WO2015181946A1

WO2015181946A1 - Information processing device, information processing method, program

Info

Publication number: WO2015181946A1
Application number: PCT/JP2014/064405
Authority: WO
Inventors: 秀明小西
Original assignee: 楽天株式会社
Priority date: 2014-05-30
Filing date: 2014-05-30
Publication date: 2015-12-03
Also published as: JP6270999B2; JPWO2015181946A1

Abstract

The purpose of the present invention is to prevent too much offer information from many trade offerers from being transmitted to a user who is a trade requester. To this end, a comparison reference is set in order to compare offer information acquired from trade offerers. Then, whether or not transmission of offer information to the trade requester should be executed is determined on the basis of the comparison result. Processing for transmission of the offer information to the trade requester is controlled on the basis of the determination result. Consequently, only offer information selected from the comparison processing is transmitted to the trade requester.

Description

Information processing apparatus, information processing method, and program

The present invention relates to an information processing apparatus, an information processing method, and a program, and more particularly to a technical field for processing a transaction request from a transaction requester and offer information corresponding thereto.

Japanese Patent Laid-Open No. 2002-15161

2. Description of the Related Art Conventionally, a service has been provided that mediates that a general user requests a business transaction via a communication network such as the Internet, and that, for example, a business operator offers a transaction.
As a technique related to such a service, the above-mentioned Patent Document 1 is disclosed. For example, a user accesses a broker's home page, presents purchase or sale conditions for a motorcycle, and the broker transmits this to the operator. The business operator answers the estimate to the user.

However, in the conventional mediation system, it has occurred that there are too many offers from the business operator presented to the user (transaction requester). For example, when a user requests a transaction using a terminal, for example, an estimate is sent by e-mail from too many operators, and conversely, the e-mail itself becomes a burden for the user, or it is difficult to select an estimate Often occurs.
Therefore, an object of the present invention is to eliminate or reduce the burden caused by too many offers to the transaction requester.

1stly, the information processing apparatus which concerns on this invention is produced | generated in the state which a some transaction applicant cannot know each other's offer content corresponding to the transaction request information transmitted from the transaction requester terminal. A commercial transaction information acquisition unit that acquires offer information about the transaction applicant, a comparison target setting unit that sets a comparison target for the offer information acquired by the commercial transaction information acquisition unit, and the commercial transaction information acquisition unit acquired A transmission permission / inhibition determination processing unit that determines whether or not to perform transmission regarding the offer information to the transaction requester terminal based on a comparison result between offer information and a comparison target set by the comparison target setting unit; And a transmission control unit that controls transmission processing of the offer information to the transaction requester terminal based on the determination of the transmission permission / inhibition determination processing unit.
The transaction requester terminal is a terminal used by a transaction requester, for example, a user who seeks a commercial transaction such as sale, purchase, contract, etc. of a product. A transaction applicant is a business operator who applies for a commercial transaction with a transaction requester. That is, this information processing apparatus functions as a system that mediates between the transaction requester and a plurality of transaction applicants. In this case, for each offer information from a plurality of transaction applicants for the transaction request information, a comparison process with a comparison target is performed to determine whether or not to transmit the offer information to the transaction requester terminal. In other words, each offer information is filtered and transmitted to the transaction requester.

Secondly, in the information processing apparatus according to the present invention described above, the transmission permission / inhibition determination processing unit determines that the estimated amount included in the offer information is more advantageous for the transaction requester than the amount included in the comparison target. In some cases, it may be desirable to determine to transmit the offer information to the transaction requester terminal.
Since it is favorable for the transaction requester, that is, offer information worth considering for the conclusion of the transaction, it is appropriate to present such offer information to the user.

Third, in the information processing apparatus according to the present invention described above, the transmission permission / inhibition determination processing unit determines that the estimated amount included in the offer information is an inferior amount for the transaction requester than the amount included in the comparison target. In some cases, if the amount difference is less than the first threshold, it may be determined to execute transmission of the offer information to the transaction requester terminal.
Even if the estimated amount is inferior to the transaction requester, the transaction requester may wish to close the contract due to various circumstances. However, if the amount is too inferior, it is usually difficult to make a contract. Therefore, although it is inferior in terms of amount, if the amount difference with the comparison target is less than the first threshold value, it is determined that it can be a candidate for closing, and transmission of the offer information to the transaction requester terminal is executed.

Fourth, in the information processing apparatus according to the present invention described above, the first threshold value is the result information of the transaction applicant who is the offer source of the offer information to be compared, or the offer information to be compared with the comparison target. You may set using the performance information of the transaction applicant who is an offer origin.
The first threshold value as the upper limit of the amount difference may be a fixed value, but may vary according to the transaction applicant's performance. Accordingly, it is possible to determine whether or not transmission to the transaction requester is possible, reflecting the credit of the transaction applicant. The performance information is, for example, information on the difference between the estimated amount shown in the offer information and the contracted amount regarding the past contracted transaction by the transaction applicant.

Fifth, in the information processing apparatus according to the present invention described above, the first threshold value may be set based on a transmission execution state regarding offer information to a transaction requester terminal that is a target of offer information. .
The first threshold has a function of tightening or loosening the transmission execution determination to the transaction requester. If the first threshold value is increased, the number of offer information to be transmitted to the transaction requester terminal is likely to increase. If the first threshold value is decreased, the offer information to be transmitted to the transaction requester terminal is increased. The number tends to be reduced. Too much transmission of offer information is a burden on the transaction requester. On the other hand, if the transmission is too small, the function that the transaction requester selects an offer to be concluded from an appropriate number of offers becomes insufficient. Therefore, the first threshold value is set based on the transmission execution status regarding the offer information to the transaction requester terminal. This allows a moderate number of offers to be presented to the transaction requester.

Sixth, in the information processing apparatus according to the present invention described above, the first threshold value is not transmitted to the transaction requester terminal according to a comparison result with offer information set as a comparison target by the comparison target setting unit. May be set based on the number of offer information determined.
This is also a process for realizing an adjustment function for presenting an appropriate number of offers to the transaction requester. For example, when other offer information that is a comparison target is extremely advantageous for the transaction requester, it is assumed that most of the other offer information is not transmitted. Therefore, the first threshold value is varied according to such a situation so that an appropriate number of transmissions are performed.

Seventh, in the information processing apparatus according to the present invention described above, the transmission permission / inhibition determination processing unit may correct the estimated amount included in the offer information for comparison and then compare it with the comparison target.
The conditions that a transaction requester wants to close range from an estimated amount, convenience, and operator's credit. Therefore, in order to prevent the transmission to the transaction requester from being executed because only the estimated amount is inferior, or the transmission being executed because only the estimated amount is superior, correction is performed to increase or decrease the estimated amount used for comparison. Is possible. As a result, estimates of various conditions are presented to the user.

Eighth, in the information processing apparatus according to the present invention described above, the transmission permission / inhibition determination processing unit is based on the magnitude of the difference between the condition element relating to offer information and the setting condition associated with the transaction request information. The estimated amount included in the offer information may be corrected for comparison.
By presenting the setting conditions in the transaction request information, the transaction requester can determine the conditions requested by the transaction requester for the contract. Offers suitable for such conditions can be easily transmitted to the transaction requester terminal by correcting the estimated amount at the time of comparison.

Ninthly, in the information processing apparatus according to the present invention described above, the offer permission determination processing unit provides an offer of the offer information with respect to offer information that is determined not to execute transmission related to offer information to the transaction requester terminal. You may make it perform the process which determines whether the notification process to the original transaction applicant is performed.
Offer information that is determined not to be transmitted to the transaction requester terminal becomes impossible or difficult for the contract applicant. Therefore, the fact is notified.

Tenth, in the information processing apparatus according to the present invention described above, the transmission permission / inhibition determination processing unit includes, in the offer information, offer information that is determined not to execute transmission related to offer information to the transaction requester terminal. If the amount difference between the estimated amount and the amount included in the comparison target is less than a predetermined threshold, it may be determined to execute the notification process to the transaction applicant who is the offer source of the offer information.
If the amount difference is less than the predetermined threshold value, it is determined that the transmission is not executed by comparison, but it means that the comparison process is not greatly lost. Therefore, notification processing is preferable in terms of prompting a re-offer.

Eleventh, in the information processing apparatus according to the present invention described above, the transmission permission / inhibition determination processing unit sends to the transaction applicant about offer information that has been determined not to perform transmission related to offer information to the transaction requester terminal. The notification process may be determined based on the status of other offer information by the transaction applicant who is the offer source of the offer information.
This is because, for example, there is a case where notification of non-execution of transmission is not necessarily required due to a situation in which there is an opportunity to close a similar product due to other offer information of the transaction applicant.

12thly, in the information processing apparatus according to the present invention described above, the offer permission determination processing unit provides an offer of the offer information for offer information that has been decided not to execute transmission related to offer information to the transaction requester terminal. When the notification process to the original transaction applicant is executed, it is desirable that the notification information by the notification process includes a content that recommends re-offer information transmission.
By recommending the re-offer information to be sent by notification, it is possible to provide an opportunity for the contract applicant to close.

13thly, in the information processing apparatus according to the present invention described above, the offer permission determination processing unit provides an offer of the offer information for offer information that has been decided not to execute transmission related to offer information to the transaction requester terminal. When the notification process to the original transaction applicant is executed, it is desirable that the notification information by the notification process includes a content that recommends changing the transaction request information to be offered.
This is because changing the target of the offer may provide a new contract opportunity to the transaction applicant.

14thly, in the information processing apparatus according to the present invention described above, the transmission permission / inhibition determination processing unit determines whether or not to execute transmission related to offer information to the transaction requester terminal from the comparison result. The condition may be selected based on the offer information transmission status to the transaction requester terminal to be transmitted.
The condition for determining whether or not to perform transmission may be varied under severe conditions or loose conditions. By making such a condition selection based on the offer information transmission status to the transaction requester terminal, it is possible to realize an appropriate number of offer information to the transaction requester terminal.

15thly, in the information processing apparatus according to the present invention described above, the comparison target setting unit corresponds to the same transaction request information as the offer information acquired by the commercial transaction information acquisition unit, and is transmitted to the transaction requester terminal. Other offer information that has been executed and that has been subjected to a predetermined operation on the transaction requester terminal side may be set as a comparison target.
The comparison target in the comparison process is desirably a transaction requester that is a criterion for whether or not the contract is possible. Offer information that has already been presented to the transaction requester and the interest of the transaction requester is assumed to be appropriate as such a criterion. Therefore, offer information on which a predetermined operation such as clicking (browsing) is performed is set as a comparison target on the transaction requester terminal side.

In accordance with the transaction request information transmitted from the transaction requester terminal, the information processing method according to the present invention generates a plurality of transaction applicants in a state in which a plurality of transaction applicants cannot know each other's offer contents. A commercial transaction information acquisition step for acquiring offer information about, a comparison target setting step for setting a comparison target for the offer information acquired in the commercial transaction information acquisition step, the offer information acquired in the commercial transaction information acquisition step, Based on the comparison result with the comparison target set in the comparison target setting step, a transmission permission / inhibition determination step for determining whether or not to transmit the offer information to the transaction requester terminal, and the transmission permission / inhibition determination Based on the determination of the step, a transmission control step for controlling a transmission process for offer information to the transaction requester terminal. And, with a.
This implements a function of filtering a large number of offer information and executing transmission to the transaction requester.
A program according to the present invention is a program that causes an information processing apparatus to execute each step of the information processing method. The information processing apparatus is realized by this program.

According to the present invention, it is possible to eliminate or reduce the burden caused by too many offers to the transaction requester.

It is a block diagram of a system configuration including a transaction mediation apparatus according to an embodiment of the present invention. It is a block diagram of the computer apparatus used by embodiment. It is a block diagram of a functional structure of the transaction mediation apparatus of an embodiment. It is explanatory drawing of the user database and vendor database of an embodiment. It is explanatory drawing of the estimate request information database of an embodiment, and an offer information database. It is explanatory drawing of the contract information database of embodiment. FIG. 10 is an explanatory diagram of a process flow between terminals in the first to sixth embodiments. It is a flowchart of the process of the transaction mediation apparatus of 1st Embodiment. It is a flowchart of the comparison object setting process of an embodiment. It is a flowchart of the comparison object setting process of an embodiment. It is a flowchart of the comparison object setting process of an embodiment. It is a flowchart of the comparison object setting process of an embodiment. It is a flowchart of the comparison object setting process of an embodiment. It is a flowchart of the comparison / transmission permission / inhibition determination process of the embodiment. It is a flowchart of the comparison / transmission permission / inhibition determination process of the embodiment. It is a flowchart of the comparison / transmission permission / inhibition determination process of the embodiment. It is a flowchart of the comparison / transmission permission / inhibition determination process of the embodiment. It is a flowchart of the comparison / transmission permission / inhibition determination process of the embodiment. It is a flowchart of the difference threshold value setting process of an embodiment. It is a flowchart of the difference threshold value setting process of an embodiment. It is a flowchart of the modification of the comparison process of embodiment. It is a flowchart of the modification of the comparison process of embodiment. It is a flowchart of non-transmission offer processing of an embodiment. It is a flowchart of non-transmission offer processing of an embodiment. It is a flow chart of notice information generation processing of an embodiment. It is a flowchart of the process of the transaction mediation apparatus of 2nd, 3rd embodiment. It is a flowchart of the process of the transaction mediation apparatus of 4th, 5th embodiment. It is a flowchart of a process of the transaction mediation apparatus of 6th Embodiment. It is explanatory drawing of the flow of the process between each terminal in 7th Embodiment. It is explanatory drawing of the offer condition database of 7th Embodiment. It is a flowchart of a process of the transaction mediation apparatus of 7th Embodiment. It is explanatory drawing of the flow of the process between each terminal in 8th Embodiment. It is explanatory drawing of the web presentation example of 8th Embodiment. It is a flowchart of a process of the transaction mediation apparatus of 8th Embodiment.

Hereinafter, embodiments will be described in the following order.
<1. Network system configuration>
<2. Configuration of Transaction Mediation Device and Database>
<3. First Embodiment>
[3-1: Overall system processing flow]
[3-2: Transaction Mediation Device Processing]
[3-3: Comparison target setting process]
[3-4: Comparison / transmission availability determination process]
[3-5: Difference threshold setting processing]
[3-6: Modified example regarding comparison processing]
[3-7: Unsent offer processing]
<4. Second to sixth embodiments>
<5. Seventh Embodiment>
<6. Eighth Embodiment>
<7. Summary and Modification>
<8. Program and Storage Medium>

In the embodiment, as an example of the information processing apparatus described in the claims of the present invention, for example, a transaction mediating apparatus that mediates the purchase of a car is cited. The transaction intermediary device is realized by one or a plurality of information processing devices. Therefore, the information processing device described in the claims of the present invention is realized by one information processing device or a plurality of information processing devices in cooperation.
Further, main terms used in the embodiments have the following meanings.
User: Refers to the transaction requester. For example, a user who wants to sell a car (purchase by a vendor).
User terminal: An information processing apparatus capable of network communication used by a user.
・ Vendor: Refers to a transaction applicant. For example, a car buyer.
Vendor terminal: An information processing apparatus that can be used by a vendor and that can perform network communication.
Quotation request information: A term that comprehensively indicates information that a user transmits to a transaction mediation apparatus in order to obtain a quote. Includes various contents such as information and conditions of products to be sold. This “estimation request information” is an example of the transaction request information referred to in the claims of the present invention.
-Offer information: A term that comprehensively indicates information related to an offer (transaction offer) by a vendor with respect to an estimate request information. Includes estimated amount and other various contents. “Offer information” described in the embodiment is an example of offer information referred to in the claims of the present invention.

<1. Network system configuration>
FIG. 1 shows a configuration example of a network system including a transaction mediating apparatus 2 according to the embodiment.
In the network system according to the present embodiment, the transaction intermediary device 2, the plurality of vendor terminals 4 (4a, 4b, 4c...), And the plurality of user terminals 5 (5a, 5b, 5c. They are connected so that they can communicate with each other.
Further, the transaction mediating apparatus 2 can access various databases shown as the database group 3. Hereinafter, “database” is referred to as “DB”.

Various examples of the configuration of the network 1 are assumed. For example, the Internet, intranet, extranet, LAN (Local Area Network), CATV (Community Antenna TeleVision) communication network, virtual private network, telephone line network, mobile communication network, satellite communication network, etc. are assumed. The
Various examples of transmission media constituting all or part of the network 1 are also envisaged. For example, IEEE (Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers) 1394, USB (Universal Serial Bus), power line carrier, telephone line, etc. can be wired with infrared, IrDA (Infrared Data Association), Bluetooth (registered trademark), 802.11 wireless It can also be used by radio such as a mobile phone network, satellite line, and digital terrestrial network.

The transaction mediating apparatus 2 is an information processing apparatus that provides a service that mediates a commercial transaction between a user and a vendor via network communication. Roughly, the following services will be provided.
The user can browse the web page of the purchase mediation service prepared by the transaction mediation device 2 by accessing the transaction mediation device 2 from the user terminal 5.
For example, a user who wants to sell a car he owns can make an estimate request on the web page. For example, the user logs in to the purchase brokerage service, and inputs information on the sold product such as the vehicle type, model year, color, and travel distance on the application screen prepared as a web page. This input information is acquired by the transaction mediating apparatus 2 together with information of the logged-in user as estimate request information.

