in which the average review score is less than a third predetermined threshold or in an instance in which the number of reviews is less than a fourth predetermined threshold, performing a fourth quality analysis. In another embodiment, the fourth quality analysis comprises in an instance in which the average review score is at least than a fifth predetermined threshold and in an instance in which the number of reviews is at least a sixth predetermined threshold, assigning a third provider quality score.
In another embodiment, in an instance in which the average review score is less than the fifth predetermined threshold or in an instance in which the number of reviews is less than a sixth predetermined threshold, the at least one memory and computer program code are configured to, with the at least one processor, cause the apparatus to determine a number of “likes”. In another embodiment, in an instance in which the average review score is at least the fifth predetermined threshold and in an instance in which the number of “likes” is at least a seventh predetermined threshold, the at least one memory and computer program code are configured to, with the at least one processor, cause the apparatus to assign a fourth provider quality score. In another embodiment, in an instance in which the average review score is less than the fifth predetermined threshold or in an instance in which the number of “likes” is less than the seventh predetermined threshold, the at least one memory and computer program code are configured to, with the at least one processor, cause the apparatus to assign a fifth provider quality score.
In another embodiment, the second quality analysis comprises in an instance in which the average review score is less than an eighth predetermined threshold or in an instance in which the number of reviews is less than a tenth predetermined threshold, assigning a tenth provider quality score. In another embodiment, in an instance in which the average review score is greater than an eighth predetermined threshold and in an instance in which the number of reviews is greater than a tenth predetermined threshold, the at least one memory and computer program code are configured to, with the at least one processor, cause the apparatus to perform a fifth quality analysis. In another embodiment the fifth quality analysis comprises in an instance in which the average review score is less than a ninth predetermined threshold, assigning an ninth provider quality score. In another embodiment, the fifth quality analysis comprises in an instance in which the average review score is greater than a ninth predetermined threshold, performing a sixth quality analysis. In another embodiment the sixth quality analysis comprises capturing a number of “likes” from one or more web sources, and determining whether the provider is associated with a positive press review from one or more web sources.
In another embodiment, in an instance in which the provider is not associated with a positive press review or in an instance in which the number of likes is less than an eleventh predetermined threshold, the at least one memory and computer program code are configured to, with the at least one processor, cause the apparatus to assign an eighth provider quality score. In another embodiment, in an instance in which the provider is associated with a positive press review, and in an instance in which the number of likes is greater than an eleventh predetermined threshold, wherein the at least one memory and computer program code are configured to, with the at least one processor, cause the apparatus to perform a seventh quality analysis. In another embodiment, the seventh quality analysis comprises in an instance in which the average review score is greater than a twelfth predetermined threshold and in an instance in which the number of “likes” is greater than a thirteenth predetermined threshold, assigning a sixth provider quality score. In another embodiment, the seventh quality analysis comprises in an instance in which the average review score is less than a twelfth predetermined threshold or in an instance in which the number of “likes” is less than a thirteenth predetermined threshold, assigning a seventh provider quality score. In another embodiment, the at least one memory and computer program code are configured to, with the at least one processor, cause the apparatus to determine whether a provider is associated with an online presence, and in an instance where the provider is not associated with an online presence, assigning a minimum provider quality score.
In another embodiment of the present invention, a computer program product is provided. The computer program product may comprise at least one computer-readable storage medium having computer-executable program code instructions stored therein, the computer-executable program code instructions comprising program code instructions for capturing one or more metrics relating to a provider, wherein the one or more metrics are indicative of a third parties evaluation of at least one of a product, service or experience provided by the provider, a performance of a provider, or the provider itself, capturing a number indicative of a quantity of the one or more captured metrics, and calculating a provider quality score based on the one or more metrics and the number indicative of a quantity of the one or more captured metrics, wherein the provider score provides an indication of future provider performance and future third party reaction to the provider.
In another embodiment, the metrics are review information, and the computer-executable program code portions further may further comprise program code instructions for calculating an average review score based on the one or more metrics and the number indicative of a quantity of metrics. In another embodiment, the computer-executable program code portions further comprise program code instructions for detecting one or more web sources related to provider information, and determining whether the one or more web sources provide metrics related to the provider. In another embodiment, the computer-executable program code portions further comprise program code instructions for detecting a provider website, rating a quality of the provider website, and factoring the quality of the provider website into the provider quality score calculation. In another embodiment, the computer-executable program code portions further comprise program code instructions for accessing prior performance data, wherein prior performance data comprises one or more of data related to a previous provider promotion, data related to a previous promotion promoted by a related provider, or data related to a previous promotion promoted by a different promotion service by the provider, and factoring the prior performance data into the provider quality score calculation.
In another embodiment, the computer-executable program code portions further comprise program code instructions for capturing positive press review information related to a provider,
determining if the positive press review information is from an acceptable source, and factoring the positive press review information into the provider quality score calculation. In another embodiment, the computer-executable program code portions further comprise program code instructions for capturing a number of “likes” related to a provider from one or more web sources, and factoring in the number of “likes” into the provider quality score application.
In another embodiment, in an instance in which the average review score is greater than a first predetermined threshold, and the number of reviews is greater than a second predetermined threshold, the computer-executable program code portions further comprise program code instructions for performing a first quality analysis. In another embodiment, in an instance in which the average review score is less than the first predetermined threshold, or the number of reviews is less than the second predetermined threshold, the computer-executable program code portions further comprise program code instructions for performing a second quality analysis. In another embodiment the first quality analysis comprises in an instance in which the average review score is greater than a third predetermined threshold and in an instance in which the number of reviews is greater than a fourth predetermined threshold, performing a third quality analysis.
In another embodiment, the third quality analysis comprises determining whether the provider is associated with a positive press review, in an instance in which the provider is associated with a positive press review, assigning a first provider quality score. In another embodiment, the third quality analysis comprises determining whether the provider is associated with a positive press review, in an instance in which the provider is not associated with a positive press review, assigning a second provider quality score. In another embodiment, the first quality analysis comprises in an instance in which the average review score is less than a third predetermined threshold or in an instance in which the number of reviews is less than a fourth predetermined threshold, performing a fourth quality analysis. In another embodiment,
the fourth quality analysis comprises in an instance in which the average review score is at least than a fifth predetermined threshold and in an instance in which the number of reviews is at least a sixth predetermined threshold, assigning a third provider quality score.
In another embodiment, in an instance in which the average review score is less than the fifth predetermined threshold or in an instance in which the number of reviews is less than a sixth predetermined threshold, the computer-executable program code portions further comprise program code instructions for determining a number of “likes”. In another embodiment, in an instance in which the average review score is at least the fifth predetermined threshold and in an instance in which the number of “likes” is at least a seventh predetermined threshold, the computer-executable program code portions further comprise program code instructions for assigning a fourth provider quality score. In another embodiment, in an instance in which the average review score is less than the fifth predetermined threshold or in an instance in which the number of “likes” is less than the seventh predetermined threshold, the computer-executable program code portions further comprise program code instructions for assigning a fifth provider quality score.
