WO2000067183A1

WO2000067183A1 - Web-based comparison shopping for consumer services

Info

Publication number: WO2000067183A1
Application number: PCT/US2000/012437
Authority: WO
Inventors: Roy Prasad; Pravin Jain; Himanshu Choksi; Krishnan Natarajan
Original assignee: Decide.Com
Priority date: 1999-05-05
Filing date: 2000-05-05
Publication date: 2000-11-09
Also published as: AU4825900A

Abstract

A method of web-based comparison shopping for services is disclosed. The method involves getting authorization from a consumer (830) to obtain that consumer's usage information (840), obtaining that information in the form of a billing history, and analyzing that information (850). From the analysis, a profile of the consumer's needs is obtained, and that profile is matched to a set of service plans (860). The set of service plans is also analyzed to characterize each plan on a set of uniform characteristics. The process of matching the profile to the set of plans indicates which plan best matches the consumer's needs (870). The consumer is then able to consummate a transaction to purchase the plan (880), and has the option of having period repetition of the process to account for changing circumstances.

Description

WEB-BASED COMPARISON SHOPPING FOR CONSUMER SERVICES

BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION

Field of the Invention

The present invention is generally related to commerce on the World Wide Web or Internet, and more particularly related to consumer comparison shopping and information dissemination on the World Wide Web, and usage based service analysis and continual shopping services.

Description of the Related Art

With the explosive expansion of the Internet and the World Wide Web, new avenues for research and gathering of information have opened. Many companies are beginning to exploit the Internet by providing information to the public about their product and service offerings. Customers of all sorts surf the web, informing themselves on everything from current events to consumer goods. Additionally, some models for commerce over the Web are beginning to emerge. Concepts such as the electronic shopping basket and secure transmission over the web have become considerations for electronic commerce.

The accessibility of the Web has also begun to break down geographical barriers to commerce, allowing a user anywhere in the world to leam of products available, and, to some extent, allowing for purchase. Search engines allow users to locate information based on keywords or phrases. Many sites serve as information clearinghouses of sorts, offering reviews of products, links to companies, sometimes opportunities for consumers to provide information on their experiences with products.

However, most commerce over the Web focuses on products rather than services, so a system for allowing consumers access to services is desirable. Furthermore, consumers often suffer from information overload. Much information is available on the Web. Unfortunately, a lot of that information is superfluous, and often vital information is difficult to find or is simply unavailable. Thus, a method of sifting through information and allowing for a direct comparison of competing services is desirable.

Additionally, consumers often only know of some of the considerations that determine which of multiple service options best fit the consumer's needs. The consumer knows or perceives the decision factors important to him or her but has incomplete information with respect to both a specific service provider's (SP) services, options, and costs; and the range of SPs whose services he or she may qualify for, based on factors which the consumer may not be aware of, such as geography. Furthermore, the consumer may be unaware of criteria that may be important in making a purchase decision, and this is particularly true when the decision involves a high value, high information content, but infrequent purchase. While the

SP has complete information about the services it offers, it knows little about the specific individual consumer's requirements. A specific SP may not know or may not present to the consumer information about competing SP's services that may be pertinent to the purchase decision at hand. The information provided by one SP may differ substantially in completeness, format and terminology so as to render unaided comparisons by the consumer difficult, laborious or impossible. Thus, neither entity has all or most of the information necessary to arrive at an optimal match of an SP's service with a consumer's needs. A method is desirable that obtains from the consumer relevant information, obtains from the SPs relevant information, systematically matches the former with the latter, and presents the consumer with more complete and relevant comparisons and decision criteria.

Even with the comparisons and decision criteria, the consumer must still transact with the SP to obtain the desired service. Also, a consumer's needs change over time, such that a service option that served well at one time may later poorly suit the consumer's needs. Thus, it is also desirable that a method further include consummating a transaction between a consumer and an SP, and repeating the whole process on an ongoing basis or at suitable time intervals.

SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

The present invention provides, in one embodiment, a method of matching a user's needs to a set of services, the method including accessing the user's usage information, analyzing the user's usage information to produce a first result, comparing the first result to a set of service offerings to produce a second result, and interpreting the second result to determine which service offering of the set of service offerings best fits the user's needs.

The present invention may further include obtaining from the user authorization to access the user's usage information, and, correspondingly, utilizing that authorization to obtain usage information from third-party sources, such as billing services or service providers. Furthermore, the usage information of the present invention may be combined with preference information supplied by the user to analyze the user's usage information and to further shape the analysis of which service offerings best fit the user's needs. Moreover, the process may be repeated from time to time, on a regular or irregular basis, or upon request, to update which service offering best suits the user's needs. Additionally, the user may be an individual, a group of individuals, a business entity or portion thereof, or anyone else capable of utilizing the process.