The transaction intermediary device 2 transmits part or all of the content of the quotation request information to a plurality of registered vendor terminals 4. Thereby, a plurality of vendors can know the contents of the request for quotation by the user. Each vendor arbitrarily creates an estimate according to the contents, that is, information such as vehicle type, model year, color, mileage, etc., and transmits offer information including the estimated amount to the transaction mediating apparatus 2. The offer information from the vendor terminal 4 is not directly transmitted to the user who has made a request for quotation, but is once acquired by the transaction mediating apparatus 2. For this reason, in the present embodiment, the transaction mediating apparatus 2 does not need to notify the vendor of contact information of the user, for example, the user's e-mail address.

In the case of the present embodiment, the transaction intermediary device 2 acquires offer information of a plurality of transaction applicants as offer information corresponding to transaction request information from the user. Generated without knowing each other's offer. In other words, each vendor cannot know the offer contents of other vendors who are competitors in commerce. That is, the transaction intermediary device 2 transmits the contents of the quotation request information to each of the

vendor terminals

4a, 4b,... But does not transmit the offer contents of other vendors.
Each vendor generates its own offer information and transmits it to the transaction intermediary device 2 without recognizing the offer contents (for example, the estimated purchase price) of the other vendors by using the

respective vendor terminals

4a, 4b. It will be. Alternatively, as described in the seventh embodiment, the transaction mediating apparatus 2 may generate offer information for each vendor while maintaining a state in which the vendors cannot know the offer contents.

The transaction intermediary device 2 does not transfer the received offer information as it is to the user terminal, but performs a comparison / transmission availability determination process described later in detail, and relates the offer information determined to be transmitted to the user terminal 5 Perform transmission.
In this way, the transaction mediating apparatus 2 performs filtering for transmitting to the user terminal 5 with respect to a large number of offer information acquired from a large number of vendor terminals 4.
In the first to seventh embodiments, the transaction intermediary device 2 transmits the contents of offer information to the user terminal 5. In the eighth embodiment, a notification of occurrence of offer information is transmitted. Here, the description will be continued assuming that the content of the offer information is transmitted to the user terminal 5.

Thereafter, the user can determine the trading partner by examining the offered offer information. The user can contact the vendor who wishes to do business and conduct an actual business negotiation.
In the present embodiment, the offer information includes the estimated amount for the request for quotation as the content. It is only an “estimate”, and does not force a contract based on conditions such as the estimated amount. Therefore, the user can make a business negotiation arbitrarily after considering offer information from a plurality of vendors and considering various conditions such as the amount of money, vendor credit, location, service, and the like.
That is, the transaction of the vendor is not compulsory by the offer information selected by the transaction intermediary device 2 by filtering and the content or notification transmitted to the user terminal 5. In other words, the filtering performed by the transaction mediating apparatus 2 is not for selecting an offer to be concluded.

As described above, the transaction mediating apparatus 2 mainly obtains vendor offer information according to the request for quotation information from the user terminal 5, filters offer information, and transmits control related to offer information to the user terminal 5 based on the filtering result. I do.
As the DB group 3, one or a plurality of DBs in which information necessary for the processing of the transaction mediating apparatus 2 is stored are schematically shown. Details will be described later.

The vendor terminal 4 is an information processing apparatus used by the vendor, and is used for communication and registration with the transaction mediating apparatus 2 via the network 1. The registration is registration for becoming a vendor as a service target by the transaction mediating apparatus 2.
The user terminal 5 is shown as an information processing apparatus operated by a user.
The user terminal 5 and the vendor terminal 4 are realized by an information processing apparatus such as a personal computer, a mobile phone, or a portable information terminal, for example.

In the case of the present embodiment, for example, the transaction intermediary device 2 starts an HTTP (Hypertext Transfer Protocol) daemon. The vendor terminal 4 or the user terminal 5 starts a browser, and the vendor terminal 4 or the user terminal 5 transmits a processing request (HTTP request) to the transaction mediating apparatus 2 via the browser. From the transaction intermediary device 2, a processing result (HTTP response) corresponding to the processing request is transmitted to the vendor terminal 4 or the user terminal 5. For example, page data described in a web page description language is transmitted to the vendor terminal 4 or the user terminal 5. Based on the page data, a web page (screen) based on the processing result is displayed on the display unit of the vendor terminal 4 or the user terminal 5. The vendor terminal 4 or the user terminal 5 can input information on the browser screen and transmit information to the transaction mediating apparatus 2.
The transaction intermediary device 2 can provide a service page for purchasing a car to the user terminal 5 by such an operation, and can accept estimate request information from the user terminal 5. Further, the transaction mediating apparatus 2 can provide a service page for an offer (a transaction offer) to the vendor terminal 4 and can accept offer information from the vendor terminal 4.

Further, the transaction mediating apparatus 2 can communicate with the vendor terminal 4 and the user terminal 5 by e-mail or the like. For example, the transaction intermediary device 2 generates e-mail data and transmits various notifications to the vendor terminal 4 and the user terminal 5 via an e-mail server (provider) not shown. For example, the transaction intermediary device 2 notifies the vendor terminal 4 of the contents of the estimate request information from the user or notifies the vendor terminal 4 of the transmission status of the offer information to the user terminal 5 by e-mail or the like.
Further, the transaction mediating apparatus 2 transmits, to the user terminal 5, offer information, notification of offer information generation, etc. by e-mail or the like.

Next, FIG. 2 shows a hardware configuration of the information processing apparatus that constitutes the transaction mediating apparatus 2, the vendor terminal 4, and the user terminal 5 shown in FIG. Each device shown as transaction brokerage device 2, vendor terminal 4, and user terminal 5 can be realized as a computer device as shown in FIG. 2 capable of information processing and information communication.

In FIG. 2, a CPU (Central Processing Unit) 101 of a computer apparatus performs various processes according to a program stored in a ROM (Read Only Memory) 102 or a program loaded from a storage unit 108 to a RAM (Random Access Memory) 103. Execute the process. The RAM 103 also appropriately stores data necessary for the CPU 101 to execute various processes.
The CPU 101, ROM 102, and RAM 103 are connected to each other via a bus 104. An input / output interface 105 is also connected to the bus 104.
The input / output interface 105 includes an input device 106 such as a keyboard, a mouse, and a touch panel, an LCD (Liquid Crystal Display), a CRT (Cathode Ray Tube), a display such as an organic EL (Electroluminescence) panel, and an output including a speaker. A device 107, a storage unit 108 including an HDD (Hard Disk Drive), a flash memory device, and the like, and a communication unit 109 that performs communication processing and inter-device communication via the network 1 are connected.
A media drive 110 is also connected to the input / output interface 105 as necessary, and a removable medium 111 such as a magnetic disk, an optical disk, a magneto-optical disk, or a semiconductor memory is appropriately mounted, and information can be written to the removable medium 111. Reading is performed.

In such a computer apparatus, data and programs can be uploaded and downloaded through communication by the communication unit 109, and data and programs can be transferred via the removable medium 111.
When the CPU 101 performs processing operations based on various programs, necessary information processing and communication as the transaction mediating apparatus 2, the vendor terminal 4, and the user terminal 5 are executed.
In addition, the information processing apparatus which comprises the transaction mediation apparatus 2, the vendor terminal 4, and the user terminal 5 is not limited to a single computer apparatus as shown in FIG. 2, and a plurality of computer apparatuses are systemized. It may be configured. The plurality of computer devices may be systemized by a LAN or the like, or may be arranged at a remote place by a VPN using the Internet or the like.

<2. Configuration of Transaction Mediation Device and Database>
FIG. 3 shows a functional configuration as a transaction intermediary device 2 constituted by one or a plurality of information processing devices and various DBs shown as the DB group 3.
Each function as transaction mediating apparatus 2 is a function realized by processing executed by CPU 101 in accordance with a program in information processing apparatus. However, all or a part of the processing described below may be realized by hardware.
Further, when each function is realized by software, each function need not be realized by an independent program. Processing of a plurality of functions may be executed by one program, or one function may be realized by cooperation of a plurality of program modules.

The transaction mediating apparatus 2 includes a communication unit 20, a commercial transaction information acquisition unit 21, a comparison target setting unit 22, a transmission availability determination processing unit 23, a transmission control unit 24, and a WEB server 25.

The communication unit 20 performs various communications with the user terminal 5, the vendor terminal 4, or other information processing apparatuses via the network 1. For example, transmission of HTML data constituting a WEB page presented on the browser in the user terminal 5 or the vendor terminal 4 or input information (for example, request for quotation information or offer information) by a user or a vendor for an input form provided on the WEB screen Accept transmission. It also sends and receives e-mails.

The commercial transaction information acquisition unit 21 acquires the commercial transaction information received by the communication unit 20. Alternatively, the commercial transaction information acquisition unit 21 may generate and acquire commercial transaction information based on the information received by the communication unit 20.
The commercial transaction information referred to in the embodiment is, for example, estimate request information transmitted from the user terminal 5, offer information transmitted from the vendor terminal 4, contract information transmitted from the user terminal 5 or the vendor terminal 4 at the time of contract, and the like. is there.
The commercial transaction information acquisition unit 21 performs processing such as registration and update of each DB, which will be described later, on various types of commercial transaction information, and also performs an execution instruction for comparison processing, an instruction for preparation processing, etc. that realize the above filtering function for offer information, For example, DB reading of necessary information is performed.
Further, the commercial transaction information acquisition unit 21 also transmits introduction information to each vendor terminal 4 in response to the acquisition of the quotation request information.
In addition, regarding offer information, the commercial transaction information acquisition unit 21 is generated in a state in which a plurality of transaction applicants cannot know each other's offer contents corresponding to the transaction request information transmitted from the user terminal 5. You will get offer information about your transaction applicants.

The comparison target setting unit 22 performs a process of setting a comparison target as a comparison partner for the comparison process regarding offer information.
In the present embodiment, as described above, the offer information is filtered for determining whether to execute transmission to the user regarding the offer information. In other words, offer information determined to be necessary for the user is presented to the user, and conversely, transmission regarding offer information determined to be unnecessary is not executed. The comparison target is a reference for such determination. Although various examples will be described later, a fixed value and a variable value can be considered as comparison targets. Other offer information may be used as a comparison target for determination of certain offer information.

Based on the comparison result between the offer information acquired by the commercial transaction information acquisition unit 21 and the comparison target set by the comparison target setting unit 22, the transmission permission / inhibition determination processing unit 23 transmits transmission regarding the offer information to the user terminal 5. A process for determining whether or not to execute is performed.
As the simplest example, when certain offer information is a condition that is superior to the comparison side from the user side (for example, the estimated amount of purchase is high), transmission related to the offer information is sent to the user terminal 5. On the other hand, when the condition is inferior when viewed from the user side, it is determined that transmission regarding the offer information is not performed to the user terminal 5. Since various specific processes for determining transmission are considered, various examples will be described later.
Further, the transmission permission / inhibition determination processing unit 23 also performs processing related to notification to the vendor of the offer source for the offer information determined not to be transmitted to the user terminal 5.

The transmission control unit 24 controls transmission processing to the user terminal 5 related to offer information based on the determination of the transmission permission / inhibition determination processing unit 23. That is, with respect to offer information determined to be transmitted, generation of e-mail data addressed to the user reflecting the content, and transmission request of e-mail data to the communication unit 20 are performed.
Further, the transmission control unit 24 generates e-mail data for notifying the offer source vendor of offer information determined not to be transmitted by the transmission permission / inhibition determination processing unit 23, and sends electronic data to the communication unit 20. Request to send mail data.
These e-mail data are transmitted to the user terminal 5 and the vendor terminal 4 by processing of the communication unit 20.

The WEB server 25 is a server that provides a WEB page for a car purchase service. A user who wishes to sell a car accesses the WEB page provided by the WEB server 25 and logs in. Then, the process proceeds to an estimate request page provided by the WEB server 25, and various contents as estimate request information can be input.
The vendor as the purchaser can access the WEB page provided by the WEB server 25 from the vendor terminal 4 and can receive registration as a supplier who receives the introduction of the user (the person who wants to sell) from the registration page. The transaction intermediary device 2 supplies the request information for quotation to the registered vendor. The registered vendor can log in from the vendor terminal 4, proceed to the offer input page provided by the WEB server 25, and input various contents as offer information.
In the case of an eighth embodiment to be described later, the WEB server 25 also performs a process for generating / updating a page for offer information presentation / viewing by a user terminal.

Next, various DBs will be described. DBs accessed by the transaction intermediary device 2 include a user DB 31, a vendor DB 32, an estimate request information DB 33, an offer information DB 34, a contract information DB 35, and an offer condition DB 36 as shown in the figure.
Each of these DBs (31 to 36) may be realized in any form as long as the transaction mediating apparatus 2 is accessible. For example, all of the DBs (31 to 36) may be formed in the storage unit in the same system as the transaction intermediary device 2, or a part or all of each DB (31 to 36) is a separate body, a remote place, etc. The computer system may be provided. Of course, each DB (31 to 36) does not need to be formed in one device (for example, one HDD). Each DB (31 to 36) does not need to be configured as one DB. For example, information stored as the user DB 31 may be stored and managed by a plurality of user DBs (for example, a login user DB and a transaction user DB). Each DB (31 to 36) described below is merely an example of information related to the processing of the embodiment in the form of one DB.

The user DB 31 stores information on users who receive services from the transaction mediating apparatus 2. An example of the user DB 31 is shown in FIG. 4A. The user DB 31 stores the user name, address, login password, e-mail address, estimate request history, and the like corresponding to the user ID (identification).
The user ID is identification information for each user. Each user ID is shown as U1, U2,. The user ID and password are used, for example, when the user logs in to the WEB page for the automobile purchase service from the user terminal 5.
When the user logs in, the transaction intermediary device 2 can check the user's name, address, e-mail address, and estimate request history by referring to the user DB 31 based on the user ID. As the estimate request history, for example, information indicating past estimate request information (for example, an estimate request ID described later) is stored.
In addition to the illustration, attribute information such as sex and age, payment information, information on other services, and the like may be registered in the user DB 31.

The vendor DB 32 stores information on vendors registered in the transaction mediating apparatus 2. FIG. 4B shows an example of the vendor DB 32. The vendor DB 32 stores a vendor name, address, login password, e-mail address, corresponding vehicle type, evaluation, and the like corresponding to the vendor ID.
The vendor ID is identification information issued to each registered vendor. Each vendor ID is shown as V1, V2,. The vendor ID and password are used, for example, when the vendor logs into the WEB page for the automobile purchase service from the vendor terminal 4.
When the vendor logs in, the transaction intermediary device 2 can check the vendor name, address, e-mail address, corresponding vehicle type, and evaluation by referring to the vendor DB 32 based on the vendor ID.
The corresponding vehicle type is information such as the vehicle type, color, and year of the car that the vendor can respond to purchase. Vendors can optionally update the information on compatible models by changing the registration.
The evaluation is, for example, vendor evaluation information calculated by the transaction mediating apparatus 2 from the past transaction performance of the vendor.
In addition to the illustration, the vendor DB 32 may register various vendor attribute information, compatible payment type information, and the like.

An example of the estimate request information DB 33 is shown in FIG. 5A. The estimate request information DB 33 stores various types of information corresponding to individual estimate request information.
The quotation request ID is identification information of individual quotation request information transmitted from the user terminal 5. Each estimation request ID is shown as RQ1, RQ2,.
Corresponding to this estimate request ID, acquisition date and time, user ID, estimate target information, status, user setting conditions, etc. are stored.
The acquisition date and time is the date and time when the transaction intermediary device 2 acquires the request for quotation information from the user terminal 5.
As the user ID, the user ID of the user who transmitted the estimate request information is stored.
The estimation target information is information on a target product (a vehicle desired to be sold) according to a request for estimation, and includes information such as a vehicle type, a color, a travel distance, an option, and an accident history, for example. This estimate target information is information included in the estimate request information transmitted from the user.
The status is information indicating the progress status of the request for quotation. For example, information such as before offer acceptance, during offer acceptance, offer acceptance end, and cancellation is stored.
The user setting condition is information on a condition requested by the user for the estimate, and can be arbitrarily set by the user. For example, a condition related to a desired transaction amount such as a desired minimum price, a time condition such as a contract expiration date, a positional condition such as a vendor location, and the like are stored according to a user setting.

An example of the offer information DB 34 is shown in FIG. 5B. In the offer information DB 34, various types of information are stored corresponding to individual offer information.
The offer ID is identification information of individual offer information. Each offer ID is shown as OF1, OF2,. Corresponding to this offer ID, acquisition date / time, vendor ID, user ID, estimate request ID, estimated amount, offer issue date, offer expiration date, status, transmission date / time, etc. are stored.
The acquisition date / time is the date / time when the transaction intermediary device 2 acquired the offer information. Specifically, it is the date and time when the offer information is received and acquired from the vendor terminal 4 or the date and time when the transaction mediating apparatus 2 generates and acquires the offer information based on the designation from the vendor or the like.
As the vendor ID, the vendor ID of the vendor that has issued the offer information is stored.
As the user ID, the user ID of the user who transmitted the quotation request information corresponding to the offer information is stored.
As the estimate request ID, an estimate request ID for the estimate request information corresponding to the offer information is stored.
The estimated amount is an estimated amount of the purchase price for the automobile indicated in the estimation request information.
The offer effective date is the effective date of the offer information.
The offer expiration date is the expiration date of the offer information.
The status is information indicating the progress of the offer information. For example, information such as transmission determination, non-transmission (non-transmission) determination, transmission to the user, adoption, non-adoption, cancellation, etc. is stored before comparison for filtering.
As the transmission date / time, the execution date / time of transmission addressed to the user terminal 5 and the transmission date / time when the non-transmission decision is made and the vendor terminal 4 is notified are stored.

