posted on December 9, 2000 10:52:56 AM
I also avoid auctions with a check-out system like Andale uses.
I don't care about the lack of "in-person" contact, or making friends, or getting that warm fuzzy feeling from dealing "face to face" with the seller. I just don't want to submit my personal information to a third party.
susiegirl, it's not just getting on email lists that's the problem. The checkout system also gets my name, physical address, a description of the item I've bought, and how much I've decided to spend on it. And my telephone number - is that really necessary? This information is gold to direct-marketers. Why do you think the supermarket wants you to use one of their "super saver" cards every time you shop? It's so they can track every item you buy, build a dossier on your buying habits, and sell it to direct marketers. Buy a jar of baby food -- this guy has a baby. Buy a can of dog food -- this guy has a dog.
"By having "Andale" all over my listings I thankfully avoid buyers who have agendas other than completing their sale and getting their item, such as ... pushing their political bent." - bemused
I don't have an agenda other than completing the sale. But a seller who uses a third-party to collect information, by association, potentially does. Submitting my personal information to a third-party who will then sell it does not benefit me and is not a necessary part of completing a transaction.
This is a personal choice I've made about me and my own information. If someone else wants to choose differently regarding their information that's fine. I'm not "pushing (my) political bent" on anyone.
posted on December 9, 2000 11:09:18 AM
Hi triplesnack,
And my telephone number - is that really necessary?
Is filling out phone numer required or optional in Andale's checkout process?
Why do they want to collect buyers' phone numbers? Anybody can think of any other reason than the reason that they want to sell the info to telemarketers?
posted on December 9, 2000 11:13:48 AM
Hi Charles927 -- I don't know if Andale asks for a phone number. (Maybe one of those buyers we've heard about who "just love it" could answer???) Some services do. There was a different third-party auction service that a seller wanted me to use at one point that asked for it. I had already decided not to submit the info but wanted to see what info they were asking for. That service also froze up my computer when it was loading the page (a java problem) so the decision on whether or not to submit info was a little moot anyway.
posted on December 9, 2000 11:22:15 AM"if you don't like it, you may have no choice in the future, because many, many sellers are trying to automate their sales as much as possible to help themselves and give YOU better service!"
Automation is not better service overall if it also ends up getting me more direct marketing (spam, telemarketing, or junk mail). Direct marketing is a major nuisance and waste (time, money, and resources), and in this context, *disservice*, as far as I'm concerned, and instantly more than wipes out any service advantage automation could possibly give to me.
A lot of companies will use "personalization" or "improved service," but only or primarily for the purpose (often buried within the lengthy legalese of current privacy statements) of selling the given information to direct marketers. In those cases, personalization has a price, and "improved service" really isn't "improved" or "service" to me.
I don't think automation will be used by even the majority of sellers for awhile yet, and even if it is, I'll have a choice, namely to shop at more antique stores and travel some more (indeed, many of eBay's decisions this year, and spammers picking up my address from eBay, have helped drive me, pun intended, to alternatives with growing frequency) -- or hope that companies wake up and stop selling out their customers to direct marketers. I'd rather entirely cease bidding at eBay than have a bunch of "automation" services (or eBay itself) selling my information. That would be a *relatively* easy decision for me, since eBay bidding is the only form of online buying I've been doing anyway, due to privacy and security concerns.
Overall, numerous surveys suggest that 40-60% of potential online buyers have balked on at least one online purchase due to security and/or privacy concerns, and some surveys suggest that number has grown over the past year.
Familiarity does not seem to breed comfort, for while some overcome their initial security concerns as they get familiar with the Internet, others actually grow more concerned about security; while privacy concerns almost always seem to grow as they learn more about the Net -- and even spread to offline practices, since this sort of stuff happens there too. In fact, the well-publicised problems online seem to only draw increasing attention to the offline versions. For example, did you know your pharmacy can sell information about you and your purchases?
I don't know if the crowd speaking here at AW is different than the crowd actually bidding, but here at least I don't see whining or gross ignorance of how to fill in a form, but rather feelings that automated auctions are impersonal, and concerns about whether such personal information is guarded with respect or sold to direct marketers.
One seller, tomwiii, reported that 50% of his customers refused to fill in the form.
Now if the advantage a particular seller gains in using automation outweighs the disadvantage of some potential customers refusing to bid, refusing to fill in the third-party form, or being off-put to the extent that they won't repeat their business, then the seller is probably better off with automation. I am not disputing that such automation can be helpful, I'm stating that it also has its price. To some sellers, the price will be worth it, while other sellers may be hurt more than they realize. It's rather hard to tell how big an effect this is, but it is there. It is not a factor that exists in isolation, either, but rather a small part of much greater concerns.