In another embodiment, the present invention provides a method of web-based comparison shopping for insurance including accessing the user's usage information, the usage information including policy terms and conditions, analyzing the user's usage information to produce a first result, comparing the first result to a set of insurance policies to produce a second result, and interpreting the second result to determine which insurance policy of the set of insurance policies best fits the user's needs.

In yet another embodiment, the present invention provides a web-based comparison shopping method including accessing the user's usage information, the usage information including billing information from telecommunications companies; analyzing the user's usage information to produce a first result; comparing the first result to a set of telecommunications service plans to produce a second result; and interpreting the second result to determine which telecommunications service plan of the set of telecommunications service plans best fits the user's needs.

In another embodiment, the present invention provides a web-based utility comparison shopping method including accessing the user's usage information, the usage information including billing information from a utility, analyzing the user's usage information to produce a first result, comparing the first result to a set of utility service plans to produce a second result, and interpreting the second result to determine which utility service plan of the set of utility service plans best fits the user's needs.

The present invention, in another embodiment, provides a web-based television service comparison shopping method including accessing the user's usage information, the usage information including television viewing information, analyzing the user's usage information to produce a first result, comparing the first result to a set of television service plans to produce a second result, and interpreting the second result to determine which television service plan of the set of television service plans best fits the user's needs.

The present invention, in yet another embodiment, provides a web-based financial services comparison shopping method including accessing the user's usage information, the usage information including financial history information, analyzing the user's usage information to produce a first result, comparing the first result to a set of financial service plans to produce a second result, and interpreting the second result to determine which financial service plan of the set of financial service plans best fits the user's needs.

In another embodiment, the present invention provides a web-based internet services comparison shopping method including accessing the user's usage information, the usage information including internet usage information, analyzing the user's usage information to produce a first result, comparing the first result to a set of internet service plans to produce a second result, and interpreting the second result to determine which internet service plan of the set of internet service plans best fits the user's needs. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

The present invention is illustrated by way of example and not limitation in the accompanying figures.

Figure 1 is a flowchart illustrating a method of comparison shopping on a network.

Figure 2a illustrates usage analysis processing for comparison shopping on a network.

Figure 2b illustrates processes of a plan recommendation engine for comparison shopping on a network.

Figure 3 is a diagram illustrating communication and relationships between entities involved in comparison shopping on a network.

Figure 4 is another diagram illustrating communication and relationships between entities involved in comparison shopping on a network.

Figure 5 is a diagram illustrating a system suitable for implementing a method of comparison shopping on a network.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION

A method and apparatus for Web-based comparison shopping for consumer services is described. In the following description, for purposes of explanation, numerous specific details are set forth in order to provide a thorough understanding of the invention. It will be apparent, however, to one skilled in the art that the invention can be practiced without these specific details. In other instances, structures and devices are shown in block diagram form in order to avoid obscuring the invention.

Reference in the specification to "one embodiment" or "an embodiment" means that a particular feature, structure, or characteristic described in connection with the embodiment is included in at least one embodiment of the invention. The appearances of the phrase "in one embodiment" in various places in the specification are not necessarily all referring to the same embodiment.

Turning to Figure 1, one embodiment of a method of web-based comparison shopping for services is illustrated. The method begins with a consumer 110 signaling or otherwise indicating an interest in shopping for services on the web. Data from the consumer 1 10 is entered into the Qualification Process 120. This data will typically be usage and preference data from the consumer 110, including such information as geographical location of the consumer, preferences for future service, past patterns of usage of similar service offerings, and other pertinent consumer information. Such usage and preference data may be gathered directly from the consumer in a variety of manners explained further below, or it may be gathered from other sources after obtaining authorization from the consumer for release of such information. The Qualification Process 120 utilizes the usage and preference data from the consumer 110 along with the Business Rules Engine 130 to determine how the consumer's 110 needs and preferences match with service offerings or plans offered by various service providers (SPs). Service Matching 140 is exemplary of this matching process. The Qualification Process 120 organizes the usage data based on the Business Rules Engine 130, and Service Matching 140 then determines how well each service offering fits the consumer's 110 needs.

Service Comparison 150 compares how well each service offering fits the consumer's 110 needs, and gives the consumer 110 feedback on this information. Then, at Service Selection 160, the consumer 110 selects a plan based on the feedback provided at Service Comparison 150. Service Condition Satisfaction 170 then determines whether any conditions to the offering are satisfied by consumer 110. Such conditions typically would be specified by the SP offering the plan. Finally, if all conditions are satisfied, the service is provided to the Consumer 110 in Service Provisioning 180.