In another embodiment, the second quality analysis comprises in an instance in which the average review score is less than an eighth predetermined threshold or in an instance in which the number of reviews is less than a tenth predetermined threshold, assigning a tenth provider quality score. In another embodiment, in an instance in which the average review score is greater than an eighth predetermined threshold and in an instance in which the number of reviews is greater than a tenth predetermined threshold, the computer-executable program code portions further comprise program code instructions for performing a fifth quality analysis.
In another embodiment, the fifth quality analysis comprises in an instance in which the average review score is less than a ninth predetermined threshold, assigning an ninth provider quality score. In another embodiment, the fifth quality analysis comprises in an instance in which the average review score is greater than a ninth predetermined threshold, performing a sixth quality analysis. In another embodiment the sixth quality analysis comprises capturing a number of “likes” from one or more web sources, and determining whether the provider is associated with a positive press review from one or more web sources. In another embodiment, in an instance in which the provider is not associated with a positive press review or in an instance in which the number of likes is less than an eleventh predetermined threshold, the computer-executable program code portions further comprise program code instructions for assigning an eighth provider quality score.
In another embodiment in an instance in which the provider is associated with a positive press review, and in an instance in which the number of likes is greater than an eleventh predetermined threshold, the computer-executable program code portions further comprise program code instructions for performing a seventh quality analysis. In another embodiment,
the seventh quality analysis comprises in an instance in which the average review score is greater than a twelfth predetermined threshold and in an instance in which the number of “likes” is greater than a thirteenth predetermined threshold, assigning a sixth provider quality score.
In another embodiment, the seventh quality analysis comprises in an instance in which the average review score is less than a twelfth predetermined threshold or in an instance in which the number of “likes” is less than a thirteenth predetermined threshold, assigning a seventh provider quality score. In another embodiment, the computer-executable program code portions further comprise program code instructions for determining whether a provider is associated with an online presence, and in an instance where the provider is not associated with an online presence, assigning a minimum provider quality score.
Having thus described embodiments of the invention in general terms, reference will now be made to the accompanying drawings, which are not necessarily drawn to scale, and wherein:
Embodiments of the present invention now will be described more fully hereinafter with reference to the accompanying drawings, in which some, but not all embodiments of the inventions are shown. Indeed, embodiments of the invention may be embodied in many different forms and should not be construed as limited to the embodiments set forth herein; rather, these embodiments are provided so that this disclosure will satisfy applicable legal requirements. Like numbers refer to like elements throughout.
As used herein, the terms “data,” “content,” “information” and similar terms may be used interchangeably to refer to data capable of being captured, transmitted, received, displayed and/or stored in accordance with various example embodiments. Thus, use of any such terms should not be taken to limit the spirit and scope of the disclosure. Further, where a computing device is described herein to receive data from another computing device, it will be appreciated that the data may be received directly from the another computing device or may be received indirectly via one or more intermediary computing devices, such as, for example, one or more servers, relays, routers, network access points, base stations, and/or the like, sometimes referred to herein as a “network.” Similarly, where a computing device is described herein to send data to another computing device, it will be appreciated that the data may be sent directly to the another computing device or may be sent indirectly via one or more intermediary computing devices, such as, for example, one or more servers, relays, routers, network access points, base stations, and/or the like.
The methods, apparatus and computer program products described herein are operable to calculate a provider quality score for a potential supply source. In one example, a provider quality score indicates a predicative value that is indicative of how well a provider would perform during a promotion offered by a promotion and marketing service and how consumers would react to the promotion.
In one example, a promotion and marketing system may calculate a demand for a particular promotion and then identify providers to fill the demand. In an instance in which one or more providers are able to provide good, services and/or experiences related to a particular promotion, and the promotion and marketing system identifies them as such, each of one or more providers may be scored and/or valued by one or more metrics. A provider quality score is one metric.
The provider quality score may include factors such as reviews from a plurality of internet sites (e.g., Yelp®, etc.), likes (e.g., Facebook® likes), existence and quality of website, prior offer performance(s), competitor offers, prior performance of related merchants, and/or Hotspots. For example, a decision model may be used to generate a provider quality score. As such, if a merchant has at least an average of 3.0 stars over five reviews, then a merchant may receive a provider quality score of between 6-10 depending on the overall star average, number of reviews and social media like. In other examples, a provider without 3.0 stars over five reviews may receive a high merchant quality score (e.g., 8) if that provider has a large number of likes, a positive review from a predetermined acceptable source and/or the like.
A promotion and marketing service may include a service that is accessible via one or more computing devices and is operable to provide example promotion and/or marketing services on behalf of one or more providers that are offering one or more instruments that are redeemable for goods, services, experiences and/or the like. The promotion and marketing service is further configured to illustrate or otherwise inform one or more consumers of the availability of one or more instruments in the form of one or more impressions. In some examples, the promotion and marketing service may also take the form of a redemption authority, a payment processor, a rewards provider, an entity in a financial network, a promoter, an agent and/or the like. As such, the service is, in some example embodiments, configured to present one or more promotions via one or more impressions, accept payments for promotions from consumers, issue instruments upon acceptance of an offer, participate in redemption, generate rewards, provide a point of sale device or service, issue payments to providers and/or or otherwise participate in the exchange of goods, services or experiences for currency, value and/or the like.
A provider may include, but is not limited to, a merchant, business owner, consigner, shopkeeper, tradesperson, vender, operator, entrepreneur, agent, dealer, organization, supply source or the like that is in the business of a providing a good, service or experience to a consumer, facilitating the provision of a good, service or experience to a consumer and/or otherwise operating in the stream of commerce. For example, a provider may the form of a running company that sells attire that is generally used by a person who runs or participates in athletic activities.
A promotion may include, but is not limited to, any type of offered, presented or otherwise indicated reward, discount, coupon, credit, deal, incentive, discount, media or the like that is indicative of a promotional value or the like that upon purchase or acceptance results in the issuance of an instrument that may be used toward at least a portion of the purchase of particular goods, services and/or experiences defined by the promotion. An example promotion, using the aforementioned running company as the example provider, is $25 for $50 toward running shoes. In some examples, the promotion defines an accepted value (e.g., a cost to purchase the promotion), a promotional value (e.g., the value of the resultant instrument beyond the accepted value), a residual value (e.g., the value upon return or upon expiry of one or more redemption parameters), one or more redemptions parameters and/or the like. For example, and using the running company promotion as an example, the accepted value is $25 and the promotional value is $50. In this example, the residual value may be equal to the accepted value.
Consumers may include, but is not limited to, a client, customer, purchaser, shopper, user or the like who may be in the position to or does exchange value for one or more instruments under the terms defined by the one or promotions. For example, and using the aforementioned running company as the example provider, an individual who is interested in purchasing running shoes.