An example of the contract information DB 35 is shown in FIG. The contract information DB 35 stores various types of information about the set of contracted offer information and estimate request information.
The offer ID and the estimate request ID indicate a set of the contracted offer information and the estimate request information. In addition, a user ID related to the quotation request ID and a vendor ID related to the offer ID are shown. Then, the estimated price, the contract price, the difference, and the contract date are stored for the group that has contracted.
The estimated amount is the estimated amount indicated in the closed offer information.
The contract price is the actual purchase price at the time of contract.
The difference is the difference between the estimated amount and the contract amount.
The date of contract is the date of contract.

The user DB 31, the vendor DB 32, the estimate request information DB 33, the offer information DB 34, and the contract information DB 35 store information as described above, for example. Of course, information not shown in the figure may be further included, and it is not necessary that all the information shown in the figure is included.
The offer condition DB 36 shown in FIG. 3 is information used in the seventh embodiment, and will be described later with reference to FIG.

The transaction intermediary device 2 sequentially accesses these DBs to perform new storage, update, and reading. For example, the transaction intermediary device 2 newly registers information about the user in the user DB 31 in response to the user registering use of the automobile purchase service. Further, in response to registration by the vendor, information about the vendor is newly registered in the vendor DB 32.
Further, in response to obtaining the quotation request information from the user terminal 5, the transaction mediating apparatus 2 newly registers information related to the quotation request information in the quotation request information DB 33.
Further, in response to acquiring offer information, transaction mediating apparatus 2 newly registers information related to the offer information in offer information DB 34.
Further, the transaction mediating apparatus 2 sequentially updates the status in the estimate request information DB 33 and the offer information DB 34 in the process.
Further, in response to the notification of the contract information from the user terminal 5 or the vendor terminal 4, the transaction intermediary device 2 stores information in the contract information DB according to the contents of the contract.

<3. First Embodiment>
[3-1: Overall system processing flow]
Hereinafter, processing of the transaction mediating apparatus 2 as the first embodiment will be described.
FIG. 7 shows an outline of the flow of processing among the information processing apparatuses of the user terminal 5, the transaction mediating apparatus 2, and the vendor terminal 4 in the first (and second to sixth to be described later) embodiments. Specifically, this is a flow of processing from transmission of the estimate request information by the user terminal 5 to transmission of offer information to the user terminal 5.

First, in step S <b> 21, a user who desires to sell a car transmits the estimate request information RQ to the transaction mediating apparatus 2 using the user terminal 5.
Specifically, the user logs in to the automobile purchase service using the user ID and password, inputs the input items to a predetermined quotation request WEB page, and transmits the input items. For example, a user name, estimation target information, user setting conditions, and the like are input. Then, a transmission operation is performed. Then, the estimate request information RQ including these pieces of information is transmitted to the transaction mediating apparatus 2.

When the transaction mediating apparatus 2 receives and acquires the quotation request information RQ in step S1, the transaction brokerage apparatus 2 transmits the quotation request introduction information IRQ to the vendor terminal 4 in step S2. The introduction information IRQ includes at least an estimate request ID and estimate target information (vehicle type, color, mileage, options, accident history, etc.) as the contents of the estimate request information RQ.
In FIG. 7, only one vendor terminal 4 is shown for the sake of illustration. The introduction information IRQ is transmitted respectively. However, the introduction information IRQ may not be transmitted to a vendor whose estimation target information does not correspond to the corresponding vehicle type (see FIG. 4B).

Each vendor that received the introduction information IRQ in step S31 generates offer information OF in step S32 and transmits it to the transaction mediating apparatus 2.
A plurality of offer information OF is sequentially transmitted to the transaction intermediary device 2 corresponding to one estimate request information RQ. Of course, it is possible that not all vendors are interested in the introduction information IRQ, and no offer information OF is sent, or only a small number of offer information OF is sent. A lot of offer information OF is sequentially transmitted corresponding to one introduction information IRQ.
The offer information OF includes a corresponding estimate request ID, an estimated amount, an offer effective date, an offer expiration date, and the like.

The transaction intermediary device 2 performs the processing from step S4 onward for each offer information OF received / acquired in step S3.
First, in step S4, a comparison target (comparison partner) for the offer information OF is set. In step S5, a comparison / transmission availability determination process is performed. This is a process of performing a process of comparing the offer information OF with the comparison target and determining whether or not to send the offer information OF to the user terminal 5 according to the comparison result.
In step S6, transaction brokerage apparatus 2 branches the process depending on the result of determining whether transmission is possible. If it is determined that the offer information OF can be transmitted, in step S7, the content of the offer information OF (offer information content OFv) is transmitted to the user terminal 5 in the form of e-mail, for example. The offer information content OFv to be transmitted may include the entire content of the offer information OF or only a part of the content.
When the user terminal 5 receives the offer information content OFv by e-mail in step S22, the user can open the e-mail and confirm the offer content. For example, the vendor name, vendor contact information, vendor homepage URL (Uniform Resource Locator), estimated price, offer expiration date, etc. can be confirmed. Thereafter, the user can arbitrarily contact the vendor and proceed with the negotiation.

On the other hand, when the transaction intermediary device 2 determines that the certain offer information OF is not transmitted by the comparison / transmission availability determination processing in step S5, the transaction intermediary device 2 proceeds from step S6 to S8, and determines whether or not to notify the vendor. Judging.
When not notified, the user terminal 5 and the vendor terminal 4 are not notified of the offer information OF as it is.
When making a notification, the transaction intermediary device 2 transmits the notification information IL to the vendor terminal 4 that is the offer source of the offer information OF in step S9. For example, the notification information IL is transmitted to the vendor terminal 4 in the form of an e-mail. The notification information IL may be content including information indicating that transmission to the user terminal 5 is not performed due to inferiority in the comparison process, re-offering recommendation, and offer target change recommendation.

When the notification information IL is transmitted, the vendor terminal 4 receives the notification information IL in step S33. Vendor representatives can open the email and check the contents. For example, you can see a pity notification that the offer is not closed, a recommendation for re-offering, and so on.
If the person in charge of the vendor confirms the notification information IL and wants to issue a re-offer by increasing the estimated amount, the re-offer information OF ′ can be transmitted (step S34). This re-offer information OF ′ is also acquired by the transaction mediating apparatus 2 in the same manner as the normal offer information OF. The transaction intermediary device 2 similarly performs the processes after step S4 for the re-offer information OF ′.

As can be understood from the overall flow described above, in the present embodiment, even if a large number of offer information OF is issued for a certain quotation request information RQ, it does not always reach the user. In other words, in the transaction mediating apparatus 2, it is determined whether or not each offer information OF is preferable (for example, worthy of consideration) for the user, and filtering is performed to transmit only the preferable information.
Below, the detailed process example of such a transaction mediation apparatus 2 is demonstrated.

[3-2: Transaction Mediation Device Processing]
A processing example (first embodiment) of the transaction mediating apparatus 2 that realizes the system processing of FIG. 7 will be described with reference to FIG. Hereinafter, the process of the transaction mediating apparatus 2 described as each embodiment is a process executed by the CPU 101 of the information processing apparatus having the functional configuration shown in FIG. Specifically, it is processing by each function as the commercial transaction information acquisition unit 21, the comparison target setting unit 22, the transmission availability determination processing unit 23, and the transmission control unit 24.

As a processing example of the transaction mediating apparatus 2 of the first exemplary embodiment in FIG. 8, a process executed in response to the transaction mediating apparatus 2 acquiring the quotation request information RQ, offer information OF, or contract information is shown. ing.
The transaction intermediary device 2 (the commercial transaction information acquisition unit 21) monitors the reception of the estimate request information RQ, the offer information OF, and the contract information in steps S101, S102, and S103 of FIG.

When the quotation request information RQ from the user terminal 5 is received, the transaction mediating apparatus 2 (the commercial transaction information acquisition unit 21) proceeds from step S101 to S104, captures the received quotation request information RQ, and sends it to the quotation request information DB 33. Perform the registration process.
In other words, an estimate request ID is set for the estimate request information RQ received and acquired, and the acquisition date and time, user ID, estimate target information, status, and user setting conditions associated with the estimate request ID in the estimate request information DB 33 in FIG. 5A. Remember. The user ID is determined by being included in the login information or the estimate request information RQ. The estimation target information and the user setting conditions are included in the estimation request information RQ. The status is, for example, “before offer reception” at this point.

Subsequently, in step S105, the transaction mediating apparatus 2 (the commercial transaction information acquisition unit 21) acquires information on the introduction destination vendor. For example, referring to the vendor DB 32 in FIG. 4B, the electronic mail address of each vendor is acquired.
It should be noted that all vendors registered in the vendor DB 32 as introduction destinations may be targeted, but some may be used. For example, only vendors that store corresponding vehicle types that match the information to be estimated (such as vehicle type) in the request information RQ are extracted, or vendors that are not far away from the user's address that can be determined from the user DB 31 It can be extracted. Further, a corresponding vendor may be selected according to user setting conditions. It may also be selected using vendor evaluation information.

In step S106, the transaction mediating apparatus 2 (the commercial transaction information acquisition unit 21) transmits the introduction information IRQ to one or a plurality of vendor terminals 4 selected as the introduction destination. For example, as the introduction information IRQ, e-mail data including at least the estimate request ID and the estimation target information (vehicle type, etc.) described in the estimate request information RQ is generated, and the e-mail of the introduction vendor selected in step S105 Send to address. The introduction information IRQ may include the user's address, user setting conditions, etc. in addition to the estimation target information.
Further, in response to the transmission of the introduction information IRQ, the transaction intermediary device 2 updates the status of the estimate request information RQ in the estimate request information DB 33 to “in accepting offer”.

When the offer information OF is received from the vendor terminal 4, the transaction intermediary device 2 proceeds from step S102 to the processing of steps S107 to S113, that is, processing according to acquisition of the offer information OF.
The timing at which the offer information OF is transmitted is indefinite due to the convenience of the vendor. Therefore, the transaction mediating apparatus 2 proceeds from step S102 to S107 each time one offer information OF is received.
The reception of the offer information OF monitored in step S102 includes the reception of the re-offer information OF ′ described above.

In step S107, the transaction mediating apparatus 2 (the commercial transaction information acquisition unit 21) performs processing for taking in the received offer information OF and registering it in the offer information DB 34.
That is, for the offer information OF received and acquired, an offer ID is set, and in the offer information DB 34 of FIG. Remember the offer expiration date, status.
The vendor ID is determined by being included in login information or offer information OF. The estimate request ID, the estimated amount, the offer effective date, and the offer expiration date are contents included in the offer information OF. The user ID can be determined by referring to the estimate request information DB 33 using the estimate request ID. The status is, for example, “before comparison” at this point.

If reception is the re-offer information OF ′, registration in the offer information DB 34 may be performed by updating the changed portion in the information about the original offer information OF, or by newly providing an offer ID and each content. May be registered separately from the original offer information OF.

In step S108, the transaction mediating apparatus 2 (comparison target setting unit 22) performs a comparison target setting process. That is, a comparison target to be compared with the offer information OF acquired this time is set. The comparison target may be a fixed value or other offer information may be selected. Each example will be described later.
In step S109, transaction mediating apparatus 2 (transmission permission / inhibition determination processing unit 23) performs a comparison / transmission permission / inhibition determination process. That is, the offer information OF acquired this time is compared with the comparison target, and it is determined whether or not the offer information OF is transmitted to the user terminal 5. Each example of the comparison / transmission availability determination process will be described later.

In step S110, transaction brokerage apparatus 2 branches the process depending on the result of determining whether transmission is possible. If it is determined that transmission is possible for the offer information OF, the transaction mediating apparatus 2 performs transmission control in step S111. That is, the transaction intermediary device 2 (transmission control unit 24) generates e-mail data (offer information content OFv) indicating the content of the offer information OF, and transmits it to the user terminal 5 from the communication unit 20.
In step S112, transaction mediating apparatus 2 (commercial transaction information acquisition unit 21) performs DB update according to the transmission of offer information content OFv. For example, the status of the offer information OF in the offer information DB 34 is updated to “sent”.

If it is determined in the comparison / transmission availability determination process in step S109 that the offer information OF currently being processed is not transmitted, the transaction intermediary device 2 proceeds from step S110 to S113, and performs a non-transmission offer process. The non-transmission offer process is a process for an offer determined to be non-transmission, which is executed by the transmission permission / inhibition determination processing unit 23, the transmission control unit 24, and the commercial transaction information acquisition unit 21. Specifically, it is determined whether or not to notify the vendor of non-transmission, transmission control processing of notification information IL according to the determination, and status in the offer information DB 34 according to non-transmission determination and notification Update processing.
Each example of the non-transmission offer process will be described later.

Although not shown in FIG. 7 described above, in the present embodiment, when a transaction is established between the user and the vendor, the contract information is transmitted from one or both of the user and the vendor.
When the contract information is received, the transaction intermediary device 2 (the commercial transaction information acquisition unit 21) proceeds from step S103 to S114 in FIG. 8, and registers the contract information DB 35. The contract information includes, for example, a user ID, a vendor ID, an estimate request ID, an offer ID, a contract price, and a contract date.
The transaction intermediary device 2 extracts the information from the received / acquired contract information and registers it in the contract information DB. Further, the estimated amount that can be searched from the offer ID is stored, and the difference between the estimated amount and the contract amount is obtained and stored in the contract information DB.

When the re-offer information OF 'is given an offer ID different from the original offer information OF (see offer information DB 34), the offer ID in the closing information DB 35 is the offer ID of the re-offer information OF' and the original offer. The offer ID of the information OF is stored.
In addition, there is a possibility that the corresponding estimate request information RQ for a certain offer is changed. In this case, the estimate request ID in the contract information DB 35 includes the estimate request ID of the contracted request information and the original estimate before the change. The estimate request ID of the request information RQ is also stored.
By doing in this way, it is also possible to confirm the contract status according to the re-offer and the change of the corresponding request for quotation information RQ.

[3-3: Comparison target setting process]
Various comparison target setting processing examples executed by the transaction mediating apparatus 2 (comparison target setting unit 22) as step S108 in FIG. 8 will be described with reference to FIGS.
Here, an example in which an amount to be compared with an estimated amount included in offer information OF or re-offer information OF ′ is set as a comparison target will be described.
Further, certain offer information OF or re-offer information OF ′ that is currently processed in steps S108 and S109 in FIG. 8 will be referred to as “current offer information OF”.

FIG. 9A is an example in which the amount of money to be compared is set based on the market price information.
As the comparison target setting process, the transaction mediating apparatus 2 first acquires market price information in step S201. The transaction intermediary device 2 refers to the estimate object information about the estimate request information RQ corresponding to the current offer information OF, and acquires the market price information about the corresponding vehicle type. For example, the price as a purchase market price is derived from the vehicle type, model year, color, mileage, and the like.
For this purpose, it is conceivable to gain access to market price information by accessing a market price DB that can search for market prices under conditions such as vehicle type. Moreover, since the market price information is constantly fluctuating in the used car market, the market price DB is desirably a DB that is updated to reflect market conditions. Moreover, you may make it acquire market price information from the traders etc. which provide market price information, without using such market price DB directly.
Alternatively, from the contract information DB 35, a contract record with the same conditions such as the vehicle type, year, color, and travel distance may be extracted, and a value obtained from the contract price, for example, an average value may be used as the market price information.

If the market price information is acquired, in step S202, the transaction mediating apparatus 2 sets a comparison target amount based on the market price information. For example, the price as the market price is used as the comparison target price. Alternatively, an amount that is slightly discounted or added to the amount as the market price is set as the amount to be compared.
Accordingly, it is possible to set a comparison target for determining whether or not to transmit the current offer information OF, reflecting market conditions.

FIG. 9B is a processing example in which the user's desired amount is reflected.
The estimate request information RQ can include a user's desired amount of transaction, for example, a minimum amount desired at the time of sale, as user setting information.
When such a desired amount is included in the estimate request information RQ corresponding to the current offer information OF, the comparison target amount can be set based on the desired amount.

For example, in the comparison target setting process of step S108, the transaction mediating apparatus 2 checks whether or not the user's desired amount is included in the estimate request information RQ in step S210 of FIG. 9B.
If the desired amount exists, the transaction intermediary device 2 proceeds to step S211 and sets a comparison target amount based on the user's desired amount. For example, the desired amount itself is set as a comparison target amount. Alternatively, a price obtained by discounting a predetermined difference or a predetermined percentage from a desired amount is used as a comparison target amount.

On the other hand, if the desired amount is not set in the estimate request information RQ, the transaction intermediary device 2 proceeds from step S210 to S212, acquires the market price information, and sets the comparison target price based on the market price information in step S213. That is, the process of FIG. 9A is performed.

By doing as described above, it is possible to set a comparison target amount reflecting the user's desired amount.
Since the desired amount is arbitrarily set by the user, it may be assumed that the desired amount is actually far from the actual market price. Therefore, it is possible to adjust the desired amount based on the market price information. For example, in step S211, ± 20% of the amount obtained as the market price information is set as an effective range, and if the desired amount is within the effective range, the desired amount is directly used as a comparison target amount. If the desired amount is out of the effective range, the upper limit or lower limit amount of the effective range is set as the comparison target amount.
In addition, on the input screen of quotation request information provided to the user as a web page, the market price information is obtained at the stage when the conditions such as the vehicle type are input, the effective range of the desired amount is presented, and the input range is limited. It is also possible.

FIGS. 10 to 13 are examples in which the estimated amount of other offer information is set as the comparison target amount for the current offer information OF.
The “other offer information OF” in these examples is a condition that it is offer information OF for the same quotation request information RQ, and offer information OF of a vendor different from the vendor of the current offer information OF. It is the satisfied offer information OF.