Alternatively, the process may proceed from Service Condition Satisfaction 170 to Service Purchase and Acceptance of Terms 173. At Service Purchase 173, the Consumer 110 purchases the selected service, and the process flows to Service Payment 176, where the Consumer 110 pays for the service. Then, the process flows to Service Provisioning 180, and the Consumer 110 receives the service. Furthermore, from time to time, the process can be repeated. Repetitions would be based on updated information from the Consumer 110 and could lead to switching to a different service offering based on changed usage patterns or preferences. Such changes could include, for example, changes in needs, geographic location, income, or the availability of new service offerings. Such repetitions could occur on a regular basis suitable to the service provided, or could occur at the Consumer's 110 request.

Turning to Figure 2a, a further illustration of the analysis of the consumer's usage and preference data and the Business Rules 215 is illustrated. The Business Rules 215 are a set of rules and definitions of what factors are important to a particular business, such as telecommunications or utility service for example. The Business Rules 215 further provide some information on relative importance of the various factors. Data in the form of Summary Information 205, Paper Bill Analysis 210, and E-Bill Analysis 220 (Electronic Bill Information Analysis) is provided to the Usage Analysis Engine 225. Summary Information 205 could include a consumer's estimate of usage patterns and preferences, a consumer's choice of profiles of generic users of a service, a consumer's responses to queries about usage patterns and preferences, or statistical analysis of consumers similar to the particular consumer for general usage patterns and preferences. Paper Bill Analysis 210 typically would be information gleaned from an analysis of the consumer's billing records for a time prior to or concurrent with shopping for a service. E-Bill Analysis 220 typically would be information gleaned from an analysis of the consumer's billing records in electronic form. In either instance of bill analysis, the information might be obtained from the consumer directly or from third parties such as SPs currently or previously providing service to the consumer or from billing services acting as intermediaries between a service provider and a consumer.

The Usage Analysis Engine 225 processes the information available from all of Summary Information 205, Paper Bill Analysis 210, E-Bill Analysis 220 and Business Rules 215 to produce Consumer Preferences and Usage Patterns 230 (Consumer Preferences 230). Consumer Preferences 230 consists of the information contained in all of the information sources available to Usage Analysis Engine 225 organized in a manner suitable for use in Service Matching 140 of Figure 1. It is essentially the output of Qualification Process 120, or a first result of the method, and Figure 2a illustrates one embodiment of a method for implementing Qualification Process 120.

Turning to Figure 2b, an illustration of one embodiment of Service Matching 140 is provided. Service Normalization 240 takes information from Business Rules 260 and Provider Service Data 235 to produce normalized data about services provided by each SP. Service Normalization 240 eliminates much of the inconsistency in presentation of information from one SP to the next. Note that Business Rules 260 will at least have similar characteristics to Business Rules 215. In one embodiment, Business Rules 260 and Business

Rules 215 are identical.

With the output of Service Normalization 240, combined with Consumer Preferences and Usage Patterns 245 (Consumer Preferences 245), Service Analysis Engine 250 produces Service Recommendations 255. Note that Consumer Preferences 245 will typically be similar to Consumer Preferences 230, and in one embodiment they are identical. Service Recommendations 255 are indications of how suitable each service is to the consumer, and are essentially the output of Service Matching 140, or a second result of the method.

Turning to Figure 6, another embodiment of a method of web-based comparison shopping for consumer services begins with an initial step 700. The method then proceeds to step 710, wherein user or consumer authorization for usage information gathering is obtained. The method then proceeds to step 720 wherein such usage information is gathered. Since this gathering step would occur over a network, the information is gathered electronically from third parties other than the entity implementing the method and the consumer. To the extent that such usage information is not private, it may be freely available, thus not requiring the authorization step. To the extent that such usage information is not available at all, for instance because a third party balks at releasing information or does not store usage information in a network accessible manner, the consumer could be queried for the information. Responding to such queries may be accomplished in an interactive manner, such as answering questions, filling out a form, choosing among a set of sample usage patterns, or otherwise replying. It also may be accomplished in a different manner, such as submitting copies of previous bills or information on ownership, residence, and usage in a format readable by a computer. Furthermore, step 720 may include both an automatic process involving querying third party entities for usage information and querying the consumer for expected changes in usage patterns or preferences for service options in the future. Thus, usage patterns dictated by constraints of present services utilized by a consumer could be adjusted to avoid these constraints for analysis of future service needs.

Once usage information is obtained, the method proceeds to step 730, wherein the usage information is analyzed. The more complete the usage information obtained in step 720, the more useful are the results of the analysis of step 730. The results of this analysis categorize the needs of the consumer for a type of service as much as possible based on the usage information obtained. After results of analysis of usage information are obtained, the method proceeds to step 740, wherein results of this analysis are compared to available services. This comparison evaluates whether particular services meet the needs of the consumer, and assigns weights or importance to areas where a service matches a consumer's needs well or poorly.