I am not an anti-technology "luddite." I am heavily involved with technology in various ways, and love using the Net for various reasons. It's just that not every use of technology is universally positive.
Think of me as a whiner if you want, but I've had it up to here with my information being treated as a commodity that can be sold behind my back to direct marketers for the sake of snowing me under more junk mail, bandwidth-clogging spam, and pushy telemarketing -- and giving me only obscure information and limited options for avoiding it. Product information, in this day and age, is more plentiful then ever; I don't need or want direct marketers shoving even more of it down my throat. (information indigestion? )
posted on December 9, 2000 11:53:00 AM
I have a question for those of you who have
stated that you will not bid on Andale auctions.
If that auction included a statement from the seller indicating willingness to bypass Andale and deal with you directly if you were uncomfortable using a third-party service, would you then consider bidding?
posted on December 9, 2000 12:01:35 PM
Tried Andale when it was free. All sorts of problems. Lousy customer (that's me) support. Lousy bidder support. Bidders didn't like the storefront page. Andale dragged their feet (weeks turned in to MONTHS) issuing refunds on their Free Listing Days. Who needs 'em?
We now have a statement on our About Me page that says: "You told us you didn't like having to go to Andale's storefront page, so we have dropped their service."
posted on December 9, 2000 01:10:18 PM
Hello MrsTee. That's a great question and I'm happy to see that you respect "my" concerns enough to ask it.
I mentioned in an earlier post that I wish seller's who use automated web-based EOA notices would include the option of NOT using the form in their auction terms. I think this is a good idea because there really are quite a number of folks who feel like I do about privacy issues and having the option of not using the automated form would most likely increase their bidder base.
I have bid on two auctions that used Andale or a similar program but only after emailing the seller to ask if I could bypass the system and keep my info just between the two of us. The response I received as well as my review of the seller's feedback were the determining factors that led to my decision to go ahead and bid on the auction. The key factor, for me, was my comfort level with the particular seller and my belief that they were sincere when they told me they wouldn't give my info to a third party. Of course, I have no way of really knowing if a seller will keep their word regarding this but sometimes TRUST is determined by relying on your instincts.
So, to answer your question, I think it would benefit you as a seller to include the option of bypassing the web-based automated EOA form and it would also benefit your buyers.
Blanche
[ edited by bhearsch on Dec 9, 2000 01:12 PM ]
posted on December 9, 2000 03:33:56 PMcocacolacathy -
It's the JavaScript loaded, browser-crashing, impossible-to-complete andale pages that bug some people. Also, I read their privacy policy and they say NOTHING about protecting the personal information of the BUYERS using the service ... which means they could sell anything they had in the way of buying habits to anyone they want to.
And my final words to any seller who insists that I hand over personal information to a third party for the privilege of buying from them ...... FOAD!
posted on December 9, 2000 05:16:49 PM
Hi, I won't bid on an auction that uses Andale. As a seller my buyers hated it and complained loudly. As a buyer, I don't want my information sold. MrsT. If I went to one of your auctions and it gave me a choice of using Andale or contacting you directing, yes, I would bid on your auction.
Anais
Live,Laugh,Love
posted on December 9, 2000 07:59:37 PM
For me it is very simple, If it is a Andale auction, and I know it, I won't bid. I will not give information to a third party. As a seller I would never expect my customers to deal with anyone or other entity but myself. My customers deserve my personnel attention.
posted on December 9, 2000 08:27:20 PM
Purely out of curiosity (since I have not filled in an Andale form), does the Andale form-fill page appear at all with JavaScript off?
I ask because some pages won't even load w/o JS, often appearing as a blank page if JS is disabled. ZDII's front page is one example.
I usually run with JS disabled, partly to avoid some JS-based exploits, mostly to avoid irritations like sites altering your mouse pointer, ads following you around the page, or separate ad windows appearing out of nowhere; but sometimes, JS is used for more of the page than just that, and the page will appear as blank if JS is off. (Unless there is really something worth seeing on that page, I'll usually just go elsewhere. )
I'm just curious what why what could be a simple HTTPS form page would have so much JS on it that it crashes some computers.