FIG. 10 is an example in which the estimated amount of one or more other offer information OF is set as the comparison target amount.
In the case of FIG. 10, the transaction intermediary device 2 searches the offer information DB 34 in step S220, and extracts offer information OF having a different vendor ID corresponding to the same request ID as the current offer information OF. Since step S108 in FIG. 8 is executed every time offer information is received, the other offer information OF that is the target is received by the transaction intermediary device 2 at a time earlier than the current offer information OF. Offer information.
When one or a plurality of offer information OF is extracted under the condition of offer information of different vendor IDs corresponding to the same quotation request ID as the current offer information OF, the transaction intermediary device 2 moves from step S221 to S222 in FIG. Then, the estimated amount of the extracted all offer information OF is set as the comparison target amount. Therefore, there may be a plurality of comparison target amounts.

If other offer information OF corresponding to the condition cannot be extracted in step S220, the process proceeds from step S221 to S223.
In step S223, since there is no other offer information OF that can be compared, a process of setting the comparison target amount without using the other offer information OF is performed. For example, the comparison target amount may be set by processing as shown in FIGS. 9A and 9B. Alternatively, the comparison target amount may be set using some fixed value.
In any case, step S223 represents a process for setting the comparison target amount without using other offer information OF. Hereinafter, the processing in step S223 is referred to as “other offer non-use setting processing”, and is described as step S223 in other processing examples.

In the processing of FIG. 10 described above, competing offer information OF for the same quotation request information RQ is used, and a comparison target amount for the current offer information OF is set. Therefore, in the subsequent comparison / transmission availability determination process, the comparison process is performed so that the offer information OFs of the respective vendors compete with each other, and the current offer information OF is transmitted to the user in the competition between the offer information OFs. It can be determined whether or not.

Next, FIG. 11A and FIG. 11B are examples in which the estimated amount of the offer information OF that is the best for the user is set as the comparison target amount among one or a plurality of other offer information OF.

In the example of FIG. 11A, the transaction intermediary device 2 searches the offer information DB 34 in step S240, and extracts offer information OF with a different vendor ID corresponding to the same quotation request ID as the current offer information OF.
When one or a plurality of offer information OF corresponding to this condition is extracted, the transaction intermediary device 2 proceeds from step S241 to S242, and among the extracted all offer information OF, the estimated amount is the most advantageous for the user (that is, the purchase estimate). The offer information OF with the highest value is selected. In step S243, the estimated price of the most advantageous offer information OF is set as the comparison price.
If other offer information OF corresponding to the condition cannot be extracted in step S240, the process proceeds from step S241 to S223, and other offer non-use setting processing is performed.

In the example of FIG. 11B, the transaction intermediary device 2 searches the offer information DB 34 in step S250, and extracts offer information OF with a different vendor ID corresponding to the same quotation request ID as the current offer information OF.
Further, in step S251, the offer information OF acquired before the current offer information OF by the transaction mediating apparatus 2 is extracted from the offer information OF extracted in step S250. That is, the offer information OF is narrowed down based on the acquisition date information in the offer information DB 34.
When one or a plurality of offer information OF corresponding to the conditions of the above steps S250 and S251 is extracted, the transaction intermediary device 2 proceeds from step S252 to S253, and the estimated amount of money is the highest among all the extracted offer information OF. Offer information OF which is superior to the customer is selected. In step S243, the estimated price of the most advantageous offer information OF is set as the comparison price.
If other offer information OF corresponding to the condition cannot be extracted in steps S250 and S251, the process proceeds from step S252 to S223, and other offer non-use setting processing is performed.

In FIG. 11A and FIG. 11B above, the most powerful offer information OF is used as a competitor among the competing offer information OF for the same request for quotation information RQ, and the comparison target amount for the current offer information OF is set. The For this reason, in the subsequent comparison / transmission availability determination process, it is determined whether or not the current offer information OF is transmitted to the user compared with the strongest competitor.

Next, FIG. 12A and FIG. 12B set the comparison target amount using the estimated amount of the offer information OF transmitted to the user terminal 5 or determined to be transmitted among one or a plurality of other offer information OF. This is an example.

In the example of FIG. 12A, the transaction intermediary device 2 searches the offer information DB 34 in step S260, and extracts offer information OF of a different vendor ID corresponding to the same quotation request ID as the current offer information OF.
Further, in step S261, the status of the offer information OF extracted in step S260 is confirmed, the offer information OF whose status is “sent” is extracted, and among them, the offer information OF with the latest transmission date and time is extracted. select.
When the offer information OF corresponding to the conditions of the above steps S260 and S261, that is, the offer information OF most recently transmitted to the user terminal 5, is extracted, the transaction intermediary device 2 proceeds from step S262 to S263, and the offer information OF Estimate amount is set as comparison target amount.
In addition, when other offer information OF applicable to conditions cannot be extracted in step S260, S261, it progresses to step S223 from step S262, and other offer non-use setting processing is performed.

In the example of FIG. 12B, the transaction intermediary device 2 searches the offer information DB 34 in step S270, and extracts offer information OF with a different vendor ID corresponding to the same quotation request ID as the current offer information OF.
Further, in step S271, the status of the offer information OF extracted in step S270 is confirmed, and the offer information OF whose status is “transmitted” or “transmission determined” is extracted. That is, offer information OF that has already been transmitted to the user terminal 5 or has not yet been transmitted but has been determined to be transmitted is extracted.
When one or a plurality of offer information OF corresponding to the above conditions of steps S270 and S271 is extracted, the transaction intermediary device 2 proceeds from step S272 to S273, and calculates the average value of the estimated amounts of all the extracted offer information OF. The average value is set as the comparison target amount.
If other offer information OF corresponding to the condition cannot be extracted in steps S270 and S271, the process proceeds from step S272 to S223, and other offer non-use setting processing is performed.

In step S273, a maximum value, a minimum value, a centroid value, or the like may be used instead of the average value of the estimated amount of offer information OF transmitted to the user terminal 5 or determined to be transmitted.

In FIG. 12A and FIG. 12B above, among the competing offer information OF for the same request for quotation information RQ, the offer information OF that has been sent to the user is used, and the comparison target amount for the current offer information OF is Is set. Therefore, in the subsequent comparison / transmission permission / inhibition determination process, it is determined whether or not the current offer information OF is suitable for transmission based on the offer information OF to be transmitted so far.
Note that an example in which all of the estimated amounts of the plurality of offer information OFs to be transmitted to the user are set as comparison target amounts can be considered.

Next, FIG. 13A, FIG. 13B, and FIG. 13C are examples in which the comparison target amount is set using the estimated amount of the offer information OF that is estimated to be of interest to the user among one or a plurality of other offer information OF. It is.

In the example of FIG. 13A, the transaction intermediary device 2 searches the offer information DB 34 in step S280, and extracts offer information OF of a different vendor ID corresponding to the same quotation request ID as the current offer information OF.
Further, in step S281, the offer information OF having a user reaction is extracted from the offer information OF extracted in step S280. Specifically, first, as described with reference to FIG. 12A, offer information OF whose status is “sent” is extracted. Further, among those, the user is interested in the electronic mail of the offer information content OFv.
The user's interest is estimated according to the user's response to the e-mail. For example, a link such as a URL of a vendor's home page, a URL of a web page presenting vendor purchase information, history information, reputation information, or the like is added to the offer information content OFv transmitted by e-mail. A user action such that the user clicks on a URL and browses to the corresponding page can be detected based on redirect information for the URL.
Alternatively, a reply to the electronic mail of the offer information content OFv may be received, and the presence / absence of interest in the offer information OF may be estimated based on the presence / absence of a reply from the user.
The transaction mediating apparatus 2 confirms the presence / absence of a user reaction for each offer information OF by these methods, for example, and extracts the offer information OF having a user reaction.

When the offer information OF corresponding to the conditions of steps S280 and S281 described above, that is, the offer information OF estimated that the user is interested in the presence of a user reaction, is extracted, the transaction mediating apparatus 2 performs steps S282 to S283. Then, the estimated amount of all offer information OF extracted is set as the comparison target amount.
If other offer information OF corresponding to the condition cannot be extracted in steps S280 and S281, the process proceeds from step S282 to S223, and other offer non-use setting processing is performed.

In the example of FIG. 13B, steps S280, S281, S282, and S223 are the same as in FIG. 13A. In step S284, transaction mediating apparatus 2 selects offer information OF that is most advantageous for the user from among the offer information OF extracted based on the user's reaction. For example, the offer information OF has the highest estimated amount. In step S285, the estimated amount of the offer information OF is set as a comparison target amount.

In the example of FIG. 13C, steps S280, S281, S282, and S223 are the same as those in FIG. 13A. In step S286, transaction brokerage apparatus 2 obtains an average value of the estimated amounts of all offer information OF extracted based on the user's reaction. Then, the average value is set as a comparison target amount.
Note that the maximum value, the minimum value, the center of gravity value, or the like may be used instead of the average value of the estimated amount.

In FIG. 13A, FIG. 13B, and FIG. 13C described above, among the competing offer information OF for the same quotation request information RQ, the offer information OF estimated that the user is interested is used, and the current offer information OF is displayed. A comparison target amount is set. For this reason, in the subsequent comparison / transmission availability determination process, it is possible to determine whether or not the current offer information OF is suitable for transmission based on the estimated user's speculation.

So far, the setting examples of the comparison target have been described, but there are various other setting examples of the comparison target. Further, a combination of the processes shown in FIGS. 9 to 13 may be used. Furthermore, the processing to be applied may be changed according to the situation. The situation includes, for example, an offer information OF acquisition situation, the number of transmissions to the user terminal 5, a transmission frequency, a time zone, a commodity market situation, a market situation, and the like.

[3-4: Comparison / transmission availability determination process]
Next, various comparison / transmission permission / inhibition determination processing examples executed by the transaction mediating apparatus 2 (transmission permission / inhibition determination processing unit 23) as step S109 in FIG. 8 will be described with reference to FIGS.
Here, a processing example is described in which the comparison target amount set as described above is compared with the estimated amount of the current offer information OF and whether or not transmission to the user terminal 5 is determined according to the comparison result.

In the comparison / transmission permission determination process of each example below, when the estimated amount of the current offer information OF is the same as the comparison target amount, the estimated amount of the current offer information OF is an amount advantageous for the user. It is going to be handled in the same way as. This is because it can be estimated that the offer is worth considering for the user if it is the same amount as the reference comparison target amount. However, from the viewpoint of preventing an increase in the number of offers to be presented to the user, if the estimated amount of the current offer information OF is the same as the comparison target amount, the estimated amount of the current offer information OF is conversely It may be handled in the same way as when the amount is inferior.

14, 15, and 16 show the offer information content OFv for the offer information OF when the estimated amount included in the current offer information OF is superior to the transaction requester than the comparison target amount. In this example, transmission to the terminal 5 is determined to be executed.

First, FIG. 14 corresponds to the case where one comparison target amount is set. For example, this corresponds to the case where the comparison target setting process is performed as shown in FIGS. 9A, 9B, 11A, 11B, 12B, 13B, and 13C.
In the case of FIG. 14, the transaction intermediary device 2 compares the estimated amount of the current offer information OF with the comparison target amount in step S300. If the estimated amount of the current offer information OF is superior or equal to the user, the process proceeds from step S301 to step S302, and the transaction mediating apparatus 2 determines to transmit the offer information content OFv of the current offer information OF to the user terminal 5.
If the estimated amount of the current offer information OF is an inferior amount for the user, the transaction intermediary device 2 proceeds from step S301 to S303, and determines not to transmit the offer information content OFv of the current offer information OF to the user terminal 5.
Therefore, in this example, the current offer information OF is simply compared with the comparison target amount to determine whether or not transmission is possible.

FIG. 15 corresponds to the case where one or a plurality of comparison target amounts are set. For example, this corresponds to the case where the comparison target setting process is performed as shown in FIGS.
Transaction brokerage apparatus 2 sets variable n = 1 in step S310. Further, the number of comparison target amounts set in the comparison target setting process is substituted for the constant nMAX.
In step S311, the transaction mediating apparatus 2 compares the nth comparison target amount with the estimated amount of the current offer information OF.
In this comparison, if the estimated amount of the current offer information OF is an inferior amount for the user, the process proceeds from step S312 to S316, and the transaction mediating apparatus 2 does not transmit the offer information content OFv of the current offer information OF to the user terminal 5. And decide.

If the estimated price of the current offer information OF is superior or equivalent for the user in the comparison in step S311, the process proceeds from step S312 to S313, and it is determined whether or not the variable n has reached a constant (number of comparison targets) nMAX. .
If n ≧ nMAX, the transaction intermediary device 2 proceeds to step S315, and decides to transmit the offer information content OFv of the current offer information OF to the user terminal 5.
If n ≧ nMAX is not satisfied, the transaction intermediary device 2 increments the variable n in step S314, and then compares the n-th comparison target amount with the estimated amount of the current offer information OF in step S311.

That is, in the case of this example, the estimated amount of the current offer information OF is sequentially compared with one or a plurality of comparison target amounts, and if the estimated amount of the current offer information OF is even inferior, it is determined not to be transmitted. If the estimated amount of the current offer information OF is superior or equivalent to all the comparison target amounts, the transmission is determined.

FIG. 16 is an example corresponding to the case where one or a plurality of comparison target amounts are set as in FIG. 15.
In the example of FIG. 16, first, the transaction mediating apparatus 2 sets a variable n = 1 in step S320. Further, the number of comparison target amounts set in the comparison target setting process is substituted for the constant nMAX. Further, a variable PW indicating the number of wins and a variable PL indicating the number of losses are set to 0.

In step S321, the transaction mediating apparatus 2 compares the n-th comparison target amount with the estimated amount of the current offer information OF.
If the estimated amount of the current offer information OF is superior or equivalent to the user in this comparison, the process proceeds from step S322 to S323, and the winning number PW is incremented.
If the estimated amount of the current offer information OF is an inferior amount for the user, the process proceeds from step S322 to S324, and the losing number PL is incremented.
In step S325, transaction brokerage apparatus 2 determines whether variable n has reached constant nMAX. If n ≧ nMAX is not satisfied, the transaction intermediary device 2 increments the variable n in step S326, and then returns to step S321 to compare the nth comparison target amount with the estimated amount of the current offer information OF.

When the variable n reaches the constant nMAX that is the comparison target number in step S325, the number when the estimated amount of the current offer information OF is superior or equivalent is held as the winning number PW and is inferior Is held as the losing number PL.
Therefore, when n ≧ nMAX in step S325, the process proceeds to step S327, and the transaction mediating apparatus 2 compares the winning number PW with the losing number PL.
If the winning number PW ≧ the losing number PL, the transaction intermediary device 2 proceeds to step S328 and decides to transmit the offer information content OFv of the current offer information OF to the user terminal 5.
If the winning number PW ≧ the losing number PL is not satisfied, the transaction mediating apparatus 2 proceeds to step S329 and determines that the offer information content OFv of the current offer information OF is not transmitted.

That is, in this example, the estimated amount of the current offer information OF is sequentially compared with one or a plurality of comparison target amounts, and the number of wins (the number of superiority or equality) of the current offer information OF and the number of losses (inferior) Number). When the number of wins is more than the losing number, transmission is determined.
In this case, the case where the winning rate (PW ÷ nMAX) is 50% or more is determined to be transmission, but it is not necessary to be 50%. For example, a processing example of 70% or more and 30% or more is also conceivable.

Next, FIGS. 17 and 18 are examples in which transmission may be determined even when the estimated amount included in the current offer information is an inferior amount for the transaction requester than the comparison target amount. That is, even if the estimated amount of the current offer information is inferior, if the amount difference is less than the first threshold thD1, it is determined to transmit the offer information content OFv of the offer information OF to the user terminal 5. Is an example corresponding to the case where one comparison target amount is set.

In the processing example of FIG. 17, first, the transaction intermediary device 2 compares the estimated amount of the current offer information OF with the comparison target amount in step S330. If the estimated amount of the current offer information OF is superior or the same for the user, the process proceeds from step S331 to S332, and the transaction mediating apparatus 2 determines to transmit the offer information content OFv of the current offer information OF to the user terminal 5.

If the estimated amount of the current offer information OF is inferior to the user, the transaction intermediary device 2 proceeds from step S331 to S333, and sets the difference threshold thD1. Each example of setting processing of the difference threshold thD1 will be described later. The difference threshold thD1 is determined when transmission is permitted if the difference in amount is small even if the estimated amount of the current offer information OF is inferior. It is a value that sets the limit of the amount difference. The difference threshold thD1 may be a fixed value, and in the case of a fixed value, the process of step S333 is not necessary.
Next, transaction mediating apparatus 2 calculates the difference between the estimated amount of the current offer information OF and the comparison target amount in step S334. If the difference amount does not exceed the difference threshold thD1 in step S335, the transaction intermediary device 2 determines to transmit the offer information content OFv of the current offer information OF to the user terminal 5 in step S332.
If the difference amount exceeds the difference threshold thD1, the transaction intermediary device 2 proceeds to step S336, and determines not to transmit the offer information content OFv of the current offer information OF to the user terminal 5.

Therefore, in this example, in addition to the case where the estimated amount of money is more advantageous or equivalent than the comparison target amount, the current offer information OF is less than the comparison target amount even if it is inferior (the difference threshold thD1 is exceeded). If not, it will be determined to be transmitted to the user terminal 5.

FIG. 18 shows an example in which transmission determination is performed based on the same concept as FIG. 17, but the processing procedure is modified.
Transaction brokerage apparatus 2 sets difference threshold thD1 in step S340. However, when the difference threshold thD1 is set to a fixed value, the step S340 is not necessary.
In step S341, transaction mediating apparatus 2 substitutes the comparison target amount into variable CPV.
In step S342, the transaction mediating apparatus 2 subtracts the difference threshold thD1 from the comparison target amount CPV, and sets the subtraction result as the corrected comparison target amount CPV ′.