Alternatively, weighting of priorities can be determined by the consumer in varying degrees of detail. The results of this comparison provide information on how well each service option evaluated fits the needs or desires of the consumer.

These results are then utilized as the method proceeds to step 750, wherein the best fit of the different service options is determined. This best fit may depend on what features the consumer indicates have most importance, or it can be determined based on assumptions of what a consumer would deem to be most important. Either way, the best fit, or a ranking of service options based on suitability for a consumer's needs can be provided to the consumer, thus allowing the consumer to contract for the service. The method then proceeds to the termination step 760.

Note that a consumer as described in the above description need not be an individual. A user of the service could be a consumer who is an individual, a company, or a group of individuals such as a household, among others. Additionally, the user could be an agent of the consumer. In the case of consumers of services that include more than one individual, some services could be tailored for each individual involved, or for subgroups of individuals, such as departments in a company or categories of individuals in a firm. Additionally, discounts might be available when groups of people or companies collectively sign up for services.

The methods exemplified in Figure 1 and Figure 6 can be applied to services such as telecommunications service, insurance, utility services, satellite television, banking services and internet services, among others. For the case of telecommunications service, usage information would be embodied in billing records, and in one embodiment, billing records for the previous three months of service are obtained after authorization from the consumer. Alternatively, the consumer can provide the billing records, preferably in an electronically readable form, or the consumer can provide information contained in the billing records at varying levels of detail. Preference information might include geographical areas a user wants to call frequently, frequency and type of use of pay phones, among other things. Analysis of the usage and preference information involves determining when calls are typically made, how long the calls last, the typical destination of calls. Results of this analysis are then compared to different plans available from telecommunications providers, resulting in a service plan or plans that best fits the patterns of usage demonstrated by the usage information.

Such a plan might involve cellular or land-based service or some combination thereof, and might involve different carriers for local and long-distance service. Moreover, a combination of plans might involve any or all of a local carrier, an inter-lata carrier, an international carrier, a cellular local carrier, a cellular long-distance carrier, a paging service, and PCS service. A consumer's indication of preferences might also determine that one or more of the above carriers would not be included. Carriers or SPs could provide service through the telephone lines, through cable (such as cable TV, for example), over the Internet, or with wireless technologies, for example.

In the case of insurance, usage information might include policy terms of current insurance and desired policy terms; claims made against existing or recent policies; location of residence; make, model, and age of automobiles; driving records of insured parties; length of stay at current residence and employment or school; medical or health history; and other relevant information. Additionally, preference information might include desired automobile, preference for future residence, policy features such as towing services or vision care, among other things. All of this information, to the extent available, would be analyzed to determine the consumer's needs. Then, the results of this analysis would be compared to insurance plans available. The consumer could determine whether to investigate only certain types of insurance such as health, life, homeowner's, automobile, or other forms of insurance. Likewise, the consumer could request evaluation of all types of insurance. The method would then result in a determination of what insurance policies best fit the consumer's needs.

Turning to utility services, for example electric power, natural gas, or water, usage information would typically be recent utility bills indicating how much of the utility's service was used. Preferences might include discounts for rotating power outages, environmental friendliness, among other things. Due consideration of seasonal changes in service usage in various geographic locations could be incorporated into analysis of usage information, and the results of such analysis would be compared to services available to the consumer. Then, the best fit of services to the consumer's needs could be provided to the consumer.

For the case of television, usage information might include patterns of television viewing, number and type of televisions utilized, and geographic location. Service options might include cable television service, satellite television service, and freely available broadcast services. Preferences might include access to premium channels, pricing rates, among other things. Such information could be analyzed to determine the consumer's needs and which available services best fit those needs. With regard to banking services, usage information might include patterns of deposits and withdrawals, income information, and debt history. Preferences might include unlimited check writing, interest rates, payment levels, among other things. This information could be analyzed to determine which financial services companies offer services best fitting the needs of the consumer, and that in turn would be presented to the consumer. As for internet service, usage information might include times and amounts of usage, storage space utilized, connection speeds, type of usage (such as surfing or emailing). Preferences might include times and amounts of usage (if a user wanted more time or access at different times), storage space utilized, connection speeds and types of connections, among other things. This information could be analyzed to determine which internet service providers offer services best fitting the needs of the consumer, and that information would be presented to the consumer.

Turning to Figure 7, another implementation of a method of provided web-based comparison shopping for services is illustrated. This implementation of the method starts with initialization step 800. It then proceeds to step 810, wherein information on services available to consumers is obtained. This can be obtained by surveying information available on a network such as the World Wide Web, by requesting information from SPs, or through input from observers of the relevant markets.