An instrument may include, but is not limited to, any type of gift card, tender, electronic certificate, medium of exchange, voucher, or the like that embodies the terms of the promotion from which the instrument resulted and may be used toward at least a portion of the purchase, acquisition, procurement, consumption or the like of goods, services and/or experiences. In some examples, the instrument may take the form of tender that has a given value that is exchangeable for goods, services and/or experiences and/or a reduction in a purchase price of a particular good, service or experience. In some examples, the instrument may have multiple values, such as accepted value, a promotional value and/or a residual value. For example, using the aforementioned running company as the example provider, an electronic indication in a mobile application that shows $50 of value to spend at the running company. In some examples, the accepted value of the instrument is defined by the value exchanged for the instrument. In some examples, the promotional value is defined by the promotion from which the instrument resulted and is the value of the instrument beyond the accepted value. In some examples, the residual value is the value after redemption, the value after the expiry or other violation of a redemption parameter, the return or exchange value of the instrument and/or the like.
By way of further example,
As shown in block 12 of
As shown in block 14 of
As shown in block 16 of
As shown in block 18 of
For example, if a merchant has at least an average of 3.0 stars with over five reviews, then a merchant may receive a provider quality score of between 6-10 depending on the overall star average, number of reviews and social media likes. In other examples, a provider without 3.0 stars or over five reviews may receive a high provider quality score (e.g., 8) if that provider has a large number of likes, a positive review from a predetermined acceptable source and/or the like.
Referring now of
The computing device 22 may be embodied by a number of different devices including mobile computing devices, such as a personal digital assistant (PDA), mobile telephone, smartphone, laptop computer, tablet computer, or any combination of the aforementioned, and other types of voice and text communications systems. Alternatively, the computing device may be a fixed computing device, such as a personal computer, a computer workstation or the like. The server 24 may also be embodied by a computing device and, in one embodiment, is embodied by a web server. Additionally, while the system of
Regardless of the type of device that embodies the computing device 22, the computing device may include or be associated with an apparatus 30 as shown in
In some embodiments, the processor 32 (and/or co-processors or any other processing circuitry assisting or otherwise associated with the processor) may be in communication with the memory device 34 via a bus for passing information among components of the apparatus. The memory device may include, for example, one or more volatile and/or non-volatile memories. In other words, for example, the memory device may be an electronic storage device (e.g., a computer readable storage medium) comprising gates configured to store data (e.g., bits) that may be retrievable by a machine (e.g., a computing device like the processor). The memory device may be configured to store information, data, content, applications, instructions, or the like for enabling the apparatus 30 to carry out various functions in accordance with an example embodiment of the present invention. For example, the memory device could be configured to buffer input data for processing by the processor. Additionally or alternatively, the memory device could be configured to store instructions for execution by the processor.
As noted above, the apparatus 30 may be embodied by a computing device 22 configured to employ an example embodiment of the present invention. However, in some embodiments, the apparatus may be embodied as a chip or chip set. In other words, the apparatus may comprise one or more physical packages (e.g., chips) including materials, components and/or wires on a structural assembly (e.g., a baseboard). The structural assembly may provide physical strength, conservation of size, and/or limitation of electrical interaction for component circuitry included thereon. The apparatus may therefore, in some cases, be configured to implement an embodiment of the present invention on a single chip or as a single “system on a chip.” As such, in some cases, a chip or chipset may constitute means for performing one or more operations for providing the functionalities described herein.
The processor 32 may be embodied in a number of different ways. For example, the processor may be embodied as one or more of various hardware processing means such as a coprocessor, a microprocessor, a controller, a digital signal processor (DSP), a processing element with or without an accompanying DSP, or various other processing circuitry including integrated circuits such as, for example, an ASIC (application specific integrated circuit), an FPGA (field programmable gate array), a microcontroller unit (MCU), a hardware accelerator, a special-purpose computer chip, or the like. As such, in some embodiments, the processor may include one or more processing cores configured to perform independently. A multi-core processor may enable multiprocessing within a single physical package. Additionally or alternatively, the processor may include one or more processors configured in tandem via the bus to enable independent execution of instructions, pipelining and/or multithreading.
In an example embodiment, the processor 32 may be configured to execute instructions stored in the memory device 34 or otherwise accessible to the processor. Alternatively or additionally, the processor may be configured to execute hard coded functionality. As such, whether configured by hardware or software methods, or by a combination thereof, the processor may represent an entity (e.g., physically embodied in circuitry) capable of performing operations according to an embodiment of the present invention while configured accordingly. Thus, for example, when the processor is embodied as an ASIC, FPGA or the like, the processor may be specifically configured hardware for conducting the operations described herein. Alternatively, as another example, when the processor is embodied as an executor of software instructions, the instructions may specifically configure the processor to perform the algorithms and/or operations described herein when the instructions are executed. However, in some cases, the processor may be a processor of a specific device (e.g., a head mounted display) configured to employ an embodiment of the present invention by further configuration of the processor by instructions for performing the algorithms and/or operations described herein. The processor may include, among other things, a clock, an arithmetic logic unit (ALU) and logic gates configured to support operation of the processor. In one embodiment, the processor may also include user interface circuitry configured to control at least some functions of one or more elements of the user interface 28.
Meanwhile, the communication interface 36 may be any means such as a device or circuitry embodied in either hardware or a combination of hardware and software that is configured to receive and/or transmit data between the computing device 22 and a server 24. In this regard, the communication interface 36 may include, for example, an antenna (or multiple antennas) and supporting hardware and/or software for enabling communications wirelessly. Additionally or alternatively, the communication interface may include the circuitry for interacting with the antenna(s) to cause transmission of signals via the antenna(s) or to handle receipt of signals received via the antenna(s). For example, the communications interface may be configured to communicate wirelessly with the head mounted displays, such as via Wi-Fi, Bluetooth or other wireless communications techniques. In some instances, the communication interface may alternatively or also support wired communication. As such, for example, the communication interface may include a communication modem and/or other hardware/software for supporting communication via cable, digital subscriber line (DSL), universal serial bus (USB) or other mechanisms. For example, the communication interface may be configured to communicate via wired communication with other components of the computing device.
The user interface 38 may be in communication with the processor 32, such as the user interface circuitry, to receive an indication of a user input and/or to provide an audible, visual, mechanical, or other output to a user. As such, the user interface may include, for example, a keyboard, a mouse, a display, a touch screen display, a microphone, a speaker, and/or other input/output mechanisms. In some embodiments, a display may refer to display on a screen, on a wall, on glasses (e.g., near-eye-display), in the air, etc. The user interface may also be in communication with the memory 34 and/or the communication interface 36, such as via a bus.
Accordingly, blocks of the flowcharts support combinations of means for performing the specified functions and combinations of operations for performing the specified functions. It will also be understood that one or more blocks of the flowcharts, and combinations of blocks in the flowcharts, can be implemented by special purpose hardware-based computer systems which perform the specified functions, or combinations of special purpose hardware and computer instructions.