In step S343, the transaction mediating apparatus 2 compares the estimated amount of the current offer information OF with the correction comparison target amount CPV ′. If the estimated amount of the current offer information OF is superior to the corrected comparison target amount CPV ′ for the user, the process proceeds from step S344 to S345, and the transaction intermediary device 2 displays the offer information content OFv of the current offer information OF as the user terminal 5. Decide to send to.
If the estimated amount of the current offer information OF is inferior (or the same amount) to the user as compared with the corrected comparison target amount CPV ′, the process proceeds from step S344 to S346, and the transaction mediating apparatus 2 offers the offer information content OFv of the current offer information OF. Is determined not to be transmitted to the user terminal 5.
That is, in this example, the comparison target amount is corrected by the difference threshold thD1, and then compared with the estimated amount of the current offer information OF, and the same result as in FIG. 17 is obtained.

Note that FIGS. 17 and 18 have been described with reference to an example in which the amount of comparison target is one. However, when a plurality of amounts of comparison target are set as shown in FIGS. Can be applied.
For example, in steps S312 to S316 in FIG. 15, steps S333, S334, and S335 in FIG. 17 are executed. If the difference amount is less than the difference threshold thD1, the process proceeds to step S313, and if the difference amount is greater than or equal to the difference threshold thD1. The process may proceed to step S316.
Also, for example, if steps S333, S334, and S335 in FIG. 17 are executed in the process of steps S322 to S324 in FIG. 16 and the difference amount is less than the difference threshold thD1, the winning number PW is incremented in step S323, and the difference amount is the difference. If it is greater than or equal to the threshold thD1, the losing number PL may be incremented in step S324.

[3-5: Difference threshold setting processing]
An example of the setting process of the difference threshold thD1 executed in step S333 in FIG. 17 and step S340 in FIG. 18 will be described with reference to FIGS.
As can be understood from FIGS. 17 and 18, as the difference threshold thD1 becomes larger, the transmission decision judgment becomes looser, and as the difference threshold thD1 becomes smaller, the transmission decision judgment becomes severer. It can be said that the setting process example of the difference threshold thD1 below adjusts the difficulty level of transmission determination according to the situation.

FIG. 19A is an example in which the difference threshold thD1 is set using the performance information of the vendor who is the offer source of the offer information that is the comparison target to be compared with the current offer information. In particular, in this example, the actual result is the difference between the estimated amount of the vendor's past transactions and the contract amount (hereinafter referred to as “estimate-contract difference”).

In the example of FIG. 19A, the transaction intermediary device 2 acquires vendor performance information related to other offer information OF set as a comparison target for the current offer information OF in step S401. That is, it is about the vendor of offer information OF in which the estimated amount is set as the comparison amount.
In this case, the contract information DB 35 of FIG. 6 is searched from the vendor ID of the offer information OF that is the comparison target, and the contract information of the vendor is extracted. Then, the difference between the estimated amount and the contract amount in one or a plurality of contract information is read out. Then, an estimate-contract difference is calculated or acquired from the read difference information.
For example, when one contract information exists in the contract information DB 35 for the vendor of the offer information OF that is the comparison target, the value of the difference stored in the contract information is directly used as the estimate-contract difference.
When a plurality of contract information exists in the contract information DB 35 for the vendor of the offer information OF that is the comparison target, an estimate-contract difference is obtained from the value of the difference stored in each contract information. For example, the following example can be considered.
・ Average, maximum, or minimum of the difference between the estimated amount and the contract amount in all contract information of the vendor ・ Difference between the estimated amount and contract amount in the contract information of the most recent contract date ・ The contract date within the specified period The average value of the difference between the estimated amount in the contract information and the contract amount, the maximum value, or the minimum value / the current offer information OF, that is, the average difference between the estimated amount and the contract amount in a transaction with the same or similar conditions such as the vehicle type Value, maximum value, or minimum value

If there is no past contract information of the vendor, that is, if the contract information of the vendor is not stored in the contract information DB 35, for example, it can be considered that estimate-contract difference = 0.

When the estimate-contract difference is acquired, a correction coefficient Kh1 is set from the estimate-contract difference in step S403.
The estimate-contract difference is positive or negative. For example, assuming that the contract price is lower than the estimated price, the difference when the vendor purchases at a price lower than the estimate is positive, and the difference when the vendor purchases at a price higher than the estimate is negative. And That is, the “difference” in the contract information DB 35 is (estimated amount) − (contract amount).
Vendors with negative estimates-contract differences are desirable vendors for users. On the other hand, a vendor whose estimate-contract difference has a positive value is not necessarily a vendor that is not desirable for the user, but a vendor with a high estimate-contract difference value is less desirable for the user. Vendors with a large estimate-contract difference value (positive value) are considered to have low creditworthiness in the estimated amount.
Therefore, for example, if the value of the estimate-contract difference is a negative value, the correction coefficient Kh = 1 (that is, no correction), and if the estimate-contract difference is a positive value, it is proportional to the value of the estimate-contract difference. Thus, the correction coefficient Kh is increased (Kh is 1 or more).

In step S404, the transaction mediating apparatus 2 multiplies the initial value DFthD1 of the difference threshold thD1 by the correction coefficient Kh1, and sets the multiplication result as the difference threshold thD1.
By setting the difference threshold thD1 in this way, the difference threshold thD1 increases as the creditworthiness of the estimated amount of the vendor of the offer information OF that is the comparison target decreases. That is, in the processing of FIG. 17 and FIG. That is, it is possible to prevent the current offer information OF from being determined too severely in consideration of the credit quality of the comparison target amount.

In addition, when a plurality of comparison targets are set, it is desirable to set the difference threshold thD1 for each comparison target. This is because the credit quality of the estimated amount differs for each comparison target. However, one difference threshold thD1 used for comparison with each comparison target may be set. For example, the difference threshold thD1 set in accordance with the vendor with the largest estimate-contract difference value is also used for comparison with other comparison targets.

By the way, in the example of FIG. 19A described above, the difference threshold thD1 is set using the performance information of the vendor to be compared. However, as a modified example of FIG. 19A, the difference threshold thD1 is set as the vendor that is the offer source of the current offer information. An example of setting using the past record information is also conceivable.
In this case, step S401 is processing for acquiring vendor performance information related to the current offer information OF from the contract information DB 35.
In step S402, a vendor estimate-contract difference of the current offer information OF is acquired, and in step S403, a correction coefficient Kh1 is set.

However, in this case, in order to consider the reliability of the estimated amount of the vendor of the current offer information OF, the logic for generating the correction coefficient Kh is as follows.
For example, if the estimate-contract difference value is a negative value, the correction coefficient Kh = 1 (that is, no correction), and if the estimate-contract difference is a positive value, it is corrected in inverse proportion to the estimate-contract difference value. The coefficient Kh is made low (Kh is less than 1).
In step S404, the transaction mediating apparatus 2 multiplies the initial value DFthD1 of the difference threshold thD1 by the correction coefficient Kh1, and sets the multiplication result as the difference threshold thD1.
By setting the difference threshold thD1 in this way, the difference threshold thD1 becomes smaller as the vendor of the current offer information OF is a vendor whose estimated amount of credit is lower. That is, in the processing of FIG. 17 and FIG. 18, transmission determination becomes strict. Even in such an example, it becomes possible to determine whether or not transmission is possible in consideration of vendor performance information.

In the above example of FIG. 19A and its modification, the estimate-contract difference is used as the vendor performance information, but in addition to or together with this, the past number of contracts of the vendor and the contracts of the most recent predetermined period. The number, the estimate for the most recent predetermined period—the contract difference, evaluation information (see FIG. 4B), and the like may be used for setting the difference threshold thD1.
It is also conceivable to set the difference threshold thD1 using both the offer source vendor performance information of the offer information OF that is the comparison target and the offer source vendor performance information of the current offer information. For example, the difference threshold thD1 obtained by the process of FIG. 19A and the difference threshold thD1 using the average value of the difference threshold thD1 obtained by the process of the above modification are set.

Subsequently, FIG. 19B and FIG. 20A are examples in which the difference threshold thD1 is set based on the transmission execution status regarding the offer information to the user terminal 5 that is the target of the current offer information OF.

First, in the example of FIG. 19B, the difference threshold thD1 is set based on the number of offers already sent to the user terminal 5 (the number of offer information contents OFv that have been sent).
In step S410, transaction mediating apparatus 2 acquires the number of offers that have been sent for the quote request ID corresponding to the current offer information OF. For example, the offer information DB 34 is searched, and the number of offer information OFs whose quote request ID is the same as the current offer information OF and whose status is “sent” is confirmed.
In step S411, transaction mediating apparatus 2 sets a correction step and a correction direction according to the number of offers that have been transmitted. The number of correction steps is, for example, a value indicating how many steps the correction unit of the difference threshold thD1 is changed. The correction direction is a direction for decreasing or increasing the difference threshold thD1.
In step S412, the transaction intermediary device 2 increases or decreases the current difference threshold thD1 by the correction step in the correction direction.

Thus, the difference threshold thD1 is adjusted according to the number of offer information contents OFv that have already been transmitted with respect to the quotation request information RQ corresponding to the current offer information OF. That is, the difference threshold thD1 is relatively large when the number of transmitted offers is small, but is adjusted so that the difference threshold thD1 decreases as the number of transmitted offers increases.
The number of offers that have already been sent is the number of offer information OF whose status is “sent”. However, the number of offers that have been sent may be included.
In step S412, the current difference threshold value thD1 is increased or decreased. However, the initial value DFthD1 may be increased or decreased by the correction step in the correction direction.
Further, as shown in FIG. 19A, multiplication of the correction coefficient Kh1 may be used. For example, a correction coefficient Kh1 is set according to the number of transmission offers, and is multiplied by the difference threshold thD1 or the initial value DFthD1.
In the process of FIG. 19A, it may be possible to set the difference threshold thD1 by setting the number of correction steps and the correction direction as shown in FIG. 19B according to the vendor performance information.

In the example of FIG. 20A, the difference threshold thD1 is set based on the elapsed time from the most recently transmitted offer to the user terminal 5.
In step S420, the transaction mediating apparatus 2 acquires the latest offer among the sent offers for the quotation request ID corresponding to the current offer information OF. For example, the offer information DB 34 is searched, and among the offer information OF whose quotation request ID is the same as that of the current offer information OF and whose status is “sent”, the information with the transmission date and time closest to the present is extracted.
In step S421, the transaction mediating apparatus 2 calculates the elapsed time from the transmission date and time of the most recently extracted offer that has been extracted to the present.
In step S422, transaction brokerage apparatus 2 sets correction coefficient Kh1 according to the calculated elapsed time. For example, the shorter the elapsed time, the smaller the correction coefficient Kh1 (Kh1 is less than 1), and the longer the elapsed time, the larger the correction coefficient Kh1 (Kh1 is 1 or more).
In step S423, the transaction mediating apparatus 2 multiplies the initial value DFthD1 of the difference threshold thD1 by the correction coefficient Kh1, and sets the multiplication result as the difference threshold thD1.

Thereby, when the transmission offer information content OF is frequently transmitted with respect to the quotation request information RQ corresponding to the current offer information OF, the difference threshold thD1 is relatively large, and the transmission determination judgment becomes severe, When the transmission is not so much, the difference threshold thD1 is decreased and the transmission decision judgment becomes loose.
Depending on the elapsed time, the forward direction of the number of correction steps may be set as shown in FIG. 19B, and the current difference threshold thD1 or the initial value DFthD1 may be increased or decreased by the correction step in the correction direction.

Subsequently, FIG. 20B shows the number of offer information OF determined not to be transmitted to the user terminal 5 based on the comparison result with the other offer information set as the comparison target in the processing of FIGS. It is an example set based on.
In step S430, the transaction mediating apparatus 2 acquires the number of offer information OF determined to be non-transmitted by the comparison process using the current comparison target. For example, the offer information DB 34 is searched, and the number of offer information OFs whose quotation request ID is the same as the current offer information OF and whose status is “non-transmission decision” is confirmed. If the “other offer information” to be compared with the offer information OF for the same request for quotation information RQ is not changed, the number of offer information OF whose status is “non-transmission decision” is confirmed. If “other offer information” is subject to change, check the number of cases where the status is “non-send decision” and “comparison target is the same“ other offer information ”” To do. For this purpose, the offer information DB 34 stores the comparison target for each offer information DB, stores the time when the comparison target is changed, and the comparison processing date and time of each offer information OF. It is conceivable to keep it.

In step S431, the transaction mediating apparatus 2 sets a correction step and a correction direction according to the number of offer information OF determined to be non-transmitted by the comparison process using the current comparison target. That is, the larger the number of non-transmitted offer information OF, the greater the number of correction steps in the direction of decreasing the difference threshold thD1, and the smaller the number of non-transmitted offer information OF, the greater the number of correction steps in the direction of increasing the difference threshold thD1. Will be a lot.
In step S432, the transaction intermediary device 2 increases or decreases the current difference threshold thD1 by the correction step in the correction direction.

As a result, when other offer information to be compared with the current offer information OF is too powerful and transmission decision is not easily made, the difference threshold thD1 is increased and the transmission decision judgment is loosened. The smaller the number of offer information OFs that are not transmitted, the smaller the difference threshold thD1 and the more severe the transmission decision.
In this example, multiplication of the correction coefficient Kh1 may be used as shown in FIG. 19A. For example, the correction coefficient Kh1 is set according to the non-transmission decision number, and the difference threshold thD1 or the initial value DFthD1 is multiplied.
The processing of FIG. 20B can also be applied when the comparison target is set according to the market price information or the user setting as shown in FIGS.

[3-6: Modified example regarding comparison processing]
Here, a modified example of the comparison process performed by the transaction mediating apparatus 2 (comparison / transmission availability determination processing unit 23) will be described. Specifically, this is a modification of step S300 in FIG. 14, step S311 in FIG. 15, and step S321 in FIG. These steps S300, S311, and S321 are processes for comparing the estimated amount of the current offer information OF with the comparison target amount, but processing examples such as FIGS. 21A, 21B, and 22 are also conceivable. These are processing examples that are used for the estimated amount for comparison, which is obtained by correcting the estimated amount of the current offer information OF according to the user setting conditions at the time of comparison.

In the example of FIG. 21A, the transaction intermediary device 2 acquires user setting conditions included in the quotation request information RQ corresponding to the current offer information OF in step S501. The user setting conditions are, for example, the vendor location and the vendor performance.

In step S502, the transaction mediating apparatus 2 performs a condition determination on the user setting condition for the current offer information OF, and determines whether the condition is satisfied.
For example, if the vendor location is required,
・ Determines whether the distance from the user address of the vendor location is within a predetermined value, whether the condition is satisfied, or whether the vendor location is included in the area range set by the user.
Also, if vendor performance is a requirement,
・ Whether the difference between the vendor's estimated amount and the purchase amount (for example, the estimate minus the contract difference explained in FIG. 19A) is within a predetermined value. ・ At least one of the vendor's past estimated number or number of purchases. Judgment is made on whether or not it is greater than or equal to a predetermined value and whether or not the vendor's evaluation (evaluated by many users) is greater than or equal to a predetermined value.

If these conditions are satisfied, the transaction intermediary device 2 proceeds to step S503, and sets the estimated amount of the current offer information OF to + x% (for example, + 20%) as a comparative estimated amount.
If the condition is not satisfied, the transaction intermediary device 2 proceeds to step S504, and uses the estimated amount of the current offer information OF as a comparative estimated amount obtained by -y% (for example, -20%).
x = y may be sufficient and x ≠ y may be sufficient.
In step S505, the transaction intermediary device 2 compares the comparative estimated amount with the comparison target amount.

By performing the processing of FIG. 21A in steps S300, S311, and S321, in the case of offer information OF that satisfies the user setting conditions, the estimated amount is increased by x% and compared with the comparison target amount, so that the user terminal 5 It is easy to make a transmission decision to. On the other hand, in the case of the offer information OF that does not satisfy the user setting conditions, the estimated amount is discounted by y%, so that transmission determination becomes difficult.

The example of FIG. 21B and FIG. 22 is an example which calculates the comparison estimated amount based on the magnitude | size of the difference of user setting conditions and the condition element regarding offer information.
In the case of FIG. 21B, first, the transaction mediating apparatus 2 acquires user setting conditions in step S510. In step S511, the transaction mediating apparatus 2 calculates the difference between the user setting condition and the current offer information OF.
For example, when the vendor address is a condition, the distance between the user address and the vendor address corresponds to the “difference” between the user setting conditions.
When the user sets conditions for the number of vendors estimated or purchased in the past, the difference between the number set and the number of vendors estimated or purchased corresponds to the “difference” between the user set conditions.
When the user sets conditions for vendor evaluation points, the difference between the set number and the actual evaluation value of the vendor corresponds to the “difference” between the user setting conditions.

In step S512, the transaction mediating apparatus 2 sets the correction coefficient Kh2 according to the “difference”. In this case, the correction coefficient Kh2 is increased as the difference is more desirable in view of the user setting conditions, and is decreased as the difference is not desired.
For example, when the vendor location is a condition, the correction coefficient Kh2 is increased as the distance is shorter.
Also, for example, the correction coefficient Kh2 is increased as the estimated number of vendors, the number of purchases, and the evaluation value are higher than the user setting and the difference between them is larger.