After obtaining information on services, the method proceeds to step 820, wherein the information is analyzed, resulting in a characterization of each service based on predetermined criteria. This characterization of each service allows for comparison of diverse service plan offerings on a more objective basis than a simple comparison feature by feature, since service plan offerings typically do not follow standard formats in most industries. Illustrating by example, wireless telephony providers typically offer packages featuring different lengths of service contracts, varying treatment of calls at different times of day, varying prices for calls, and a multitude of other detailed differences. By characterizing each service plan according to predetermined criteria, comparing multiple plans with radically different features becomes possible.

After obtaining data on available services, the method proceeds to step 830, wherein authorization for gathering of consumer usage information is obtained. With authorization, the method proceeds to step 840, wherein consumer usage and preference information is obtained. As discussed above with respect to Figure 6 and Figure 1, obtaining consumer usage information may involve seeking such information from third parties or obtaining it from the consumer in a variety of forms. In one embodiment, consumer usage information is obtained from billing services which exist principally to process and distribute bills from SPs to consumers. In another embodiment, consumer usage information is obtained directly from the SPs, and from other third parties such as the government or public records as needed.

Once such usage and preference information is obtained, the method proceeds to step 850, wherein the usage and preference information is analyzed to determine the needs of the consumer and patterns of usage of the services provided. The results of this analysis are used in step 860, wherein these results are compared with the results of analysis of service plans available to the consumer. This comparison results in information indicating how well each service plan fits the needs of the consumer.

Then, the method proceeds to step 870, wherein the best fit, or a ranking of suitability of service plans is produced for the consumer. Following this, the method proceeds to step 880, wherein the consumer can consummate a transaction with the SP, thereby allowing the consumer to immediately secure the benefits of the analysis. Such a transaction may be consummated with the provider of the analysis acting as an intermediary between the consumer and the SP. It may also be consummated by directing the consumer to the SP with information sufficient to identify the service plan sought by the consumer. Finally, the method proceeds to termination step 890.

Additionally, the methods illustrated in Figures 1, 6 and 7 may be performed periodically. Each time the method is performed, the consumer's usage information can be updated to determine whether the consumer's needs have changed. Depending on the changes, new service plans may prove more suitable as consumer's needs change. Likewise, new offerings made available between times when analysis occurs may result in service plans that better fit the consumer's needs. Also, development of relationships between the party conducting the analysis of the consumer's needs and SPs may result in more availability of consumer usage information. Such a development would allow for more refined analysis of the consumer's needs in a particular service area and better matching of available services to those needs.

Figure 3 illustrates connections and relationships between entities involved in implementation of a method of web-based comparison shopping for consumer services. A Consumer 300 has an Existing Service Relationship 320 with a Service Provider 310. The Consumer 300 provides Authorization 360 to Comparison Program 330, authorizing

Comparison Program 330 to obtain Consumer's 300 Consumer Data 370. Consumer Data

370 preferably provides complete usage information relating to services provided to

Consumer 300 by Service Provider 310, but may vary in content. Consumer 300 may also supply preferences for future usage of a service to Comparison Program 330.

Comparison Program 330 has obtained information on Consumer Services Available 350 from Consumer Information Sources 340 by searching through an electronic network in a manner similar to that which a consumer would employ. Since Comparison Program 330 is implemented on a computer system, it will search in a more efficient and exhaustive manner than most consumers would, and therefore would have more complete information than Consumer 300 has.

Comparison Program presents Authorization 360 to Service Provider 310, thereby providing evidence that Service Provider 310 should release Consumer Data 370 to Comparison Program 330. Comparison Program 330 then analyzes usage information obtained from Consumer Data 370 and compares results of that analysis of consumer needs to results of analysis of Consumer Services Available 350. The result of this comparison yields information on which available services best fit Consumer's 300 needs, and Comparison Program 330 presents this information to Consumer 300 in the form of Preferable Consumer Service 380. This may be extended to allow Consumer 300 to use Comparison Program 330 to purchase Preferable Consumer Service 380.

Turning to Figure 4, an alternative combination of relationships and interconnections between the parties is illustrated. Service Provider 410, Alternate Service Provider 440 and Alternate Service Provider 450 each provide competing services. Service Provider 410 uses the services of Billing Service 420, supplying Billing Information 415. Consumer 400 has Existing Relationship 405 with Service Provider 410. Billing Service 420 sends Bills 425 to Consumer 400 on behalf of Service Provider 410.

Comparison Program 430 maintains information on Services Available 475 from Service Provider 410, Services Available 460 from Alternate Service Provider 440, and Services Available 465 from Alternate Service Provider 450. This information may be gathered by searching an electronic network such as the World Wide Web, or through relationships between the various service providers and Comparison Program 430.