I don't know if it is Andale (I think it is, but would -- and will shortly -- check), but on some auction pages, the thumbnail of the item is presented, and you have to click to get the full image. Sometimes, when I follow the link (I just want to see the image even if I know I'm not going to bid), I end up on a page that doesn't have an image on it, until I look at the page source and find the image is being served up through the JS part instead of with a simple <img> tag.
posted on December 9, 2000 08:32:16 PM
Well I guess we all just want that personal touch, that is why we are communicating via a machine....and bidding on auctions rather than being waited on personally by a store. I have read these threads with some amusement and with some dismay. The anger that comes through is unbelievable..lots of hostility out there coming through. I have used Andale for over 6 months and by far the feedback I am getting is extremely positive...customers keep complimenting me on my professional demeanor and the efficiency of the transaction. If a customer has a problem navigating Andale, I suggest in my EOA email and in my ad, to email me direct and they do when necessary. No problem, unless you are looking for one. I have tripled the number of auctions I am running...all due to the efficiency and help that Andale gives me...I track my deadbeats better, and my finances as well. If you don't want to bid on my great items because I use Andale, that is fine with me!
posted on December 9, 2000 08:37:17 PM
A bit of advice to any seller considering using Andale or another mgmt service, don't put to much stock in the professional naysayers here, they hate everything. Take the time to customize the email templates, make sure you include the Andale checkout instructions in your auctions, and respond to customer inquiries promptly as a good seller would under any other system. I've successfully used Andale for a couple of months without complaint from customers, and in fact have been complimented on my professionalism.
Don't fear losing "buyers" of the type posting in this forum, believe me you want to avoid people who think that their personal information is the Holy Grail of Madison Avenue and the most sought after commodity on earth. I'm well versed in the privacy concerns expressed here, but the only 2 things I fear are "Identity Theft" and credit card fraud, being marketed to is of minor concern since I'm realistic enough to know that it will occur every time I choose to open my eyes. I suppose however if you're that proverbial sucker that's born every minute and can't resist the evil temptation of cheesy banner ads, mailers, etc. then that might be a big issue in your life.
posted on December 9, 2000 08:55:12 PM
I just checked some Andale auctions, and the smaller image on the auction page shows up without JavaScript, but when you click on it to see the bigger image (where you go to an Andale page), *that* image does not appear without JS being on. Andale page serves up the image in JS, so without JS, I only end up seeing their logo, a "Why buy from an Andale merchant?", a "Previous Page" link, and a copyright statement -- no item image without JS.
Just to be clear, though, this is far from unique to Andale. Many other sites seem to be entranced with JS, even where there are simpler ways of doing the same thing.
I'm really more curious whether Andale's form page (the post auction form for the bidder to fill in) works w/o JS. If so, turning off JS would be a way for those who don't otherwise mind typing in their information with a third party to get it done without crashing their computer. If the form does not appear without JS, however, the only choice is to send the information to the seller directly.
posted on December 9, 2000 08:58:00 PM
Question for the Andele sellers out there...
Suppose you customize your end-of-auction email to state that you will be collecting buyer's contact information and buying habits in order to create a database to sell to online marketers. Do you think your customers would mind?
posted on December 9, 2000 09:14:59 PMmrpotatoheadd
Question for you: Can you direct me to the proof that Andale is doing what you are accusing them of? Do you have anything to base these allegations on besides conjecture and paranoia? I realize that you feel everyone is tracking your every movement, but I'm here to tell you that you're not that important, none of us are. How do I know this you might ask? I'm on the mailing list for the secret Cabal that runs the world, and so too would you be if you would just loosen up a little.
posted on December 9, 2000 10:29:13 PMbemused: Actually, any *one* person's information is, in a sense, a speck of dirt to direct marketers. Believe me, they don't venerate my information or any other individual's. In general, they need lots of people's information, and in as detailed a form as possible, to be of value to them. That's the lifeblood of direct marketers.
One person's information is just one more piece or set of data to them -- something to shoot another telemarketing call at, or one of ten million email addresses to send spam to.
For another thing, I consider myself very resistent to marketing (though I realize it's subjective for me to unilaterally say that). I also doubt anyone is completely impervious by any means (I'm not, and I wouldn't even necessarily want to be, for non-direct marketing does inform me about the existence of a product, even if... ) I choose to ignore, avoid, or read between the lines of more pushy, more hyped, more evasive sales pitches. I'm looking for quality, not hype. They tend to have an inverse relationship.
There is indeed plenty of marketing elsewhere -- but I am free to ignore it (or have some of it sink in subconsciously, or whatever), read a book while the ads are on, etc. That says two things: I don't need more rammed directly down my throat; and what is rammed down my throat takes my time (or money) to get back out: an extra minute sorting the mail, tossing the junk (and shredding the CC offers); a minute to get up see my telephone is ringing from yet another "unknown" (almost always a telemarketer, on my CallerID, which I'm spending my own $$ on so I don't actually have to *answer* the pushy sales calls); a minute telling the door-to-door solicitors, as politely but firmly as possible, that I'm not interested; and a minute downloading or shell deleting the spam (and possibly having to find and delete any attachment that got put on my hard drive).