In some embodiments, certain ones of the operations herein may be modified or further amplified as described below. Moreover, in some embodiments additional optional operations may also be included. It should be appreciated that each of the modifications, optional additions or amplifications below may be included with the operations above either alone or in combination with any others among the features described herein.
As shown in block 402 of
As shown in block 404 of
As shown in block 406 of
As shown in block 408 of
As shown in block 410 of
As shown in block 412 of
As shown in block 414 of
As shown in block 416 of
As shown in block 418 of
As shown in block 420 of
As shown in block 422 of
As shown in block 424 of
As shown in block 502 of
If the determination at block 502 yields a yes, process 500 proceeds to block 504. If the determination at block 502 yields a no, the process proceeds to block 528, which will be discussed later.
As shown in block 504 of
If the determination at block 504 yields a yes, process 500 proceeds to block 506. If the determination at block 504 yields a no, the process proceeds to block 528, which will be discussed later.
As shown in block 506 of
If the determination at block 506 yields a yes, process 500 proceeds to block 508. If the determination at block 506 yields a no, the process proceeds to block 516, which will be discussed later.
As shown in block 508 of
If the determination at block 508 yields a yes, process 500 proceeds to block 510. If the determination at block 508 yields a no, the process proceeds to block 516, which will be discussed later.
As shown in block 510 of
If the determination at block 510 yields a yes, process 500 proceeds to block 512. If the determination at block 510 yields a no, the process proceeds to block 514, which will be discussed later.
As shown in block 512 of
As shown in block 514 of
As shown in block 516 of
If the determination at block 516 yields a yes, process 500 proceeds to block 518. If the determination at block 516 yields a no, the process proceeds to block 526, which will be discussed later.
As shown in block 518 of
If the determination at block 518 yields a yes, process 500 proceeds to block 520. If the determination at block 518 yields a no, the process proceeds to block 522, which will be discussed later.
As shown in block 520 of
As shown in block 522 of
If the determination at block 522 yields a yes, process 500 proceeds to block 524. If the determination at block 522 yields a no, the process proceeds to block 526, which will be discussed later.
As shown in block 524 of
As shown in block 526 of
As shown in block 528 of
If the determination at block 528 yields a yes, process 500 proceeds to block 530. If the determination at block 528 yields a no, the process proceeds to block 532, which will be discussed later.
As shown in block 530 of
As shown in block 532 of
If the determination at block 532 yields a yes, process 500 proceeds to block 534. If the determination at block 532 yields a no, the process proceeds to block 536, which will be discussed later.
As shown in block 534 of
As shown in block 536 of
If the determination at block 536 yields a no, process 500 proceeds to block 538. If the determination at block 536 yields a yes, the process proceeds to block 540, which will be discussed later.
As shown in block 538 of
As shown in block 540 of
If the determination at block 540 yields a no, process 500 proceeds to block 542. If the determination at block 540 yields a yes, the process proceeds to block 544, which will be discussed later.
As shown in block 542 of
As shown in block 544 of
If the determination at block 544 yields a yes, process 500 proceeds to block 526 where a fifth provider quality score may be assigned. If the determination at block 544 yields a no, the process proceeds to block 546.
As shown in block 546 of
As shown in block 602 of
If the determination at block 602 yields a no, process 600 proceeds to block 604. If the determination at block 602 yields a yes, process 600 proceeds to block 606.
As shown in block 604 of
As shown in block 606 of
Review information may be provided by one or more review type websites, web or network sources, or databases, internal or external. In one embodiment, a website may provide a star rating (e.g., 1 star, 2 stars . . . 5 stars) and a number of reviews factored into calculating the star rating (e.g., 130 reviews). In another embodiment, a website may provide a plurality of different categories that have been reviewed. For example, a website may provide separate reviews for a product, a service, a cost, a value, décor, or the like, where a provider may be reviewed on each of one or more of the categories. For example, a pizza restaurant may be reviewed based on “food”, “service”, and “décor”.
In another embodiment, the review information that may be captured may be ranked. For example, a review website may provide reviews as rankings. For example, when looking at “pizza restaurants” in a locations, the pizza restaurants may be displayed in a ranked format or provided with an associated ranking. Additionally, each of a plurality of categories may be ranked. For example, a pizza restaurant may have review information indicating the 23rd best food, 8th best service, and 15th best décor.
In another embodiment, review information may be provided by a review website in a format indicating a percentage of reviewers who “liked it.” For example, a pizza restaurant may have review information indicating that “81% liked it.”
As shown in block 608 of
In an instance in which a start rating and a number of reviews is provided, a review score may be determined by using the star rating. In an instance where more than one source of review information is captured and utilized for calculating an aggregated review score, the star rating and the number of reviews may be factored into the aggregated review score.
In an instance in which captured review information is in a format divided into a plurality of categories, the review score may use any one category, an average of any two or more categories, or a weighted average of any two or more categories. A determination on which to use may be dependent on a category, sub-category, location, hyper-location, or price of a promotion and/or service that the provider is expected to provide. For example, sub-category “burger restaurants” may utilize review information from one reviewed category (e.g., “food”), “Italian restaurants” may utilize an average of two reviewed categories (e.g., “food” and “service”), and “Asian restaurants” may utilize a weighted average of three reviewed categories (e.g., 40% “décor”, 40% “food”, and 20% “service”).
In an instance where review information is in a format indicating a percentage of reviewers that “liked it”, the review score may be calculated or determined based on “buckets”. For example, a review score of 1.0 may be calculated for providers with review information indicating that 0%-20% “liked it, a 2.0 for 21%-40%, 3.0 for 41%-60, a 4.0 for 61%-80% and a 5.0 for 81%-100%. The “buckets” may be smaller and the review scores divided into 0.5 s, such as for example, a 0.5 for 0%-10%, a 1.5 for 30%-40%, 2.5 for 50%-60%, a 3.5 for 70%-80% and a 4.5 for 90%-100%.
As shown in block 610 of
If the determination at block 610 yields a no, process 600 proceeds to block 630, which will be discussed later. If the determination at block 610 yields a yes, process 600 proceeds to block 612.
As shown in block 612 of
If the determination at block 612 yields a no, process 600 proceeds to block 622, which will be discussed later. If the determination at block 610 yields a yes, process 600 proceeds to block 614.
As shown in block 614 of
If a positive press review is found or determined to exist at block 614, process 600 proceeds to block 616. If a positive press review is not found or determined not to exist at block 614, process 600 proceeds to block 620, which will be discussed later.
As shown in block 616 of
As shown in block 618 of
As shown in block 620 of
As shown in block 622 of
If the determination at block 622 yields a yes, process 600 proceeds to block 620, where a provider is assigned one of a fourth subset of provider quality scores. If the determination at block 622 yields a no, process 600 proceeds to block 624.
As shown in block 624 of
As shown in block 626 of
Additionally or alternatively, block 624 may capture a percentage of likes (e.g., information such as “85% of people liked provider Y”) and block 626 may determine if that percentage is greater than or equal to at least a predetermined percentage.