Consumer 400 accesses Comparison Program 430 and provides Authorization 435. Consumer 400 may also provide preferences for future use of services to Comparison Program 430. Comparison Program 430 presents Authorization 435 to Billing Service 420 and Billing Service 420 replies by providing Billing Information 445 to Comparison Program

430. Comparison Program 430 analyzes Billing Information 445 to determine Consumer's

400 needs. Comparison Program 430 then matches Consumer's 400 needs to information on services available, and determines which services from Services Available 460, 465, and 475 best match Consumer's 400 needs. Comparison Program 430 then presents this information as Preferable Service 470.

As will be apparent, a ranking of available services may be presented in place of Preferable Service 470. Additionally, Comparison Program 430 may be enabled to allow Consumer 400 to purchase Preferable Service 470. Furthermore, Comparison Program may optionally repeat the data gathering, analysis, and presentation at preset intervals of time, thereby enabling Consumer 400 to continually utilize the services best fitting Consumer's 400 needs.

Figure 5 illustrates a system suitable for implementing the method previously discussed. System 600 includes Central Processor (CPU) 610, Memory 620, and Input/Output components (I/O) 630. System 600 is connected via I/O 630 to Network 640. Network 640 is preferably the Internet or World Wide Web, but may be other computer networks. I/O 630 connects to Network 640 via carrier wave, direct physical connection, through an intermediary, or in some other manner. System 600, principally through CPU 610, executes instructions causing System 600 to query Network 640 for information such as service characteristics or consumer usage information, to analyze such information, and to provide results of such analysis to a consumer. The consumer may interact with the system directly through I/O 630 or may send and receive information and queries through an intermediary system also connected to Network 640.

In the foregoing detailed description, the method and apparatus of the present invention has been described with reference to specific exemplary embodiments thereof. It will, however, be evident that various modifications and changes may be made thereto without departing from the broader spirit and scope of the present invention. The present specification and figures are accordingly to be regarded as illustrative rather than restrictive.

Claims

CLAIMSWhat is claimed is:

1. A method of matching a user's needs to a set of services, the method comprising: accessing the user's usage information; analyzing the user's usage information to produce a first result; comparing the first result to a set of service offerings to produce a second result; and interpreting the second result to determine which service offering of the set of service offerings best fits the user's needs.

2. The method of claim 1 further comprising: obtaining from the user authorization to access the user's usage information.

3. The method of claim 1 wherein: the user's usage information comprises billing records.

4. The method of claim 2 wherein: the user's usage information comprises policy terms and conditions.

5. The method of claim 2 wherein: accessing the user's usage information comprises obtaining the user's usage information from a service provider.

6. The method of claim 2 wherein: accessing the user's usage information comprises obtaining the user's usage information from a third-party billing service.

7. The method of claim 1 further comprising: repeating said accessing, analyzing, comparing and interpreting periodically to determine on an updated basis which service offering best suits the user's needs.

8. The method of claim 5 further comprising: obtaining from the user a set of preferences relating to future usage patterns; and wherein analyzing the user's usage information further comprises analyzing the set of preferences.

9. The method of claim 6 further comprising: obtaining from the user a set of preferences relating to future usage patterns; and wherein analyzing the user's usage information further comprises analyzing the set of preferences.

10. The method of claim 1 further comprising: obtaining from the user a set of preferences relating to future usage patterns; and wherein analyzing the user's usage information further comprises analyzing the set of preferences.

11. The method of claim 10 further comprising: repeating said accessing, analyzing, comparing and interpreting periodically to determine on an updated basis which service offering best suits the user's needs.

12. The method of claim 1 wherein: said user is a group of individual consumers.

13. The method of claim 11 wherein: said accessing, analyzing, comparing and interpreting are repeated for each individual of the group of individual consumers.

14. The method of claim 1 wherein: said user is a business entity.

15. The method of claim 14 wherein: said business entity is a company.

16. The method of claim 14 wherein: said business entity is a subgroup of a company.

17. The method of claim 14 wherein: said business entity is a set of subgroups of a company.

18. The method of claim 17 wherein: said accessing, analyzing, comparing, and interpreting are performed for each subgroup of the set of subgroups of a company.

19. The method of claim 18 further comprising: repeating said obtaining, accessing, analyzing, comparing, and interpreting on a periodic basis to further determine which service offerings best suit each subgroup's needs.

20. The method of claim 19 further comprising: obtaining from the user a set of preferences relating to future usage patterns. and wherein analyzing the user's usage information further comprises analyzing the set of preferences.

21. A method of web-based comparison shopping for insurance comprising: accessing the user's usage information, the usage information including policy terms and conditions; analyzing the user's usage information to produce a first result; comparing the first result to a set of insurance policies to produce a second result; and interpreting the second result to determine which insurance policy of the set of insurance policies best fits the user's needs.

22. The method of claim 21 further comprising: obtaining from the user authorization to access the user's usage information.