In step S514, the transaction mediating apparatus 2 multiplies the estimated amount of the current offer information OF by the correction coefficient Kh2, and sets it as the comparative estimated amount. In step S514, the comparison estimated amount is compared with the comparison target amount.
As a result of such processing, the estimated price for comparison becomes higher and the transmission is more likely to be determined as the offer information OF is more desirable by the user.

In the case of the process of FIG. 22, first, the transaction mediating apparatus 2 acquires user setting conditions in step S520. In step S521, the transaction mediating apparatus 2 compares the user setting condition and the condition element of the current offer information OF to determine whether the condition is satisfied.

When the current offer information OF satisfies the user setting condition, the transaction mediating apparatus 2 proceeds to step S522, and calculates the difference between the user setting condition and the current offer information OF (similar to step S511 in FIG. 21B).
In step S522, transaction mediating apparatus 2 sets correction coefficient Kh3 according to the “difference”. The correction coefficient Kh3 is increased as the difference is more desirable in view of the user setting conditions, and is decreased as the difference is not desired.
In step S524, the transaction mediating apparatus 2 obtains an estimated amount for comparison obtained by adding (x + Kh3)% to the estimated amount of the current offer information OF. In step S528, the comparison estimated amount is compared with the comparison amount. “X” is, for example, the premium value described in FIG. 21A.

If the current offer information OF does not satisfy the user setting condition, the transaction mediating apparatus 2 proceeds to step S525, and calculates the difference between the user setting condition and the current offer information OF (similar to step S522).
In step S526, transaction mediating apparatus 2 sets correction coefficient Kh3 according to “difference”. In this case, contrary to step S523, the correction coefficient Kh3 is decreased as the difference is desirable in view of the user setting conditions, and is increased as it is not desired.
In step S527, the transaction mediating apparatus 2 obtains a comparative estimated amount obtained by discounting (y + Kh3)% with respect to the estimated amount of the current offer information OF. In step S528, the comparison estimated amount is compared with the comparison amount. “Y” is, for example, the discount value described in FIG. 21A.

As a result of such a process, the estimated price for comparison is higher for the offer information OF that is more desirable by the user, the transmission is more easily determined, and the offer information OF that is less desired by the user is more comparative. The estimated amount is low, making it difficult to determine transmission.

[3-7: Unsent offer processing]
Next, examples of the non-transmission offer process in step S113 in FIG. 8 will be described with reference to FIGS. This is a process performed when the current offer information OF is determined not to be transmitted.

The processing example of FIG. 23A is an example in which notification to the vendor is not particularly performed when non-transmission is determined.
In step S601, the transaction mediating apparatus 2 updates the status of the current offer information OF to “non-transmission determination” in the offer information DB 34 in response to the current offer information OF being determined to be non-transmission in step S109 of FIG. .

23B, FIG. 23C, FIG. 24A, and FIG. 23B perform the process of determining whether or not to execute the notification process to the transaction applicant who is the offer source of the offer information for the offer information that has been determined not to be transmitted. It is an example.

First, the processing example of FIG. 23B is an example in which notification to the vendor is always performed when non-transmission is determined.
In step S610, the transaction mediating apparatus 2 (transmission availability determination processing unit 23) notifies the vendor of the current offer information OF in response to the current offer information OF being determined not to be transmitted in step S109 of FIG. It decides to do so and generates notification information. The contents of the notification information will be described later.
In step S611, transaction brokerage apparatus 2 (transmission control unit 24) performs notification processing. For example, e-mail data having contents as notification information is generated, and an e-mail as notification information IL is transmitted from the communication unit 20 to the corresponding vendor (see FIG. 7).
In step S612, the status of the current offer information OF is updated to “non-transmission decision” in the offer information DB.

In the example of FIG. 23C, for the offer information determined not to be transmitted, if the difference between the estimated amount included in the offer information and the amount to be compared is less than a predetermined threshold, the notification processing to the vendor that is the offer source of the offer information This is an example of determining to execute.
In step S620, the transaction mediating apparatus 2 acquires the amount difference in the comparison process, that is, the difference between the estimated amount of the current offer information OF and the amount to be compared.
In step S621, transaction brokerage apparatus 2 determines whether or not the amount difference is within difference threshold thD2.
When the comparison / transmission availability determination process is performed using the difference threshold thD1 as shown in FIGS. 15 and 16, the difference threshold thD2> the difference threshold thD1.

If the amount difference in the comparison process is within the difference threshold thD2, the transaction intermediary device 2 proceeds to step S622, determines to notify the vendor of the current offer information OF, and generates notification information.
In step S623, the transaction mediating apparatus 2 performs notification processing. That is, e-mail data having contents as notification information is generated and transmitted to the corresponding vendor.
In step S624, the transaction mediating apparatus 2 updates the status of the current offer information OF to “non-transmission decision” in the offer information DB.

If the amount difference in the comparison process exceeds the difference threshold thD2, the transaction intermediary device 2 proceeds from step S621 to S624, and updates the status of the current offer information OF to “non-transmission decision” in the offer information DB. In this case, notification processing to the vendor is not performed.

According to the processing in FIG. 23C, it has been determined that the transmission is not performed, but when the amount difference in the comparison processing is within the difference threshold thD2, the vendor is notified. This means that a notification is sent when the comparison process loses the comparison target but it is ugly. For example, if the vendor re-offers with a slight correction to the estimated amount, a notification is given when there is a possibility that transmission will be decided.
On the other hand, if the amount difference in the comparison process exceeds the difference threshold thD2, it is assumed that the estimated amount of this vendor is a loss that does not compete with the comparison target of other vendors, etc. This is when there is no chance of winning. In such a case, notification will not be made.

Next, the example of FIG. 24A is an example of determining whether to perform notification processing for offer information determined to be non-transmitted based on the status of other offer information by the vendor of the offer source.
In step S630, the transaction mediating apparatus 2 confirms the other offer information OF of the vendor for the current offer information OF. For example, offer information OF of the same vendor ID is extracted from the offer information DB 34.
In step S631, the transaction mediating apparatus 2 determines whether the vendor is a similar product and there is already-offered offer information OF. In other words, the offer information OF of the vendor is extracted with the status “sent”. Further, the estimated request ID is traced with respect to the extracted offer information OF, the estimated request information DB 33 is referred to, and it is confirmed whether the estimated object information is the same or similar.

If the vendor does not matter for the user, but there is similar offer and sent offer information OF, the process proceeds to step S634 without performing the notification process, and the status of the current offer information OF is displayed in the offer information DB 34. Is updated to “non-transmission decision”.
Instead of the product of the current offer information OF, since the offer for the similar product is transmitted to a certain user, it is determined that no re-offer is requested for the current offer information OF.

On the other hand, if there is no similar offer product and the offer information OF that has already been transmitted for the vendor, the process advances to step S632 to decide to notify the vendor of the current offer information OF and generate notification information.
In step S633, notification processing is performed. In step S634, the status of the current offer information OF is updated to “non-transmission decision” in the offer information DB.

According to the processing of FIG. 24A, when there are several pieces of quotation request information RQ for similar products, and a certain vendor issues offer information OF for each of them, one or more of them, If it is transmitted to the user terminal 5, the offer information OF which is not transmitted is a process of not requesting a re-offer.

The offer information OF of the vendor that has been transmitted to the user terminal 5 for similar products whose presence is determined in steps S630 and S631 is preferably targeted for offer information within a predetermined time. This is because the old offer information cannot be related to the current offer information.
In addition, it is desirable that the target offer information OF is an offer for which the request for quotation continues. In other words, it is a condition that the contract has not been concluded and the estimate request itself has not been canceled by the user. This is because, even if no notification is given under this condition, a trade opportunity for the corresponding product of the vendor will not be taken away.

The example of FIG. 24B is also an example of determining whether to perform notification processing on the offer information determined to be non-transmitted based on the status of other offer information by the vendor of the offer source. When the number of offers for similar products among the offers to other users is equal to or less than the threshold thON, the notification process to the vendor is performed.

In step S640, the transaction mediating apparatus 2 confirms the other offer information OF of the vendor for the current offer information OF. For example, offer information OF of the same vendor ID is extracted from the offer information DB 34.
In step S641, the transaction mediating apparatus 2 confirms the number of offer information OF regarding the current offer information OF and similar products as offers to other users. That is, the number of pieces of offer information OF in which the target information in the corresponding request request information RQ is the same or similar is confirmed.

In step S642, the transaction mediating apparatus 2 checks whether or not the number of corresponding offer information OF is equal to or less than the threshold thON.
If the number of corresponding offer information OF exceeds the threshold thON, the process proceeds to step S645 without performing the notification process, and the status of the current offer information OF is updated to “non-transmission decision” in the offer information DB.

If the number of corresponding offer information OF is less than or equal to the threshold thON, the process proceeds to step S643, where it is determined to notify the vendor of the current offer information OF, and notification information is generated.
In step S644, notification processing is performed. In step S645, the status of the current offer information OF is updated to “non-transmission decision” in the offer information DB.

According to the process of FIG. 24B, in the case of a vendor that issues a large number of offer information OF for similar products, the notification process is not performed even if the current offer information OF is determined not to be transmitted. This is because there are other alternative commodity trading opportunities.
Also in this example, the number of offer information OF of the vendor for similar products determined in steps S640 and S641 is the offer information within a predetermined time, the contract has not been reached, and is estimated by the user. It is desirable to target offer information OF in which the request itself is not canceled.

The non-transmission offer process is performed as in the above examples of FIGS. 23 and 24. The contents of the notification process are as follows.
・ Sorry notification This is a notification that the offer has not been accepted.
-Re-offering recommendation Notification for proceeding with re-offering (transmission of re-offering information OF ') by correcting the estimated amount. This gives the vendor another opportunity to trade.
-Offer destination change recommendation It is the content which advances the change about the said offer information OF about other estimate request information RQ. For example, it is not uncommon for multiple users to obtain a plurality of pieces of estimate request information RQ for a product that can be determined to be similar in the same vehicle type, color, mileage range, and the like at the same time. Therefore, the request information RQ of the same or similar product is introduced in the notification information, and the vendor is encouraged to change the other party of the offer information OF. This expands vendor opportunities.

Examples of notification information generation processing including re-offer recommendation and offer destination change recommendation as notification information generation processing performed in step S610 in FIG. 23, step S622 in FIG. 23C, step S632 in FIG. 24A, and step S643 in FIG. This is shown in FIG. 25B.

FIG. 25A shows a case where re-offer recommendation is performed.
In step S660, transaction brokerage apparatus 2 obtains a comparison target amount compared with current offer information OF.
In step S661, a comparison target amount is presented, and notification information including content for recommending a re-offer with an estimated amount equal to or greater than the comparison target amount is generated. In other words, it is a content that recommends re-offering after including guidance information on how much the estimated amount of re-offering is likely to determine transmission execution. This makes it easier for vendors to decide whether to re-offer.
When the difference threshold thD1 is used as shown in FIGS. 17 and 18 in the comparison process, a value obtained by subtracting the amount of the difference threshold thD1 from the comparison target amount is notified as an amount that may be determined to be transmitted. You may make it show in information. Furthermore, when using the comparison estimated amount corrected in the comparison process as shown in FIGS. 21 and 22, the amount considering the correction may be presented.

FIG. 25B shows a case where offer destination change is recommended.
The transaction intermediary device 2 extracts, from the estimate request information DB 33, other estimate request information RQ that has the same or similar estimate target information as the estimate request information RQ that the current offer information OF is the target of the transaction offer.
The extracted one or more pieces of estimate request information RQ are narrowed down by confirming the status in step S671. That is, the quotation request information RQ whose status is “before offer reception” or “offering offer” is extracted. This is because the quote request information RQ of “offer acceptance end” and “cancel” does not make sense even if the offer destination is changed.

When one or more pieces of estimate request information RQ having a status of “Before accepting offer” or “Receiving offer” are extracted, the process proceeds to step S673, and the transaction intermediary device 2 creates a list of offer change destination candidates. That is, it is a list of extracted quotation request information RQ.
In step S674, transaction brokerage apparatus 2 generates notification information including an offer change destination candidate list. In other words, other estimation request information RQ having the same or similar estimation object information such as the vehicle type is listed and presented to the vendor, and notification information including the content for proposing the offer destination change is generated to the vendor.

Also, there may be no estimate request information RQ corresponding to the change destination candidate. In that case, the transaction mediating apparatus 2 proceeds from step S672 to step S675, and generates notification information that does not include the change destination candidate list. For example, the content is only the above-mentioned disappointment notice.

As described above, when there is an offer change destination candidate, it is possible to widen the vendor's transaction opportunities by notifying the vendor and recommending the offer destination change.
Note that both offer change destination recommendation and re-offer recommendation may be included. For example, in step S675 of FIG. 25B, the processing described in FIG. 25A may be performed to generate notification information including re-offer recommendation. As a result, an offer destination change recommendation is made if there is a change destination candidate, and a re-offer recommendation is made if there is no change destination candidate.
In addition, an example of generating notification information including both offer destination change recommendation and re-offer recommendation by performing the processing described in FIG. 25A in step S674 of FIG. 25B is also conceivable.

<4. Second to sixth embodiments>
Second to sixth embodiments will be described sequentially. Hereinafter, only differences from the processing of FIG. 8 of the first embodiment will be described, and redundant description will be avoided. In the second to sixth embodiments, the processes described in FIGS. 9 to 25 can be applied.

FIG. 26A shows processing of the transaction mediating apparatus 2 as the second embodiment. This is shown as processing between steps S107 and S110 in FIG. That is, it is an example of processing related to execution of comparison target setting processing and comparison / transmission availability determination processing.

In the second embodiment, after the transaction intermediary device 2 receives the offer information OF and performs the process of step S107 of FIG. 8, the transaction intermediary device 2 performs the current offer information OF in step S150 of FIG. 26A. Confirms the number of already received offer information OF (the number of already received offers NR) for the same estimate request information RQ as the corresponding estimate request information RQ. This may be done by referring to the offer information DB 34 and confirming the number of offer information OF having the same estimate request ID corresponding to the current offer information OF.

In step S151, the transaction intermediary device 2 confirms whether or not the received offer number NR is equal to or less than the threshold thNR.
If NR ≦ thNR, it is determined unconditionally to execute transmission in step S152.
If NR ≦ thNR is not satisfied, the comparison target setting process in step S108 and the comparison / transmission availability determination process in step S109 described in the first embodiment are performed.
Then, the process proceeds to step S110 in FIG.

In such a second embodiment, for example, if the threshold thNR = 1, the offer information OF that has been transmitted first for a certain quotation request information RQ is always transmitted to the user terminal 5. .
For example, if the threshold thNR = 3, the offer information OF received from the first to the third for a certain quotation request information RQ is always transmitted to the user terminal 5.
The offer information OF received after that is determined to be transmitted or not transmitted in the comparison / transmission availability determination process.
According to such processing, at least the offer information OF corresponding to the number of the threshold thNR is ensured to be transmitted to the user terminal 5. Therefore, as long as one or more offer information OF is issued, the number of offer information OF presented to the user does not become zero. In addition, when a larger number of offer information OFs is received, filtering for transmission to the user terminal 5 is performed, and transmission of the offer information OF determined to be useless for the user is restricted.

FIG. 26B shows processing of the transaction mediating apparatus 2 as the third exemplary embodiment. This is also shown as processing between steps S107 and S110 in FIG.
After step S107 in FIG. 8, the transaction intermediary device 2 in step S160, the number of already sent offer information OF (the number of already sent offers) for the same quote request information RQ as the quote request information RQ corresponding to the current offer information OF. NT). This may be done by referring to the offer information DB 34 and confirming the number of offer information OF having the same quote request ID as the current offer information OF and the status “sent”. The number of offer information OF whose status is “transmission decision” may be included.

In step S161, transaction mediating apparatus 2 checks whether or not the number of transmitted offers NR is greater than or equal to threshold thNT1.
If NR ≧ thNT1, it is determined unconditionally to execute transmission in step S162.
If NR ≧ thNT1, a comparison target setting process in step S108 and a comparison / transmission availability determination process in step S109 are performed.
Then, the process proceeds to step S110 in FIG.

In the third embodiment, for example, if the threshold value thNT1 = 3, transmission determination is unconditionally performed until at least three offer information OF is transmitted to the user terminal 5 for a certain quotation request information RQ. Is done. Accordingly, at least the offer information OF corresponding to the number of the threshold thNT1 is ensured to be transmitted to the user terminal 5. In addition, when a larger number of offer information OFs are received, filtering for transmission to the user terminal 5 is performed, and transmission of the offer information OF determined to be useless for the user is restricted.
In step S160, the transmitted offer number NT may be the number of already-offered offer information OF between the present time and a predetermined time before. In this way, when transmission is concentrated, transmission permission / inhibition is determined, and transmission can be performed unconditionally in a time zone where there is not much transmission.

It can be said that the second and third embodiments described above provide a case where transmission is performed unconditionally without determining whether transmission is possible. As an example of providing the case of unconditional transmission as described above, for example, an example of performing unconditional transmission based on the reception date / time of the latest offer information OF or the elapsed time from the transmission date / time to the user terminal 5 is also conceivable.
For example, if the predetermined time has not elapsed since the most recent reception date / time or transmission date / time, the transmission determination of steps S108 and S109 is performed for the current offer information OF, but if the predetermined time has elapsed, it is transmitted unconditionally. Is. Even in such a process, when transmission is concentrated, it is determined whether transmission is possible or not, and the number of transmissions is limited. It is possible to perform processing that avoids the concentration of

Next, fourth and fifth embodiments will be described with reference to FIGS. 27A and 27B.
These select conditions for determining whether or not to perform transmission related to offer information OF to the user terminal 5 from the comparison result based on the offer information transmission status to the user terminal 5 to be transmitted. is there.