If the determination at block 626 yields a yes, process 600 proceeds to block 620, where a provider is assigned one of a fourth subset of provider quality scores. If the determination at block 622 yields a no, process 600 proceeds to block 628.
As shown in block 628 of
As shown in block 630 of
If the determination at block 630 yields a no indicating for example a low review score and a sufficient number of reviews, process 600 proceeds to block 604, where a provider is assigned one of a first subset of provider quality scores. If the determination at block 630 yields a yes, process 600 proceeds to block 632.
As shown in block 632 of
If the determination at block 632 yields a no indicating for example a low review score and a sufficient number of reviews, process 600 proceeds to block 642, which is discussed later. If the determination at block 632 yields a yes, process 600 proceeds to block 634.
As shown in block 634 of
As shown in block 636 of
As shown in block 638 of
As shown in block 640 of
If the determination at block 640 yields a no, process 600 proceeds to block 642, which is discussed below. If the determination at block 640 yields a yes, process 600 proceeds to block 626 discussed above.
As shown in block 642 of
As shown in block 702 of
If the determination at block 702 yields a yes, the process 700 proceeds to block 704. As shown in block 704 of
If the determination at block 704 yields a yes, the process 700 proceeds to block 706. As shown in block 706 of
If the determination at block 706 yields a yes, the process 700 proceeds to block 708. As shown in block 708 of
If the determination at block 704 yields a no, the process 700 proceeds to block 710. As shown in block 710 of
If the determination at block 710 yields a yes, the process 700 proceeds to block 712. As shown in block 712 of
If the determination at block 710 yields a no, the process 700 proceeds to block 714. As shown in block 714 of
If the determination at block 714 yields a yes, the process 700 proceeds to block 712, where the provider is assigned a score of 8. If the determination at block 714 yields a no, the process 700 proceeds to block 716. As shown in block 716 of
If the determination at block 702 yields a no, the process 700 proceeds to block 718. As shown in block 718 of
If the determination at block 718 yields a yes, the process 700 proceeds to block 720. As shown in block 720 of
If the determination at block 718 yields a no, the process 700 proceeds to block 722. As shown in block 722 of
If the determination at block 722 yields a no, the process 700 proceeds to block 724. As shown in block 724 of
If the determination at block 722 yields a yes, the process 700 proceeds to block 726. As shown in block 726 of
If the determination at block 726 yields a no, the process 700 proceeds to block 724 where the provider is assigned a score of 4. If the determination at block 726 yields a yes, the process 700 proceeds to block 714.
As shown in block 728 of
Promotion system 810 can be coupled to a search engine system 834, a 3rd party server 832, via network 28. Promotion system 810 may additionally be coupled to one or more consumer devices and/or one or more provider devices via network 28
In this regard, network 28 may include any wired or wireless communication network including, for example, a wired or wireless local area network (LAN), personal area network (PAN), metropolitan area network (MAN), wide area network (WAN), or the like, as well as any hardware, software and/or firmware required to implement it (such as, e.g., network routers, etc.). For example, network 28 may include a cellular telephone, an 802.11, 802.16, 802.20, and/or WiMax network. Further, the network 28 may include a public network, such as the Internet, a private network, such as an intranet, or combinations thereof, and may utilize a variety of networking protocols now available or later developed including, but not limited to TCP/IP based networking protocols. In one embodiment, promotion system 810 can be coupled to any consumer and/or provider devices directly via any wired or wireless communication network including, for example, a wired or wireless local area network (LAN), personal area network (PAN), metropolitan area network (MAN), wide area network (WAN), or the like, as well as any hardware, software and/or firmware required to implement it.
Consumer devices and/or provider devices may each be implemented as a personal computer and/or other networked device, such as a cellular phone, a “smartphone”, a tablet computer, mobile device, etc., that may be used for any suitable purpose in addition to buying or selling offers.
Memory 34 of promotion system 810 may include promotional computing device 812, and/or other programs 820 and data repositories 822. Promotional computing device 812 can be any suitable network server and/or other type of processing device. The programs 820 and data repositories 822 may be any suitable network database configured to store offer parameter data, consumer account information, merchant account information and/or analytics data, such as that discussed herein. In this regard, promotion system 810 may include, for example, at least one backend data server, network database, cloud computing device, among other things.
Regarding promotion system 810,
In addition, promotion system 810 may comprise one or more distinct computing systems/devices and may span distributed locations. In other example embodiments, a pre-processing module or other module that requires heavy computational load may be configured to perform that computational load and thus may be on a remote device or server. Furthermore, each block shown may represent one or more such blocks as appropriate to a specific example embodiment. In some cases one or more of the blocks may be combined with other blocks.
Processor 32 may, for example, be embodied as various means including one or more microprocessors with accompanying digital signal processor(s), one or more processor(s) without an accompanying digital signal processor, one or more coprocessors, one or more multi-core processors, one or more controllers, processing circuitry, one or more computers, various other processing elements including integrated circuits such as, for example, an ASIC or FPGA, or some combination thereof. Accordingly, although illustrated in
Whether configured by hardware, firmware/software methods, or by a combination thereof, processor 32 may comprise an entity capable of performing operations according to embodiments of the present invention while configured accordingly. Thus, for example, when processor 32 is embodied as an ASIC, FPGA or the like, processor 32 may comprise specifically configured hardware for conducting one or more operations described herein. Alternatively, as another example, when processor 32 is embodied as an executor of instructions, such as may be stored in memory 34, the instructions may specifically configure processor 32 to perform one or more algorithms and operations described herein, such as those discussed in connection with
Memory 34 may comprise, for example, volatile memory, non-volatile memory, or some combination thereof. Although illustrated in
Communications interface 36 may be embodied as any device or means embodied in circuitry, hardware, a computer program product comprising computer readable program instructions stored on a computer readable medium (e.g., memory 34) and executed by a processing device (e.g., processor 32), or a combination thereof that is configured to receive and/or transmit data from/to another device, such as, for example, a consumer device, a provider device and/or the like. In some embodiments, communications interface 36 (like other components discussed herein) can be at least partially embodied as or otherwise controlled by processor 32. In this regard, communications interface 36 may be in communication with processor 32, such as via a bus. Communications interface 36 may include, for example, an antenna, a transmitter, a receiver, a transceiver, network interface card and/or supporting hardware and/or firmware/software for enabling communications with another computing device. Communications interface 36 may be configured to receive and/or transmit any data that may be stored by memory 34 using any protocol that may be used for communications between computing devices. Communications interface 36 may, alternatively or additionally, be in communication with the memory 34, user interface 38 and/or any other component of promotion system 810, such as via a bus.
