It’s time to better understand the galaxy of channels we use to shop online and in stores. Photo via Pexels

Back in the Paleolithic Age of online marketing — say, 15 years ago — the idea of online sales as a significant business vehicle for brands such as Target or Walmart was almost unimaginable. Shopping meant going to a store, because stores were where sales happened.

Today, people shop with their computers, via watches and phones, even through their refrigerators. Sellers market on multiple platforms, digital and traditional, including the brick and mortar store. Even the glossy catalogues that arrive in the mail still prompt sales.

Advancing technology has made it possible for consumers to shop not only across a staggering number of channels — but to do so in a constellation of ways. Say a shopper has broken down and decided to buy a wildly popular all-purpose pressure cooker. She might start off using the internet to glean product details and prescreen options. Then she might visit a retail outlet to eyeball the product herself. Finally, after mulling for days, she may impulsively whip out her phone to make the order.

But what determines these particular choices of shopping venues? Rice Business professor Utpal M. Dholakia set out to map this new landscape of consumerism. Joining Dholakia were colleagues Barbara E. Kahn of the Wharton Business School, Randy Reeves of Macy’s Department Stores, Aric Rindfleisch of the University of Wisconsin, David Stewart of the University of California at Riverside and Earl Taylor of the Marketing Science Institute.

Consumer behavior, the researchers knew, is too complex — too all-over-the-map — to develop any sort of quantum marketing theory to explain it. So while interested in answers, the team aimed instead to frame useful questions. Their goal was to bring attention to the multi-channel retailing environment, creating a comprehensive but flexible way to investigate how shoppers navigate the intricate modern marketplace.

More specifically, Dholakia’s team wanted to learn exactly what consumers are finding. What do they do while using various internet and other tools to shop? When do different types of shoppers grab their devices and buy? What obstacles crop up as shoppers wend their ways through this maze of venues? Finally, the researchers wanted to map the vast scope of research issues surrounding this customer behavior.

It was fairly simple to answer the first question: Why do we use such diverse shopping tactics? Usually, it’s about getting the best deal. Some people, however, take their shopping seriously, savoring the idea that they are approaching their task both thoughtfully and thoroughly. Others get a genuine thrill out of the social experience of being part of a community, or from experimenting with different products and ways to buy them. And some shoppers head straight to a certain website or media source because they expect a specific price tag.

Many consumers, Dholakia and his co-researchers found, constantly change the means they use to shop. In one survey of 337 multichannel shoppers, for example, the researchers found that 52 percent reported migrating back and forth from offline to online channels across four product categories including books, airline tickets, stereo systems and wine. This hopscotching from brick and mortar to catalogues, to online and back, could be predicted by certain factors including price, the product they were looking for, how they evaluated the product and even waiting time.

The researchers also found that each type of shopper uses channels differently. Penny-pinchers don’t care where they buy, as long as the price is right. Generalists shop online or in the store because of the overall shopping experience. Traditionalists shun new ways of shopping, and multichannel enthusiasts happily bounce between stores, the internet and catalogues. Finally, the hard-core, store-focused customers will only shop in a place with doors and shelves.

To add a layer of complication, some don’t use channels to shop at all. They just want information. These are the shoppers who pop into to a store to test drive a phone before they buy it online. They study the pressure cooker in a catalogue before they go to the store.

And even within all the online options, there are innumerable detours to explore. Say you want a Nikon camera. You might go to an enthusiasts’ page such as Nikonians.org before you decide which model to buy, whether it’s online or at the local camera shop. Your friendly chat with the guy who owns the local camera store may now turn into a real-time virtual chat with a company representative.

The new marketplace, in other words, has become a dizzying landscape. Shoppers, clearly, have risen to the challenge. Nevertheless, it’s in the interests of sellers and buyers both to understand more deeply not only why we buy what we buy — but where.

------

This article originally ran on Rice Business Wisdom and is based on research from Utpal M. Dholakia, the George R. Brown Professor of Marketing at Jones Graduate School of Business at Rice University.