First, in the fourth embodiment, after the step S107 in FIG. 8, the transaction intermediary device 2 is the step S170 in FIG. 27A and the existing request information RQ that is the same as the request information RQ to which the current offer information OF corresponds is the existing request information RQ. The number of offer information OF to be transmitted (number of transmitted offers NT) is confirmed (similar to step S160 in FIG. 26B).
In step S171, the transaction mediating apparatus 2 checks whether or not the transmitted offer number NR is equal to or greater than the threshold thNT2.
If NR ≧ thNT2, the first transmission permission / inhibition determination condition is set in step S172.
If NR ≧ thNT2, the second transmission permission determination condition is set in step S173.
Then, a comparison target setting process in step S108 and a comparison / transmission availability determination process in step S109 are performed, and then the process proceeds to step S110 in FIG.

In this case, the first transmission permission / inhibition determination condition when the number of already transmitted offers is smaller than the threshold thNT2 is a setting that is relatively loose. For example, as shown in FIG. 17, even if the estimated amount of the current offer information OF is inferior to the user, if the difference is within the difference threshold thD1, the process for executing transmission is adopted.
On the other hand, the second transmission permission / inhibition determination condition is set to be a relatively strict condition. For example, as shown in FIG. 14, if the estimated amount of the current offer information OF is inferior to the user, it is a process that is immediately not transmitted.
That is, in the fourth embodiment, when the number of offers that have already been transmitted to the user terminal 5 is large, the conditions for transmission are tightened, and when the number of offers that have been transmitted is small, the conditions for transmission are relaxed. It allows a large number of offers to be presented to the user.

Next, in the fifth embodiment, after the step S107 of FIG. 8, the transaction intermediary device 2 is the step S180 of FIG. 27B about the request information RQ that is the same as the request information RQ to which the current offer information OF corresponds. Of the already sent offer information OF, the latest transmission date is acquired. For example, the offer information DB 34 is searched, and among the offer information OF whose quotation request ID is the same as that of the current offer information OF and whose status is “sent”, the information with the transmission date and time closest to the present is extracted.
In step S181, the transaction mediating apparatus 2 calculates the elapsed time from the transmission date and time of the most recently extracted previously sent offer to the present.
In step S182, transaction brokerage apparatus 2 checks whether or not the elapsed time is equal to or greater than threshold value thTM.
If the elapsed time is equal to or greater than the threshold value thTM, a relatively loose first transmission permission determination condition is set in step S183. For example, the process of FIG. 17 is selected.
If the elapsed time is not equal to or greater than the threshold thTM, a relatively strict second transmission permission determination condition is set in step S184. For example, the process of FIG. 14 is selected.
Then, a comparison target setting process in step S108 and a comparison / transmission availability determination process in step S109 are performed, and then the process proceeds to step S110 in FIG.

As a result, when the transmission offer information content OF is frequently transmitted with respect to the quotation request information RQ to which the current offer information OF corresponds, the condition for determining transmission becomes strict, and conversely, transmission is not much. Otherwise, the conditions for determining transmission will be relaxed. Thereby, the number and frequency of offer information OF shown to a user are adjusted.

Next, a sixth embodiment will be described with reference to FIG.
The sixth embodiment is a processing example that can be applied instead of the processing of FIG. 8 of the first embodiment. In particular, the sixth embodiment is an example in which the transmission permission / inhibition determination for the offer information OF is collectively performed at a certain timing, not at the time of sequential reception. In FIG. 28, the same processes as those in FIG. 8 are denoted by the same step numbers, and description thereof is omitted.

FIG. 28A shows processing executed by the transaction mediating apparatus 2 in response to reception of the request for quotation information RQ, offer information OF, and contract information.
In response to reception of the estimate request information RQ, the processing from step S101 to step S104 (registration request information registration), S105 (introduction vendor information acquisition), and S106 (introduction information transmission) are performed in the same manner as in FIG.
In response to receiving the offer information OF, the processing from step S102 to step S107 (offer information registration) is performed in the same manner as in FIG.
In response to the receipt of the contract information, the processing from step S103 to S114 (registration information registration) is performed in the same manner as in FIG.

The transaction intermediary device 2 executes the process of FIG. 28B at a certain timing in parallel with the process of FIG. 28A.
That is, when the execution timing is detected in step S120, the transaction mediating apparatus 2 acquires unprocessed offer information OF in step S121. This is a process of extracting from the offer information DB 34 offer information OF that has been received but has not yet been determined to be transmitted (for example, offer information OF whose status is “before comparison”).
Then, for each extracted offer information OF, a comparison target setting process in step S108 and a comparison / transmission availability determination process in step S109 are performed.
In step S122, transmission control to the user terminal 5 for each of the one or more offer information OFs determined to be executed in the comparison / transmission permission / inhibition determination process (the same process as step S111 in FIG. 8) is performed.
In step S123, non-transmission offer processing (similar to step S113 in FIG. 8) is performed for each of one or a plurality of offer information OF determined to be non-transmission in the comparison / transmission availability determination processing.
In step S124, for each offer information OF, DB update corresponding to transmission / non-transmission, that is, status update of the offer information DB 34 is performed.

Even in such a processing example, it is possible to perform filtering related to the presentation of the offer information OF to the user as in FIG.
Various examples of the execution timing of step S120 are conceivable.
The execution timing may be set at regular intervals. Further, variable timing may be set according to the time zone. For example, the execution timing may be set at different intervals in a time zone in which the offer information OF is frequently received or a time zone in which the offer information OF is high.
Alternatively, the execution timing may be a point in time when a predetermined number of offer information OF with a status of “before comparison” is accumulated.
Moreover, it is good also considering the time when the elapsed time from the latest transmission addressed to the user terminal 5 becomes a predetermined time as the execution timing.

<5. Seventh Embodiment>
A seventh embodiment will be described with reference to FIGS. 29, 30, and 31. FIG.
The seventh embodiment is an example in which the transaction mediating apparatus 2 generates the offer information OF of each vendor in response to the quotation request information RQ, instead of the vendor sequentially transmitting the offer information OF.

FIG. 29 shows the processing flow of the entire system. The same parts as those in FIG. 7 are denoted by the same step numbers and the description thereof is omitted.
In this case, the vendor notifies the offer condition information OFC from the vendor terminal 4 to the transaction mediating apparatus 2 in advance in step S30. When the transaction intermediary device 2 receives the offer condition information OFC at step SS0, it registers this in the offer condition DB 36.

Thereafter, when the quotation request information RQ is transmitted from the user terminal 5 in step S21, the transaction mediating apparatus 2 receives the offer information in step S1, and then generates offer information OF in step S3A.
That is, the transaction mediating apparatus 2 generates offer information OF for each vendor based on the offer condition information OFC received from each vendor terminal 4 without transmitting the introduction information IRQ to the vendor terminal 4.
Then, for each of the generated offer information OF, steps S4 (comparison target setting process), S5 (comparison / transmission availability determination process), S6 (processing branch according to transmission availability determination), S7 (user of offer information contents OFv) The processes of (transmission to terminal 5), S8 (notification determination), and S9 (transmission of notification information IL to vendor terminal 4) are performed in the same manner as in FIG.
When the re-offer information OF ′ is transmitted from the vendor terminal 4 in response to the notification information IL in step S9, the transaction intermediary device 2 acquires the re-offer information OF ′ in step S3A, and the re-offer information OF Also for ', the processing in steps S4 to S9 is performed.

A configuration example of the offer condition DB 36 is shown in FIG.
For each vendor indicated by the vendor ID (V1, V2,...), One or a plurality of offer conditions and an estimated price corresponding thereto are stored.
For example, the vendor provides one or more offer condition information OFC in which the vehicle type, color, year, mileage, and estimated price in that case are set as a set to the transaction intermediary device 2 in advance. Transaction mediating apparatus 2 registers such offer condition information OFC in offer condition DB 36. Thereby, the transaction mediating apparatus 2 can generate the offer information OF of each vendor with reference to the offer condition DB 36 when receiving the estimate request information RQ from the user terminal 5.
The offer condition information OFC provided by the vendor to the transaction mediating apparatus 2 may be an algorithm, a program, or the like for deriving an estimated amount from each condition such as a vehicle type, and these may be registered in the offer condition DB 36.

FIG. 31 is a processing example of the transaction mediating apparatus 2 in the seventh exemplary embodiment. This process corresponds to FIG. 8 of the first embodiment, and the same step number is assigned to the same process.
The transaction intermediary device 2 monitors reception of the quotation request information RQ, offer information OF, and contract information in steps S101, S101, and S103 of FIG.

When the quotation request information RQ from the user terminal 5 is received, the transaction intermediary device 2 proceeds from step S101 to S104, and performs processing for taking in the received quotation request information RQ and registering it in the quotation request information DB 33 (FIG. 8).

Subsequently, in step S130, the transaction mediating apparatus 2 acquires information about the introduction vendor. Here, offer condition information of each vendor is read out from the offer condition DB 36.
In step S131, transaction brokerage apparatus 2 generates offer information OF for each vendor.

When the offer information OF for each vendor for which the offer condition information has been presented in advance is generated, the transaction intermediary device 2 performs steps S108A (comparison target setting process) and S109A (comparison / transmission availability determination process) for each offer information OF. I do.
In step S111A, transmission control to the user terminal 5 is performed for each of the one or more offer information OFs determined to be transmitted in the comparison / transmission permission / inhibition determination process (the same process as step S111 in FIG. 8).
In step S113A, non-transmission offer processing (similar to step S113 in FIG. 8) is performed for each of the one or more offer information OFs determined to be non-transmission in the comparison / transmission availability determination processing.
In step S124A, for each offer information OF, DB update corresponding to transmission / non-transmission, that is, status update of the offer information DB 34 is performed.

In the case of FIG. 31, it is assumed that the offer information OF received from the vendor terminal 4 monitored in step S102 is the case where the re-offer information OF ′ is transmitted.
In this case, the transaction intermediary device 2 proceeds from step S102 to step S107, and performs a process of fetching the received re-offer information OF 'and registering it in the offer information DB 34.
Then, step S108B (comparison target setting process), S109B (comparison / transmission availability determination process), and steps S110, S111B, S112B, and S113B are performed in the same manner as steps S108 to S113 in FIG.

If the contract information is received, the transaction intermediary device 2 proceeds from step S103 to S114, and registers the contract information DB 35 as in FIG.

According to the seventh embodiment, filtering related to transmission of the offer information OF to the user terminal 5 is performed as in the first to sixth embodiments. Further, in this case, the offer information OF is generated by the transaction intermediary device 2. Therefore, it is not necessary for the vendor staff to always wait for the estimate request information RQ. Therefore, the burden on the vendor is significantly reduced.

<6. Eighth Embodiment>
The eighth embodiment will be described with reference to FIGS. 32, 33, and 34. FIG.
In the eighth embodiment, the offer information content OFv is not transmitted to the user terminal 5, but the content of the offer information OF is presented on the website without any particular limitation. However, for each offer information OF, the transmission permission / inhibition decision is made in the same manner as in the previous embodiments, and for the offer information OF decided to be transmitted, a notice of posting on the website is transmitted to the user terminal 5. It is said.

FIG. 32 shows a processing flow of the entire system. The same parts as those in FIG. 7 are denoted by the same step numbers, and detailed description is avoided.
When the quotation request information RQ is transmitted from the user terminal 5 in step S21, the transaction mediating apparatus 2 receives the quotation request introduction information IRQ to the vendor terminal 4 in step S2 after receiving it in step S1.
Each vendor that received the introduction information IRQ in step S31 generates offer information OF in step S32 and transmits it to the transaction mediating apparatus 2.

The transaction mediating apparatus 2 uploads each offer information OF received / acquired in step S3 to the website in step S10.
FIG. 33 shows an example of a web page that posts offer information OF.
For example, as a page that the user who transmitted the estimate request information RQ can browse in the login state, as shown in FIG. 33, the contents of the estimate request information RQ (estimate information such as vehicle type, color, year, mileage, etc.) As the contents of offer information OF from each vendor, for example, the vendor name, location, and estimated amount are presented.

Further, the transaction intermediary device 2 performs steps S4 (comparison target setting process) and S5 (comparison / transmission permission / inhibition determination process) for the acquired offer information OF.
If it is determined that transmission is to be executed, the process proceeds from step S11 to step S12, and a notification mail MLv is sent to notify the user terminal 5 of the upload. This is a notification that new offer information OF has been added on the page as shown in FIG.
The user terminal 5 receives the notification mail MLv in step S22. The user can open the e-mail to know that the offer has been added, and can access the website that the user can view and check the content of the offer information OF.

FIG. 34 shows a processing example of the transaction mediating apparatus 2 in the eighth exemplary embodiment. The same processes as those in FIG. 8 of the first embodiment are denoted by the same step numbers, and only differences from FIG. 8 will be described.
In this case, step S141 is added between steps S107 and S108 in FIG. That is, when receiving the offer information OF, the transaction intermediary device 2 performs registration in the offer condition DB 36 in step S107, and in step S141, performs processing for posting the content of the offer information OF on the website.
Thereafter, steps S108 (comparison target setting process) and S109 (comparison / transmission availability determination process) are performed to determine whether transmission is possible for the offer information OF. If transmission is determined, the process proceeds from step S110 to S142, and notification mail is sent. MLv transmission control is performed. That is, the transaction mediating apparatus 2 generates e-mail data indicating that the offer information OF has been newly added, and transmits it to the user terminal 5 from the communication unit 20.
In step S142, the transaction mediating apparatus 2 performs DB update according to the transmission of the notification mail MLv. For example, the status of the offer information OF in the offer condition DB 36 is updated to “sent”.

On the other hand, even if it is determined not to be transmitted, the notification information IL is not transmitted to the vendor terminal 4 as in the above-described embodiments. This is because the website can be posted even if it is determined not to be transmitted, and the user can view it.

As described above, in the eighth embodiment, the offer information OF is posted on the website, but only the offer information OF determined to be useful to the user is notified to the user about the posting.
In addition, in the web page as shown in FIG. 33, the offer information OF that has transmitted the notification mail MLv and the non-sent offer information OF may be posted in a distinguishable manner.
Further, instead of the processing of FIG. 34, a processing example in which the comparison / transmission permission / inhibition determination is performed at every predetermined execution timing as shown in FIG. 28 is also conceivable.

<7. Summary and Modification>
In the above first to eighth embodiments, the following effects can be obtained.
In the transaction mediating apparatus 2 according to the embodiment, a plurality of vendors (transaction applicants) offer each other's offer contents corresponding to the estimate request information RQ (transaction request information) transmitted from the user terminal 5 (transaction requester terminal). The business transaction information acquisition unit 21 that acquires offer information OF for a plurality of vendors, which is generated in a state in which it is impossible to know, and the comparison target setting unit that sets a comparison target for the offer information OF acquired by the business transaction information acquisition unit 21 22, based on the comparison result between the offer information OF acquired by the commercial transaction information acquisition unit 21 and the comparison target set by the comparison target setting unit 22, whether transmission related to the offer information OF is executed to the user terminal 5. A transmission permission / inhibition determination processing unit 23 for determining whether or not the transmission information is transmitted to the user terminal 5 regarding the offer information OF based on the determination of the transmission permission / inhibition determination processing unit 23. And a transmission control unit 24 for controlling.
This transaction mediating apparatus 2 functions as a system that mediates between a user and a plurality of vendors. In this case, for a plurality of offer information OF with respect to the estimate request information RQ, a comparison process with a comparison target is performed, and transmission related to offer information to the user terminal 5 (for example, transmission of offer information content OFv and notification mail MLv) is performed. Determine whether or not. In other words, each offer information OF is provided with a filtering function related to presentation to the user.
Accordingly, it is possible to eliminate or reduce the burden on the user due to too many offers.
Specifically, according to the first to seventh embodiments, it is possible to eliminate the fact that a large amount of offer contents from a large number of vendors are sent to the user one by one, and the user can select the offer selected by comparison. It is only necessary to check the information, and it is possible to appropriately eliminate unnecessary offer confirmation and examine useful offers.
According to the eighth embodiment, when an offer is generated, it is not reported to the user one by one, so that in this case as well, the user can be solved or reduced from being bothered by too many notifications.

In the case of the embodiment, at the time when the vendor creates the offer information OF, it is a system that cannot know the offer contents (estimated amount, etc.) of other vendors. This makes it suitable for managing transaction brokers with the intention of not promoting excessive competition among vendors.
Also, the offer information presented to the user is an estimated amount for making a transaction offer and not a contractual condition. For this reason, the user side can consider a plurality of offer information OFs and consider a contract instead of accepting only one offer information OF. Of course, there is still an opportunity for negotiations after sending the offer information OF. Accordingly, the system according to the embodiment does not impose maintenance on the offer contents until the contract is concluded or obligates the contract to both the vendor and the user, and assumes introduction only. In this sense, a large number of offers are allowed to be presented to the user. For this reason, it is significant to eliminate the user's burden in the present embodiment. That is, this embodiment has a remarkable effect in a system in which a user can accept a plurality of offers.

Further, as described in FIGS. 14 and 15, the transaction intermediary device 2 (transmission permission / inhibition determination processing unit 23) determines that the estimated amount included in the offer information OF is more advantageous for the user than the comparison target amount. Then, it is determined that transmission of the offer information OF to the user terminal 5 is executed. As shown in FIG. 16, it may be determined according to the number of cases where the amount is dominant.
That the estimated amount of money is superior to the user is offer information that is favorable for the user and is worth considering for the contract. Therefore, it is appropriate to present such offer information OF to the user as a mediator of desirable transactions between the user and vendor.