User interface 38 may be in communication with processor 302 to receive an indication of a user input and/or to provide an audible, visual, mechanical, or other output to a user (e.g., merchant and/or consumer). As such, user interface 38 may include support, for example, for a keyboard, a mouse, a joystick, a display, a touch screen display, a microphone, a speaker, a RFID reader, credit card reader, barcode reader, biometric scanner, and/or other input/output mechanisms as represented by 308. User interface 38 may be in communication with the memory 34, communications interface 306, and/or any other component(s), such as via a bus. Although more than one input/output module and/or other component can be included in promotion system 810, only one is shown in
Detection module 814 may be included and configured to perform the functionality discussed herein related to accessing a network or the world wide web (WWW) and/or detecting a presence of information related to a provider on a network or WWW. In some embodiments, some or all of the functionality of detection module 814 may be performed by processor 32. In this regard, the example processes and algorithms discussed herein can be performed by at least one processor 32 and/or detection module 814. For example, non-transitory computer readable media can be configured to store firmware, one or more application programs, and/or other software, which include instructions and other computer-readable program code portions that can be executed to control each processor (e.g., processor 32 and/or detection module 814) of the components of promotional computing device 810 to implement various operations, including the examples shown above. As such, a series of computer-readable program code portions are embodied in one or more computer program products and can be used, with a computing device, server, and/or other programmable apparatus, to produce machine-implemented processes.
Capturing module 816 can be configured to capturing review information from a network, the WWW, and/or a database. In order to capture review information, capturing module 816 may be configured to determine locations and/or formats of review information.
Calculating module 818 may be configured to assign, calculate or determine a provider quality score. Alternatively or additionally, calculating module 818 can be configured to calculate a review score from a plurality of different formats and/or sources to be utilized in the assignment, calculation and/or determination of the provider quality score. Furthermore, the Calculating module 818 can be configured to convert, trim and/or selectively utilize review information and/or review scores.
As will be appreciated, any such computer program instructions and/or other type of code may be loaded onto a computer, processor or other programmable apparatus's circuitry to produce a machine, such that the computer, processor other programmable circuitry that execute the code on the machine create the means for implementing various functions, including those described herein.
As described above and as will be appreciated based on this disclosure, embodiments of the present invention may be configured as methods, mobile devices, backend network devices, and the like. Accordingly, embodiments may comprise various means including entirely of hardware or any combination of software and hardware. Furthermore, embodiments may take the form of a computer program product on at least one non-transitory computer-readable storage medium having computer-readable program instructions (e.g., computer software) embodied in the storage medium. Any suitable computer-readable storage medium may be utilized including non-transitory hard disks, CD-ROMs, flash memory, optical storage devices, or magnetic storage devices.
Embodiments of the present invention have been described above with reference to block diagrams and flowchart illustrations of methods, apparatuses, systems and computer program products. It will be understood that each block of the circuit diagrams and process flowcharts, and combinations of blocks in the circuit diagrams and process flowcharts, respectively, can be implemented by various means including computer program instructions. These computer program instructions may be loaded onto a general purpose computer, special purpose computer, or other programmable data processing apparatus to produce a machine, such that the computer program product includes the instructions which execute on the computer or other programmable data processing apparatus create a means for implementing the functions specified in the flowchart block or blocks.
These computer program instructions may also be stored in a computer-readable storage device that can direct a computer or other programmable data processing apparatus to function in a particular manner, such that the instructions stored in the computer-readable storage device produce an article of manufacture including computer-readable instructions for implementing the function discussed herein. The computer program instructions may also be loaded onto a computer or other programmable data processing apparatus to cause a series of operational steps to be performed on the computer or other programmable apparatus to produce a computer-implemented process such that the instructions that execute on the computer or other programmable apparatus provide steps for implementing the functions discussed herein.
Accordingly, blocks of the block diagrams and flowchart illustrations support combinations of means for performing the specified functions, combinations of steps for performing the specified functions and program instruction means for performing the specified functions. It will also be understood that each block of the circuit diagrams and process flowcharts, and combinations of blocks in the circuit diagrams and process flowcharts, can be implemented by special purpose hardware-based computer systems that perform the specified functions or steps, or combinations of special purpose hardware and computer instructions.
Many modifications and other embodiments of the inventions set forth herein will come to mind to one skilled in the art to which these embodiments of the invention pertain having the benefit of the teachings presented in the foregoing descriptions and the associated drawings. Therefore, it is to be understood that the embodiments of the invention are not to be limited to the specific embodiments disclosed and that modifications and other embodiments are intended to be included within the scope of the appended claims. Although specific terms are employed herein, they are used in a generic and descriptive sense only and not for purposes of limitation.
This application claims priority to U.S. Provisional Patent Application No. 61/730,046, titled “METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR MATCHING SUBSCRIBER DEMAND WITH MERCHANT/INVENTORY SUPPLY” filed on Nov. 26, 2012″, and U.S. Provisional Application No. 61/709,623, titled “MERCHANT SIDE CROSS-CATEGORY DEAL DIVERSITY”, filed Oct. 4, 2012, each of which is hereby incorporated by reference. The present application is related to U.S. patent application Ser. No. 13/803,445, filed Mar. 14, 2013, titled “METHOD, APPARATUS, AND COMPUTER PROGRAM PRODUCT FOR SALES PIPELINE AUTOMATION”, U.S. patent application Ser. No. 13/826,333, filed Mar. 14, 2013, titled “METHOD, APPARATUS, AND COMPUTER PROGRAM PRODUCT FOR DEMAND FORECASTING”, U.S. patent application Ser. No. 13/805,000, filed Mar. 14, 2013, titled “METHOD, APPARATUS, AND COMPUTER PROGRAM PRODUCT FOR IDENTIFICATION OF SUPPLY SOURCES”, U.S. patent application Ser. No. 13/826,464, filed Mar. 14, 2013, titled “METHOD, APPARATUS, AND COMPUTER PROGRAM PRODUCT FOR LEAD ASSIGNMENT”, U.S. patent application Ser. No. 13/826,757, filed Mar. 14, 2013, titled “METHOD, APPARATUS, AND COMPUTER PROGRAM PRODUCT FOR DETERMINING A PROVIDER RETURN RATE”, U.S. patent application Ser. No. 13/804,403, filed Mar. 14, 2013, titled “METHOD, APPARATUS, AND COMPUTER PROGRAM PRODUCT FOR IDENTIFYING A SERVICE NEED VIA A PROMOTIONAL SYSTEM”, U.S. patent application Ser. No. 13/804,316, filed Mar. 14, 2013, titled “METHOD, APPARATUS, AND COMPUTER PROGRAM PRODUCT FOR DETERMINING CLOSING METRICS”, and U.S. patent application Ser. No. 13/830,243, filed Mar. 14, 2013, titled “CAPACITY CALCULATOR”, and U.S. patent application Ser. No. 13/803,275, filed Mar. 14, 2013, titled “MERCHANT SIDE CROSS-CATEGORY DEAL DIVERSITY” each of which is hereby incorporated by reference.