23. The method of claim 22 wherein: accessing the user's usage information comprises obtaining the user's usage information from an insurer.

24. The method of claim 22 wherein: accessing the user's usage information comprises obtaining the user's usage information from an insurer and from a government agency, the usage information further including value of property.

25. The method of claim 22 wherein: accessing the user's usage information comprises obtaining the user's usage information from an insurer and from a government agency, the usage information further including the user's driving record.

26. The method of claim 22 wherein: accessing the user's usage information comprises obtaining the user's usage information from an insurer, the usage information further including the user's medical history.

27. The method of claim 21 further comprising: repeating said accessing, analyzing, comparing and interpreting periodically to determine on an updated basis which insurance policy best suits the user's needs.

28. The method of claim 21 further comprising: obtaining from the user a set of preferences relating to future usage patterns; and wherein analyzing the user's usage information further comprises analyzing the set of preferences.

29. The method of claim 28 wherein: repeating said accessing, analyzing, comparing and interpreting periodically to determine on an updated basis which insurance policy best suits the user's needs.

30. The method of claim 21 further comprising: obtaining the set of insurance policies from public information sources.

31. The method of claim 21 further comprising: obtaining the set of insurance policies through direct connections to a set of insurers.

32. The method of claim 21 wherein: the user is a group of individual consumers.

33. The method of claim 21 wherein: the user is a business entity.

34. A web-based comparison shopping method comprising: accessing the user's usage information, the usage information including billing information from telecommunications companies; analyzing the user's usage information to produce a first result; comparing the first result to a set of telecommunications service plans to produce a second result; and interpreting the second result to determine which telecommunications service plan of the set of telecommunications service plans best fits the user's needs.

35. The method of claim 34 further comprising: obtaining from the user authorization to access the user's usage information.

36. The method of claim 35 wherein: accessing the user's usage information comprises obtaining the user's usage information from the telecommunications companies.

37. The method of claim 35 wherein: accessing the user's usage information comprises obtaining the user's usage information from a third party billing service.

38. The method of claim 35 wherein: accessing the user's usage information comprises obtaining the user's usage information from multiple telecommunications companies.

39. The method of claim 34 further comprising: repeating said accessing, analyzing, comparing and interpreting periodically to determine on an updated basis which telecommunications service plan best suits the user's needs.

40. The method of claim 34 further comprising: obtaining from the user a set of preferences relating to future usage patterns; and wherein analyzing the user's usage information further comprises analyzing the set of preferences.

41. The method of claim 40 wherein: repeating said accessing, analyzing, comparing and interpreting periodically to determine on an updated basis which telecommunications service plan best suits the user's needs.

42. The method of claim 34 further comprising: obtaining the set of telecommunications service plans from public information sources.

43. The method of claim 34 further comprising: obtaining the set of telecommunications service plans through direct connections to a set of telecommunications companies.

44. The method of claim 34 wherein: telecommunications companies comprise one or more companies offering at least one service of the group of services consisting essentially of: cellular service, PCS service, local telecommunications service, long distance telecommunications service, paging service, internet telephony service, wireless telecommunications service, cable television service, and satellite television service.

45. The method of claim 34 wherein: the user comprises a group of individuals.

46. The method of claim 34 wherein: the user comprises a business entity.

47. A web-based utility comparison shopping method comprising: accessing the user's usage information, the usage information including billing information from a utility; analyzing the user's usage information to produce a first result; comparing the first result to a set of utility service plans to produce a second result; and interpreting the second result to determine which utility service plan of the set of utility service plans best fits the user's needs.

48. The method of claim 47 further comprising: obtaining from the user authorization to access the user's usage information.

49. The method of claim 48 wherein: accessing the user's usage information comprises obtaining the user's usage information from the utility.

50. The method of claim 48 wherein: accessing the user's usage information comprises obtaining the user's usage information from a third party billing service.

51. The method of claim 48 wherein: accessing the user's usage information comprises obtaining the user's usage information from multiple utilities.

52. The method of claim 47 further comprising: repeating said accessing, analyzing, comparing and interpreting periodically to determine on an updated basis which utility service plan best suits the user's needs.

53. The method of claim 47 further comprising: obtaining from the user a set of preferences relating to future usage patterns; and wherein analyzing the user's usage information further comprises analyzing the set of preferences.

54. The method of claim 53 wherein: repeating said accessing, analyzing, comparing and interpreting periodically to determine on an updated basis which utility service plan best suits the user's needs.

55. The method of claim 47 further comprising: obtaining the set of utility service plans from public information sources.

56. The method of claim 47 further comprising: obtaining the set of utility service plans through direct connections to a set of utilities.