Ad Placement 300x100
Ad Placement 300x600

CultureMap Emails are Awesome

Houston startup raises $6M to scale home-based healthcare platform

fresh funding

As healthcare systems race to expand care beyond hospitals and into the home, investors are placing bigger bets on the infrastructure needed to make that shift possible.

This month, Rosarium Health announced it has raised $6 million in seed funding led by Kalos Ventures, with participation from ResilienceVC, Rock Health Capital, Symphonic Capital, Black Tech Nations Ventures and others.

The investment will help the Houston-based startup continue to build its platform, which features a national network of 800-plus clinicians and 3,000-plus contractors to coordinate home accessibility upgrades and modifications for seniors and people living with disabilities.

For founder and CEO Cameron Carter, the company’s mission grew out of firsthand caregiving experiences.

“From my own personal caregiving experiences, I realized that the benefits exist on paper, but not in reality,” Carter said in a news release. “Families are being left to figure out the paperwork and installations all on their own, which shouldn’t be how this works.”

While Medicare Advantage and Medicaid plans have expanded coverage for home-based services and accessibility modifications, the logistics behind delivering those services often remain fragmented.

Rosarium’s platform coordinates the entire process, from clinical assessments and referrals to contractor management, documentation, reimbursement and installation.

“A clinician can document that a home isn’t safe and a plan can approve a benefit, but there’s no one that’s responsible for making sure the work actually gets done,” Carter says. “We built the missing piece.”

The company was founded in 2021 as Rose Health and was a 2023 participant in the Texas Medical Center’s Accelerator for HealthTech program. It has scaled quickly, building a network of more than 800 clinicians and 3,000 contractors across 34 states.

Rosarium is currently in-network for 1.2 million Medicare and Medicaid lives, with projected coverage expected to reach nearly 4 million by the end of the year, according to the release.

“We’re excited to back Cameron because he and the team at Rosarium are building the infrastructure healthcare needs right now to make the home a safe and comfortable place of care,” Kate Ballinger, investor at Kalos Ventures, added in the release.

As part of the recent investment, Ballinger will join Rosarium’s board of directors.

With eyes on the future, Rosarium plans to grow its partnerships with Medicaid and Medicare Advantage plans, including CalViva and Community Health Plan of Imperial Valley, strengthening its presence in California while expanding access to underserved communities.

Additionally, Carter predicts that home-based healthcare will be part of a broader transformation happening across the industry.

“There’s a growing recognition that health outcomes are shaped by what happens in the home,” he said in the release. “The future of healthcare isn’t just treating people after something goes wrong. It’s creating environments that help prevent those problems in the first place.”

Houston business mogul Tilman Fertitta acquires Caesars in $17.6B deal

Money Moves

Houston billionaire Tilman Fertitta may currently be serving as America’s ambassador to Italy, but his company is as busy as ever. Fresh off its move to revive the Houston Comets WNBA franchise, his company, Fertitta Entertainment, has announced a $17.6 billion deal to acquire Caesars Entertainment, Inc.

Speculation about the deal has been circulating since at least March, according to various media reports. The deal combines Fertitta’s well-known Golden Nugget casino brand with all of the properties in the Caesars’ portfolio, including Las Vegas hotels Caesars Palace, Harrah's, Paris Las Vegas, Planet Hollywood, Horseshoe, The LINQ Hotel, Flamingo, and The Cromwell.

Overall, the combined company will include 60 domestic casino resorts and gaming facilities; online gaming including sports betting, iCasino, and Caesar’s online poker platform; retail sports betting at over 200 third-party locations through the William Hill brand; and over 550 Fertitta Entertainment outlets, including more than 450 Landry's full-service restaurants across America. The companies will combine their loyalty programs, Caesars Rewards, Golden Nugget's 24 Karat Select Club, and Landry's Select Club.

The terms will see Caesars’ shareholders receive $31 per share. Fertitta Entertainment will also acquire approximately $11.9 billion of Caesars' outstanding debt.