| Number | Name | Date | Kind |
|---|---|---|---|
| 6058371 | Djian | May 2000 | A |
| 6922672 | Hailpern et al. | Jul 2005 | B1 |
| 7092929 | Dvorak et al. | Aug 2006 | B1 |
| 7240025 | Stone et al. | Jul 2007 | B2 |
| 7647255 | Wang et al. | Jan 2010 | B2 |
| 7720708 | Elkins, II et al. | May 2010 | B1 |
| 7769628 | Mathews et al. | Aug 2010 | B2 |
| 7917387 | Spurr et al. | Mar 2011 | B2 |
| 8001058 | Harding | Aug 2011 | B1 |
| 8010404 | Wu et al. | Aug 2011 | B1 |
| 8019744 | Roizen et al. | Sep 2011 | B1 |
| 8200521 | Hader | Jun 2012 | B2 |
| 8214238 | Fairfield et al. | Jul 2012 | B1 |
| 8249942 | Mesaros | Aug 2012 | B2 |
| 8478650 | Ridley et al. | Jul 2013 | B2 |
| 8533038 | Bergh et al. | Sep 2013 | B2 |
| 8600843 | Bachman et al. | Dec 2013 | B2 |
| 8725597 | Mauseth | May 2014 | B2 |
| 20010032128 | Kepecs | Oct 2001 | A1 |
| 20010039514 | Barenbaum et al. | Nov 2001 | A1 |
| 20020042739 | Srinivasan et al. | Apr 2002 | A1 |
| 20020052820 | Gatto | May 2002 | A1 |
| 20020099678 | Albright et al. | Jul 2002 | A1 |
| 20020169654 | Santos et al. | Nov 2002 | A1 |
| 20020198756 | Ghaisas et al. | Dec 2002 | A1 |
| 20030046191 | Ferreri et al. | Mar 2003 | A1 |
| 20030065603 | Aihara et al. | Apr 2003 | A1 |
| 20030220830 | Myr | Nov 2003 | A1 |
| 20040093296 | Phelan et al. | May 2004 | A1 |
| 20040143473 | Tivey et al. | Jul 2004 | A1 |
| 20050055275 | Newman et al. | Mar 2005 | A1 |
| 20050060242 | Armstrong et al. | Mar 2005 | A1 |
| 20050096963 | Myr et al. | May 2005 | A1 |
| 20050187818 | Zito et al. | Aug 2005 | A1 |
| 20050261951 | Tighe | Nov 2005 | A1 |
| 20050267828 | Baron et al. | Dec 2005 | A1 |
| 20060041500 | Diana et al. | Feb 2006 | A1 |
| 20060047559 | Jacoby et al. | Mar 2006 | A1 |
| 20060161534 | Carson, Jr. et al. | Jul 2006 | A1 |
| 20060212355 | Teague et al. | Sep 2006 | A1 |
| 20060287946 | Toms | Dec 2006 | A1 |
| 20070016508 | Lapointe et al. | Jan 2007 | A1 |
| 20070050276 | Mannion | Mar 2007 | A1 |
| 20070087831 | Van Luchene et al. | Apr 2007 | A1 |
| 20070168131 | Root et al. | Jul 2007 | A1 |
| 20080021844 | Sanwal et al. | Jan 2008 | A1 |
| 20080177615 | Chen-Ritzo et al. | Jul 2008 | A1 |
| 20080256061 | Chang et al. | Oct 2008 | A1 |
| 20080270209 | Mauseth | Oct 2008 | A1 |
| 20080281756 | Riise et al. | Nov 2008 | A1 |
| 20080288481 | Zeng et al. | Nov 2008 | A1 |
| 20080294996 | Hunt et al. | Nov 2008 | A1 |
| 20080306812 | Bowen et al. | Dec 2008 | A1 |
| 20080313018 | Kamm, IV et al. | Dec 2008 | A1 |
| 20090024402 | Delingat | Jan 2009 | A1 |
| 20090048859 | McCarthy et al. | Feb 2009 | A1 |
| 20090119258 | Petty | May 2009 | A1 |
| 20090177540 | Quatse | Jul 2009 | A1 |
| 20090276296 | Spriegel | Nov 2009 | A1 |
| 20090281818 | Li et al. | Nov 2009 | A1 |
| 20100050201 | Kubota et al. | Feb 2010 | A1 |
| 20100082410 | Baudin et al. | Apr 2010 | A1 |
| 20100082413 | Huberman et al. | Apr 2010 | A1 |
| 20100082442 | Ma et al. | Apr 2010 | A1 |
| 20100094693 | Corke | Apr 2010 | A1 |
| 20100179704 | Ozog | Jul 2010 | A1 |
| 20100211455 | Williams et al. | Aug 2010 | A1 |
| 20110029382 | Narasimhan et al. | Feb 2011 | A1 |
| 20110087531 | Winters et al. | Apr 2011 | A1 |
| 20110112892 | Tarantino | May 2011 | A1 |
| 20110112897 | Tietzen et al. | May 2011 | A1 |
| 20110173059 | Benson | Jul 2011 | A1 |
| 20110219073 | Lawler | Sep 2011 | A1 |
| 20110225023 | Evens et al. | Sep 2011 | A1 |
| 20110231321 | Milne | Sep 2011 | A1 |
| 20110246255 | Gilbert et al. | Oct 2011 | A1 |
| 20110246260 | Gilbert et al. | Oct 2011 | A1 |
| 20110246306 | Okabe et al. | Oct 2011 | A1 |
| 20110258067 | Rowell | Oct 2011 | A1 |
| 20110289106 | O'Brien | Nov 2011 | A1 |
| 20110313840 | Stolte | Dec 2011 | A1 |
| 20120010931 | Modani | Jan 2012 | A1 |
| 20120036009 | Aronowich | Feb 2012 | A1 |
| 20120054001 | Zivkovic et al. | Mar 2012 | A1 |
| 20120054019 | Powter | Mar 2012 | A1 |
| 20120054020 | Jacobs | Mar 2012 | A1 |
| 20120066393 | Tekwani | Mar 2012 | A1 |
| 20120078721 | Dakka et al. | Mar 2012 | A1 |
| 20120123851 | Bax et al. | May 2012 | A1 |
| 20120123863 | Kaul et al. | May 2012 | A1 |
| 20120203708 | Psota | Aug 2012 | A1 |
| 20120246015 | Bennett et al. | Sep 2012 | A1 |
| 20120259705 | Monteverde | Oct 2012 | A1 |
| 20120271660 | Harris et al. | Oct 2012 | A1 |
| 20120278154 | Lange et al. | Nov 2012 | A1 |
| 20120291087 | Agrawal | Nov 2012 | A1 |
| 20120323634 | Oksman | Dec 2012 | A1 |
| 20120330720 | Pickton et al. | Dec 2012 | A1 |
| 20120330772 | Choe et al. | Dec 2012 | A1 |
| 20130006916 | McBride et al. | Jan 2013 | A1 |
| 20130013345 | Wallquist et al. | Jan 2013 | A1 |
| 20130013404 | Suprock et al. | Jan 2013 | A1 |
| 20130030872 | Oksman | Jan 2013 | A1 |
| 20130036069 | Salloum | Feb 2013 | A1 |
| 20130054369 | Grigg et al. | Feb 2013 | A1 |
| 20130066885 | Komuves | Mar 2013 | A1 |
| 20130073381 | Binkley | Mar 2013 | A1 |
| 20130080239 | Okerlund | Mar 2013 | A1 |
| 20130103634 | Jojic | Apr 2013 | A1 |
| 20130159319 | Duan | Jun 2013 | A1 |
| 20130179264 | Wilson | Jul 2013 | A1 |
| 20130185147 | Letca et al. | Jul 2013 | A1 |
| 20130197675 | McCarthy et al. | Aug 2013 | A1 |
| 20130246176 | Chang | Sep 2013 | A1 |
| 20130282509 | Strong et al. | Oct 2013 | A1 |