57. The method of claim 47 wherein: the utility provides electric power.

58. The method of claim 47 wherein: the utility provides natural gas.

59. The method of claim 47 wherein: the utility provides water.

60. The method of claim 47 wherein: the user comprises a group of individuals.

61. The method of claim 47 wherein: the user comprises a business entity.

62. The method of claim 47 further comprising: the business entity comprises a company.

63. A web-based television service comparison shopping method comprising: accessing the user's usage information, the usage information including television viewing information; analyzing the user's usage information to produce a first result; comparing the first result to a set of television service plans to produce a second result; and interpreting the second result to determine which television service plan of the set of television service plans best fits the user's needs.

64. The method of claim 63 further comprising: obtaining from the user authorization to access the user's usage information.

65. The method of claim 64 wherein: accessing the user's usage information comprises obtaining the user's usage information from a cable television company.

66. The method of claim 64 wherein: accessing the user's usage information comprises obtaining the user's usage information from a third party billing service.

67. The method of claim 64 wherein: accessing the user's usage information comprises obtaining the user's usage information from multiple television service providers.

68. The method of claim 63 further comprising: repeating said accessing, analyzing, comparing and interpreting periodically to determine on an updated basis which television service plan best suits the user's needs.

69. The method of claim 63 further comprising: obtaining from the user a set of preferences relating to future usage patterns; and wherein analyzing the user's usage information further comprises analyzing the set of preferences.

70. The method of claim 69 wherein: repeating said accessing, analyzing, comparing and interpreting periodically to determine on an updated basis which television service plan best suits the user's needs.

71. The method of claim 63 further comprising: obtaining the set of television service plans from public information sources.

72. The method of claim 63 further comprising: obtaining the set of television service plans through direct connections to a set of television service providers.

73. The method of claim 63 wherein: the user comprises a group of individuals.

74. The method of claim 63 wherein: the user comprises a business entity.

75. A web-based financial services comparison shopping method comprising: accessing the user's usage information, the usage information including financial history information; analyzing the user's usage information to produce a first result; comparing the first result to a set of financial service plans to produce a second result; and interpreting the second result to determine which financial service plan of the set of financial service plans best fits the user's needs.

76. The method of claim 75 further comprising: obtaining from the user authorization to access the user's usage information.

77. The method of claim 76 wherein: accessing the user's usage information comprises obtaining the user's usage information from a financial services provider.

78. The method of claim 76 wherein: accessing the user's usage information comprises obtaining the user's usage information from an accounting service.

79. The method of claim 76 wherein: accessing the user's usage information comprises obtaining the user's usage information from multiple financial services providers.

80. The method of claim 75 further comprising: repeating said accessing, analyzing, comparing and interpreting periodically to determine on an updated basis which financial service offering best suits the user's needs.

81. The method of claim 75 further comprising: obtaining from the user a set of preferences relating to future usage patterns; and wherein analyzing the user's usage information further comprises analyzing the set of preferences.

82. The method of claim 81 wherein: repeating said accessing, analyzing, comparing and interpreting periodically to determine on an updated basis which financial service offering best suits the user's needs.

83. The method of claim 75 further comprising: obtaining the set of financial service offerings from public information sources.

84. The method of claim 75 further comprising: obtaining the set of financial service offerings through direct connections to a set of financial service providers.

85. The method of claim 75 wherein: the user comprises a group of individuals.

86. The method of claim 75 wherein: the user comprises a business entity.

87. A web-based internet services comparison shopping method comprising: accessing the user's usage information, the usage information including internet usage information; analyzing the user's usage information to produce a first result; comparing the first result to a set of internet service plans to produce a second result; and inteφreting the second result to determine which internet service plan of the set of internet service plans best fits the user's needs.

88. The method of claim 87 further comprising: obtaining from the user authorization to access the user's usage information.

89. The method of claim 88 wherein: accessing the user's usage information comprises obtaining the user's usage information from an internet services provider.

90. The method of claim 88 wherein: accessing the user's usage information comprises obtaining the user's usage information from multiple internet service providers.

91. The method of claim 87 further comprising: repeating said accessing, analyzing, comparing and inteφreting periodically to determine on an updated basis which internet service offering best suits the user's needs.

92. The method of claim 87 further comprising: obtaining from the user a set of preferences relating to future usage patterns; and wherein analyzing the user's usage information further comprises analyzing the set of preferences.

93. The method of claim 87 wherein: repeating said accessing, analyzing, comparing and inteφreting periodically to determine on an updated basis which internet service offering best suits the user's needs.

94. The method of claim 87 further comprising: obtaining the set of internet service offerings from public information sources.

95. The method of claim 87 further comprising: obtaining the set of internet service offerings through direct connections to a set of internet service providers.

96. The method of claim 87 wherein: the user comprises a group of individuals.

97. The method of claim 87 wherein: the user comprises a business entity.