Further, as described with reference to FIGS. 17 and 18, the transaction intermediary device 2 (transmission permission / inhibition determination processing unit 23), when the estimated amount included in the offer information OF is an amount that is inferior to the user compared to the amount to be compared. If the amount difference is less than the first threshold value (difference threshold value thD1), it may be determined to execute transmission of the offer information to the user terminal 5.
Even if the estimated amount of money is inferior to the user, the user may want to close the contract due to various circumstances such as location, due date, additional service, and the like. However, if the price is too inferior, it is usually difficult to become a contract candidate, so the value presented as an offer to the user is low. Therefore, although it is inferior in terms of amount, if the amount difference with the comparison target is less than the difference threshold thD1, it is determined that it can be a contract candidate, and transmission of the offer information OF to the user terminal 5 is executed. As a result, it is possible to secure a function of not confirming offers that are likely to be closed, and confirming various offers for the user.

Further, as described in FIG. 19A and its modification example, the transaction mediating apparatus 2 (transmission permission / inhibition determination processing unit 23) uses the first threshold (difference threshold thD1) as the offer source of the offer information to be compared. You may set using the performance information of an applicant, or the performance information of the transaction applicant who is the offer origin of the offer information compared with a comparison object.
That is, the difference threshold thD1 as the upper limit of the amount difference may be a fixed value, but may be varied according to the vendor performance. Thus, it is possible to determine whether or not transmission to the user is possible, reflecting the vendor's trust and the like.
For example, if the vendor of the offer information OF to be compared has a large difference between the estimated amount and the contracted amount and the credit amount of the estimated amount (comparative amount) is low, the difference threshold thD1 is increased to determine whether the current offer information OF can be transmitted. By loosening, it is possible to increase the possibility of transaction mediation with high user satisfaction.
Alternatively, if the vendor of the current offer information OF is a vendor that has a large difference between the estimated amount and the contracted amount and is unfavorable to the user, for example, the decision to send or not is strict, and the vendor that is advantageous to the user has a small difference between the estimated amount and the concluded amount In this case, the possibility of transaction mediation with a high degree of user satisfaction can also be increased by loosening the transmission permission / inhibition decision.

Further, as described with reference to FIGS. 19B and 20A, the transaction mediating apparatus 2 (transmission permission / inhibition determination processing unit 23) sets the first threshold (difference threshold thD1) to offer information to the user terminal 5 that is the target of the offer information OF. It may be set based on the transmission execution status.
If the difference threshold thD1 is increased, the transmission permission / inhibition decision becomes loose, and the number of offer information to be transmitted to the user terminal 5 is likely to increase. If the difference threshold thD1 is decreased, the transmission permission / inhibition decision becomes strict. The number of offer information to be transmitted to setting 5 is reduced. Therefore, if the setting is made based on the transmission execution status to the user terminal 5, an appropriate number of offers can be presented to the user. That is, not only too much but also too few can be accommodated.

Further, as described with reference to FIG. 20B, the transaction mediating apparatus 2 (transmission permission / inhibition determination processing unit 23) sets the first threshold (difference threshold thD1) to the other offer information OF set as the comparison target, It may be set based on the number of offer information OFs determined not to be transmitted. If the other offer information OF that is the comparison target is too powerful, the other offer information OF may be determined to be almost non-transmitted. In that case, it may be difficult for the user to receive the offer information OF. Therefore, an appropriate number of offer information OF can be presented to the user by adjusting the difference threshold thD1.

Further, as described with reference to FIGS. 21 and 22, the transaction mediating apparatus 2 (transmission permission / inhibition determination processing unit 23) compares the estimated amount for comparison with the estimated amount included in the offer information corrected for comparison with the comparison target. It may be.
The conditions that the user wants to close are diverse, such as the estimated amount, convenience, and operator's credit. Therefore, in order to prevent the transmission to the transaction requester from being executed because only the estimated amount is inferior, or the transmission being executed because only the estimated amount is superior, correction is performed to increase or decrease the estimated amount used for comparison. Thereby, the estimation of various conditions can be presented to the user.
When the comparison is made using the estimated amount for comparison, the difference between the condition elements related to the offer information OF, for example, the geographical element, the temporal element, the vendor's credit, etc., and the user setting condition as shown in FIG. Based on this, the estimated amount may be corrected for comparison.
When the user presents the setting condition in the estimate request information RQ, the condition that the user seeks to close can be determined. An offer suitable for such conditions can be easily transmitted to the user terminal 5 by correcting the estimated amount at the time of comparison. Conversely, increase the possibility of not sending offers that do not meet the conditions. Therefore, it is possible to easily deliver a desired offer to the user.

Further, as described in the non-transmission offer process in FIGS. 23 and 24, the transaction mediating apparatus 2 (transmission permission / inhibition determination processing unit 23) determines the offer information OF that is determined not to execute the transmission related to the offer information to the user terminal 5. A process for determining whether or not to execute a process of notifying the vendor who is the offer source of the offer information OF may be performed.
Offer information that is determined not to be transmitted to the transaction requester terminal becomes impossible or difficult for the contract applicant. Therefore, by notifying that fact, it is possible to encourage the vendor to appropriately report and to deal with the vendor.

Further, as shown in FIG. 23C, in the non-transmission offer process, for the offer information OF determined to be non-transmission, the amount difference between the estimated amount included in the offer information OF and the comparison target amount is less than a predetermined threshold (difference threshold thD2). For example, it may be determined that the notification process to the transaction applicant who is the offer source of the offer information is executed.
If the amount difference is less than the predetermined threshold value, it is determined that the transmission is not executed by comparison, but it means that the comparison process is not greatly lost. Therefore, notification processing is preferable in terms of prompting a re-offer.

Further, as shown in FIGS. 24A and 24B, in the non-transmission offer process, it is determined whether or not to execute the offer information OF determined to be non-transmission based on the status of other offer information by the vendor of the offer information OF. You may make it do.
For example, it may not always be necessary to notify the non-execution of transmission due to the other offer information of the vendor, such as when there is an opportunity to close a transaction for the same product. Simplification and efficiency of vendor operations can also be achieved.

In addition, it is desirable that the notification information IL notified to the vendor in the non-transmission offer process includes content recommending the re-offer information transmission as shown in FIG. 25A. Encouraging vendors to close deals by sending re-offer information through notifications.
Further, the notification information IL may include content recommending a change of the estimate request information RQ to be offered as shown in FIG. 25B. This is because changing the offer target may provide a new opportunity for the vendor to close.

In addition, as described in the second, third, fourth, and fifth embodiments (FIGS. 26A, 26B, 27A, and 27B), the transaction mediating apparatus 2 (transmission permission / inhibition determination processing unit 23) performs comparison. You may make it select the conditions for determining whether to perform transmission to the user terminal 5 regarding offer information OF from the result based on the offer information transmission condition to the user terminal 5.
It is conceivable that the condition for determining whether or not to execute transmission varies depending on severe conditions or loose conditions. By performing such a condition selection based on the offer information transmission status to the user terminal 5, presentation of an appropriate number of offer information to the user terminal 5 can be realized.

Further, as described with reference to FIGS. 13A, 13B, and 13C, the transaction mediating apparatus 2 (comparison target setting unit 22) receives other offer information that has been subjected to a predetermined operation on the user terminal 5 side. , It may be set as a comparison target.
The comparison target in the comparison process is preferably a reference for whether or not the contract is possible for the user. Offer information that has already been presented to the user and the user has shown interest is considered appropriate as such a criterion. Therefore, on the user terminal 5 side, offer information for which a predetermined operation such as clicking on a URL link in an email as offer information content OFv is performed is set as a comparison target. Thereby, the transmission permission / inhibition determination function for presenting an offer desirable for the user can be enhanced.

Further, regarding the comparison target setting, using the market price information as shown in FIG. 9A and using the user desired amount as shown in FIG. 9B can also enhance the transmission permission / inhibition decision function for presenting a desired offer for the user.
Further, as in the examples of FIGS. 10, 11, and 12, by using other competing offer information OF as a comparison target, it is possible to select an offer superior to the user among a large number of vendors and present it to the user. .

The information processing apparatus of the present invention is not limited to the example of the transaction mediating apparatus 2 of the embodiment, and various modifications are assumed.
First, although the example of the automobile purchase service has been described, the present invention can be applied as an intermediary service for other various commercial transactions.
For example, it can be an intermediary service for contracting auto insurance, life insurance, non-life insurance, fire insurance, earthquake insurance and other insurance products. It is also suitable as a service for a user to search for a trader for vehicle inspection, moving, transportation and the like. It is also suitable as an intermediary for real estate transactions such as home sales, and as an intermediary for sales of travel products. It can also be applied to used goods purchase services. The above is merely an example, and various fields of application of the present invention are envisaged besides these.

Further, in the embodiment, the explanation has been made assuming that “the advantage for the user” is high, but conversely, in the case where the user purchases such as insurance, vehicle inspection, real estate sales, etc., “ It goes without saying that “advantage” means that the estimated amount is low.
In addition, when the case where the estimated amount is low is applied to a transaction advantageous to the user, each example may be appropriately modified, for example, “CPV ′ ← CPV + thD1” in step S342 of FIG.

In the embodiment, the comparison process uses the estimated amount and the comparison target amount. However, the comparison process may be performed using a value other than the amount. For example, the transaction quantity, transaction date and time, vendor evaluation value, etc. may be used in the comparison process together with the amount or instead of the amount.
Further, although the quote request information RQ is given as an example of the transaction request information, an example in which the estimated amount is not used as a comparison target is also conceivable, and examples other than the quote request information RQ can be considered as the transaction request information. For example, a request for requesting the presentation of a possible quantity as a transaction quantity, a transaction date and time, and a possible date and time is also considered as an example of the transaction request information.

<8. Program and Storage Medium>
As mentioned above, although the transaction mediating apparatus 2 as embodiment of the information processing apparatus of this invention was demonstrated, the program of embodiment is the commercial transaction information acquisition part 21 in the transaction mediating apparatus 2, the comparison object setting part 22, and transmission permission / inhibition This is a program that causes an information processing device (such as a CPU) to execute the processes of the determination processing unit 23 and the transmission control unit 24.

The program of the embodiment corresponds to the request information RQ transmitted from the user terminal 5 and provides the offer information OF for a plurality of vendors generated in a state where the plurality of vendors cannot know each other's offer contents. The information processing apparatus is caused to execute a commercial transaction information acquisition procedure to be acquired. Further, the information processing apparatus is caused to execute a comparison target setting procedure for setting a comparison target for the offer information OF acquired in the commercial transaction information acquisition procedure. Further, based on the comparison result between the offer information OF acquired in the commercial transaction information acquisition procedure and the comparison target set in the comparison target setting procedure, it is determined whether or not transmission related to the offer information OF is executed to the user terminal 5. The information processing apparatus executes the transmission permission / inhibition determination procedure to be performed. Furthermore, the professional who makes an information processing apparatus perform the transmission control procedure which controls the transmission process to the user terminal 5 OF of offer information based on determination of the transmission permission decision procedure.
That is, this program has been described as the first to eighth embodiments in FIG. 8, FIG. 26A, FIG. 26B, FIG. 27A, FIG. 27B, FIG. 28, FIG. It is a program that executes processing.

By such a program, the information processing apparatus as the transaction mediating apparatus 2 described above can be realized.
Such a program can be stored in advance in an HDD as a storage medium built in a device such as a computer device, a ROM in a microcomputer having a CPU, or the like. Alternatively, it can be stored (stored) temporarily or permanently in a removable storage medium such as a semiconductor memory, memory card, optical disk, magneto-optical disk, or magnetic disk. Such a removable storage medium can be provided as so-called package software.
Further, such a program can be installed from a removable storage medium to a personal computer or the like, or can be downloaded from a download site via a network such as a LAN or the Internet.

1 network, 2 transaction brokerage device, 3 DB group, 4 vendor terminal, 5 user terminal, 20 communication unit, 21 commercial transaction information acquisition unit, 22 comparison target setting unit, 23 transmission enable / disable determination processing unit, 24 transmission control unit, 25 WEB server

Claims

Commerce information to obtain offer information for multiple transaction applicants that is generated in a state where multiple transaction applicants do not know each other's offer contents corresponding to the transaction request information sent from the transaction requester terminal An acquisition unit;
A comparison target setting unit for setting a comparison target for the offer information acquired by the commercial transaction information acquisition unit;
Whether or not to transmit the offer information to the transaction requester terminal based on a comparison result between the offer information acquired by the commercial transaction information acquisition unit and a comparison target set by the comparison target setting unit A transmission permission / inhibition determination processing unit for determining
An information processing apparatus comprising: a transmission control unit that controls transmission processing of the offer information to the transaction requester terminal based on the determination of the transmission permission / inhibition determination processing unit.
When the estimated amount included in the offer information is an amount superior to the transaction requester than the amount included in the comparison target, the transmission permission / inhibition determination processing unit transmits the offer information to the transaction requester terminal. The information processing device according to claim 1, wherein the information processing device is determined to be executed.
If the estimated amount included in the offer information is inferior to the transaction requester than the amount included in the comparison target, the transmission permission / inhibition determination processing unit determines that the offer is determined if the amount difference is less than the first threshold. The information processing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the information processing apparatus determines to perform transmission of the information to the transaction requester terminal.
The first threshold value is set using performance information of a transaction applicant who is an offer source of offer information to be compared, or performance information of a transaction applicant who is an offer source of offer information to be compared with a comparison target. The information processing apparatus according to claim 3.
The information processing apparatus according to claim 3, wherein the first threshold is set based on a transmission execution status related to offer information to a transaction requester terminal that is a target of offer information.
The first threshold value is set based on the number of offer information determined not to be transmitted to the transaction requester terminal based on a comparison result with offer information set as a comparison target by the comparison target setting unit. 3. The information processing apparatus according to 3.
The information processing apparatus according to any one of claims 1 to 6, wherein the transmission permission / inhibition determination processing unit corrects an estimated amount included in offer information for comparison, and compares it with a comparison target.
The transmission permission / inhibition determination processing unit corrects the estimated amount included in the offer information for comparison based on the magnitude of the difference between the condition element related to the offer information and the setting condition associated with the transaction request information. The information processing apparatus described in 1.
Whether or not the transmission permission / inhibition determination processing unit performs notification processing to the transaction applicant who is the offer source of the offer information for the offer information determined to not perform transmission related to the offer information to the transaction requester terminal. The information processing apparatus according to any one of claims 1 to 8, wherein a process for determining the information is performed.
The transmission permission / inhibition determination processing unit, for offer information determined not to execute transmission related to offer information to the transaction requester terminal, an amount difference between an estimated amount included in the offer information and an amount included in a comparison target is a predetermined threshold value The information processing apparatus according to claim 9, wherein if it is less than the number, it is determined to execute a notification process to a transaction applicant who is an offer source of the offer information.
The transmission permission / inhibition determination processing unit performs a notification process to the transaction applicant regarding offer information determined not to execute transmission related to offer information to the transaction requester terminal by a transaction applicant who is an offer source of the offer information. The information processing apparatus according to claim 9, wherein it is determined whether or not to execute based on a situation of other offer information.
The transmission permission / inhibition determination processing unit, when executing the notification process to the transaction applicant who is the offer source of the offer information, for the offer information determined not to execute the transmission related to the offer information to the transaction requester terminal, The information processing apparatus according to any one of claims 1 to 11, wherein the notification information by the notification process includes content that recommends transmission of re-offer information.
The transmission permission / inhibition determination processing unit, when executing the notification process to the transaction applicant who is the offer source of the offer information, for the offer information determined not to execute the transmission related to the offer information to the transaction requester terminal, The information processing apparatus according to any one of claims 1 to 12, wherein the notification information by the notification process includes a content that recommends change of transaction request information to be offered.
The transmission permission / inhibition determination processing unit provides a condition for determining whether or not to execute transmission related to offer information from the comparison result to the transaction requester terminal. The information processing device according to claim 1, wherein the information processing device is selected based on the information processing device.
The comparison target setting unit corresponds to the same transaction request information as the offer information acquired by the commercial transaction information acquisition unit, and is other offer information transmitted to the transaction requester terminal, the transaction requester terminal side The information processing apparatus according to any one of claims 1 to 14, wherein offer information on which a predetermined operation is performed is set as a comparison target.
Commerce information to obtain offer information for multiple transaction applicants that is generated in a state where multiple transaction applicants do not know each other's offer contents corresponding to the transaction request information sent from the transaction requester terminal An acquisition step;
A comparison target setting step for setting a comparison target for the offer information acquired in the commercial transaction information acquisition step;
Whether or not to transmit the offer information to the transaction requester terminal based on a comparison result between the offer information acquired in the commercial transaction information acquisition step and a comparison target set in the comparison target setting step A transmission permission / inhibition determining step for determining
A transmission control step of controlling transmission processing of offer information to the transaction requester terminal based on the determination of the transmission permission / inhibition determining step.
Commerce information to obtain offer information for multiple transaction applicants that is generated in a state where multiple transaction applicants do not know each other's offer contents corresponding to the transaction request information sent from the transaction requester terminal Acquisition procedure;
A comparison target setting procedure for setting a comparison target for the offer information acquired in the commercial transaction information acquisition procedure;
Whether or not to transmit the offer information to the transaction requester terminal based on the comparison result between the offer information acquired in the commercial transaction information acquisition procedure and the comparison target set in the comparison target setting procedure A transmission permission / inhibition determination procedure for determining
A transmission control procedure for controlling a transmission process to the transaction requester terminal related to offer information based on the determination of the transmission permission determination procedure;
For causing an information processing apparatus to execute the program.