| 20130290172 | Mashinsky | Oct 2013 | A1 |
| 20130311271 | Agrawal et al. | Nov 2013 | A1 |
| 20130346157 | Avrilionis et al. | Dec 2013 | A1 |
| 20130346981 | Johnson et al. | Dec 2013 | A1 |
| 20140019249 | Nicholas et al. | Jan 2014 | A1 |
| 20140025467 | Nagarajan et al. | Jan 2014 | A1 |
| 20140143100 | Glustrom et al. | May 2014 | A1 |
| 20140279058 | Mullins et al. | Sep 2014 | A1 |
| 20150149091 | Milton et al. | May 2015 | A1 |
| 20160314399 | Mullins et al. | Oct 2016 | A1 |
| Entry |
|---|
| U.S. Appl. No. 61/639,067, filed Apr. 26, 2012; entitled Deal Meter. |
| U.S. Appl. No. 61/682,762, filed Aug. 13, 2012; entitled Unified Payment and Return on Investment System. |
| U.S. Appl. No. 13/411,502, filed Mar. 2, 2012; entitled Relevance System for Consumer Deals. |
| U.S. Appl. No. 13/460,745, filed Apr. 30, 2012, entitled Sales Enhancement System. |
| U.S. Appl. No. 13/842,379, filed Mar. 15, 2013 entitled Pull-Type Searching System. |
| U.S. Appl. No. 14/038,629, filed Sep. 26, 2013; entitled Automated Deal Guide Structure Identification. |
| U.S. Appl. No. 14/039,473, filed Sep. 27, 2013, entitled Method, Apparatus, and Computer Program Product for Consumer Tracking. |
| U.S. Appl. No. 14/106,203, filed Dec. 13, 2013, entitled Method, Apparatus, and Computer Program Product for Providing a Search Feedback System. |
| U.S. Appl. No. 13/829,581, filed Mar. 14, 2013; In re: Richardson et al., entitled Updating Routing Information Based on Client Location. |
| Office Action from U.S. Appl. No. 13/803,275, dated Apr. 7, 2015. |
| Office Action from U.S. Appl. No. 13/826,757, dated Apr. 10, 2015. |
| “Credit Rating Analysis with Support Vector Machines and Neural Networks: A Market Comparative Study”; Zan Huanga, Hsinchun Chena, Chia-Jung Hsua, Wun-Hwa Chenb, Soushan Wu; 0167-9236/03/$—see front matter 2003 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/S0167-9236(03)00086-1. |
| “Support Vector Machine for Regresssion and Applications to Financial Forecasting”; Theodore B. Trafalig and Huseyin Ince; 0-7695-0619-4/00 $10.00 2000 IEEE. |
| “Forecasting Corporate Revenue and Profit: Time-Series Models Versus Management and Analysts”; David A. Kodde and Hein Schreuder; Journal of Business Finance & Accounting; 11(3), Autumn 1984, 0306686×$2.50. |
| Office Action from U.S. Appl. No. 13/826,464, dated Apr. 7, 2015. |
| Office Action from U.S. Appl. No. 13/826,333, dated Apr. 21, 2015. |
| Office Action from U.S. Appl. No. 13/803,445, dated Jun. 5, 2015. |
| Office Action from U.S. Appl. No. 13/803,445, dated Nov. 6, 2015. |
| Office Action from U.S. Appl. No. 13/805,000, dated Nov. 6, 2015. |
| Office Action from U.S. Appl. No. 13/803,275, dated Nov. 3, 2015. |
| Notice of Allowance for corresponding U.S. Appl. No. 13/826,757 dated Dec. 30, 2015. |
| Office Action from U.S. Appl. No. 14/316,228, dated Feb. 1, 2016. |
| Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 13/826,333 dated Aug. 9, 2016. |
| Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 14/316,264 dated Jul. 28, 2016. |
| Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 14/316,253 dated Jul. 29, 2016. |
| Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 13/803,445 dated Oct. 7, 2016. |
| Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 13/805,000 dated Oct. 7, 2016. |
| Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 14/316,228 dated Oct. 12, 2016. |
| Advisory Action for U.S. Appl. No. 14/316,228 dated May 23, 2016. |
| Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 13/826,464 dated Jun. 23, 2016. |
| Office Action from U.S. Appl. No. 13/805,000, dated Jun. 6, 2015. |
| Office Action from U.S. Appl. No. 14/316,228, dated Jul. 16, 2015. |
| Office Action from U.S. Appl. No. 13/826,333, dated Aug. 13, 2015. |
| Office Action from U.S. Appl. No. 13/826,464, dated Aug. 31, 2015. |
| Office Action from U.S. Appl. No. 13/826,757, dated Sep. 29, 2015. |
| Advisory Action for U.S. Appl. No. 13/826,333 dated Nov. 27, 2015. |
| Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 15/051,165 dated Aug. 31, 2016. |
| Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 13/826,464 dated Nov. 21, 2016. |
| Wong, W., “Andrew Mason talks about Groupon's growth and growing up”, Chicago Tribune, Business, (Sep. 8, 2012), pp. 1-3, Retrieved oniine at: http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2012-09-08/business/chi-andrew-mason-talks-about-groupons-growth-and-growing-up-20120908_1_deal-personalization-groupons-core-daily-deal-business. |
| International Search Report and Written Opinion for Application No. PCT/US2014/44067 dated Nov. 14, 2014. |
| International Search Report and Written Opinion for Application No. PCT/US2014/020028 dated Jun. 6, 2014. |
| Extended European Search Report for European Office Application No. 14818658.8 dated Dec. 9, 2016, 5 pages. |
| U.S. Appl. No. 13/803,445, filed Mar. 14, 2013; In re: Shariff et al., In re: Method, Apparatus, and Computer Program Product for Sales Pipeline Automation. |
| “CMPT 125: Lecture 1: Understanding the Computer” Tamara Smyth School of Computing Science, Simon Fraser University Jan. 3, 2009. |
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 61730046 | Nov 2012 | US | |
| 61709623 | Oct 2012 | US |