The transaction will be financed through a combination of equity contributed by Fertitta Entertainment, assumed Caesars' debt, and new committed debt financing arranged by a group consisting of 10 banks. It is subject to approval by Caesars’ shareholders and government regulators.

Fertitta Entertainment is the Houston-based company behind a diverse array of hospitality businesses, including The Golden Nugget, The Post Oak Hotel, River Oaks District, the Kemah Boardwalk, and Houston’s Downtown Aquarium.

It also operates a number of prominent restaurant brands, including Mastro's Restaurants, Del Frisco's Double Eagle Steakhouse, Morton's The Steakhouse, The Palm, McCormick & Schmick's, Landry's Seafood House, The Oceanaire Seafood Room, and Saltgrass Steak House.

---

This article first appeared on CultureMap.com.

4 Houston-area institutions get $8M for cancer research facilities

fighting cancer

Cancer research capabilities in the Houston area just got an $8 million boost.

On Wednesday, May 20, the Cancer Prevention and Research Institute of Texas (CPRIT) awarded $8 million in grants to institutions in Houston and Bryan for the creation or expansion of so-called “core” cancer research facilities.

“Core facilities provide shared access to advanced technology, equipment, and scientific expertise that may not be available at every institution,” CPRIT says. “These core facilities are vital to not only cancer research but also to the study of diseases beyond cancer.”

Houston-area recipients of these $2 million grants are:

  • A facility at the University of Texas Health Science Center for preclinical support of cancer researchers in Texas to evaluate new safe, effective drugs and drug combinations.
  • The Accelerator for Cancer Therapeutics, operated by Houston’s Texas Medical Center Foundation. The accelerator helps researchers and startups move innovative cancer treatments from the lab to clinical trials.
  • Rice University’s Genetic Design & Engineering Center in Houston. The center enables researchers to collaborate on studies of custom DNA for cancer treatment.
  • A facility at the Texas A&M University System’s Health Science Center in Bryan that aims to speed up the development of cancer therapies.

In addition to those grants, the University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, Methodist Hospital Research Institute, Baylor College of Medicine, and Rice University shared $21 million to recruit cancer researchers from other institutions.

The largest of those grants—totalling $4 million—went to M.D. Anderson for the recruitment of renowned cancer researcher Andre Nussenzweig from the National Institutes of Health. His research focuses on how DNA damage and faulty DNA repairs lead to cancer.

Here are the totals for the other CPRIT grants awarded in the Houston area:

  • $12.8 million to Houston-based Indapta Therapeutics for the development of an off-the-shelf therapy that naturally kills cancer cells, combined with an immunity-targeting agent for a type of leukemia.
  • $11.1 million to MD Anderson, including $5 million for a statewide platform to improve long-term health outcomes in adolescents and young adults who survived cancer.
  • $8.4 million to Baylor College of Medicine, including $4.8 million for two training programs for cancer researchers.
  • $6.25 million to UT Health Houston, including $4 million for a biomedical informatics and genomics training program for cancer researchers.
  • $4.4 million to the Texas A&M Health Science Center’s Houston campus, including $2.4 million for a cancer therapeutics training program.
  • $2.75 million to Rice, including $250,000 for a study of ovarian cancer.
  • $2 million to Houston-based March Biosciences for the development of a targeted therapy for treating T-cell lymphoma.
  • $1.15 million to the University of Houston, including $900,000 for a platform for detection of lung cancer.
  • $900,000 to Texas A&M in Bryan to conduct clinical drug trials in rural and underserved communities around the state.
  • $800,000 to Houston- and Israel-based Xerient Pharma for the development of an oral form of a cell-protecting drug called amifostine to protect the upper GI tract from radiation damage during pancreatic cancer treatment.
  • $659,000 to Missouri City-based OmniNano Pharmaceuticals for the development of a two-drug combination to treat the most common form of pancreatic cancer.
  • $250,000 to the University of Texas Medical Branch at Galveston for a novel therapeutic to prevent colitis-related colorectal cancer.