Actual numbers vary, but I've added up what I would guess are some typical numbers for people, and found that at the current rate of intrusion, in an average lifetime, someone would have to spend the equivalent of several months of 8-hour work days just to deal with (even if only to say "no" to) direct marketers -- and that's just an average: some get even more. I'd call that one of the most needless drains of people's lives.
Besides, in this age of information, I have more means than ever for finding the kinds of products I want, when I want to. Another reason I don't need direct marketers to shove more information down my throat.
Yet it's taken me awhile to learn and read about just how many direct marketing connections there are -- the connections are kept pretty quiet. Why? I think the answer is fairly clear -- there would be a thundering groundswell of public outrage if they knew, all at once, just how many details were bartered around for the sake of things like those telemarketing calls that probably more than 95% of the people would rather be entirely rid of.
Realize that, as I learned (fortunately not the hard way), one form of direct marketing can actually, in some cases, lead to identity theft: credit card offers. Some of those pre-list some information that is best shredded before thrown away. (It is the only form of direct marketing that I know should be shredded. )
However, don't think that identity theft consists solely of "dumpster divers" either. Do you honestly believe that every employee of all these direct marketers will resist the temptation to "database dip?" Online databases are also a tempting target for "hackers," especially when poorly secured. I'm not the only one concerned. Even Bill Gates has made privacy and security into keynote speeches lately; he and others recognize that many people are concerned, to the point it is costing online industry a lot of additional growth potential.
There must be reasons that identity theft has been growing explosively (up to about 750,000 cases in the U.S. last year). Individual carelessness is one way, and sure, your credit card being taken to the back room of the restaurant is another possible source, but factors like these have pretty much been constants. Can it be that so much more information is being gathered and coalesced by increasing numbers of companies nowadays, with little or no consideration to the good or wishes of those individuals?
On one hand, I don't particularly care if someone knows I like stuff about jetliners; but on the other hand, I see no reason for direct marketers to know that about me, because I don't want to hear from them in the first place. I certainly don't think my pharmacy should be selling information about anything I might have to get in the future.
If direct marketers would provide a single, simple, universal, and permanent way for me to say, "Do not ever send me advertisements," and that this would be the only piece of data about me in any direct marketer's database, I wouldn't have a complaint about them. To me, that's the only thing they need to know about me: that I don't want to hear from any of them. People who still want/use direct marketing can keep getting it; those who don't want or use it can stop it. Is this such a terribly extreme thing to want? When it comes to the worst form of direct marketing IMO, namely telemarketing, I'd guess most people would want that.
Yes, direct marketing is a relatively minor thing as far as life and its problems and joys go, but as I indicated, a thousand needless annoyances can add up to one big, totally unnecessary waste of people's time.
One final thing: I don't hate everything. I hate pushiness, I hate deception, and I hate direct marketing. Everything else is either a positive or something I can just deal with or ignore. I'm also a great buyer, with several dozen glowing (if I may say so) FB's on eBay, who sometimes bids fairly high on things I really want, pays quickly, leaves FB, asks questions (if any) *before* bidding, and follows the seller's EOA (even to the point that I *did* fill out one third party's form, because I had failed to notice there would be one). I used to love eBay, I just wish the spammers and direct marketers weren't as thick as flies around it nowadays.
I can't speak for other "naysayers," but this direct marketing "naysayer" happens to like most things in life; but happens to have a pet peeve that has obviously grown into an ongoing battle which has (with a little bit of research a week, adding up to about as much time as direct marketers were formerly spending for me), allowed me to reduce their junk to about 10% of what it once was, all by doing some (once I realized what they were) fairly simple things.
And finally (this time for sure), I never denied, and even agreed, that third party services can help the seller. They can also hurt to some unknown greater or lesser degree, if some bidders go elsewhere. It is up to the individual sellers to decide whether the benefits outweigh the potential costs, to decide whether "naysayers" are the minority, etc.
Few things are as simple as they first appear.
[ Edited to break up a long paragraph, for readability. ]
[ edited by dc9a320 on Dec 9, 2000 10:40 PM ]
posted on December 9, 2000 11:08:16 PMbemused, you asked if we know for sure that Andale is selling our personal info. No, I don't know for sure that Andale or any similar service is selling my personal info but, that's the whole point!! Due to some of the Dot Com track records I think it's wise to assume they ARE if they don't tell you otherwise. Also, the fact that they may tell you otherwise doesn't mean squat since they can change their Privacy Policy at the drop of a hat anytime they see fit to do so. Here are a few quotes and their links to read in case you haven't been following the recent developments with Amazon.com.
QUOTE
"EPIC and other privacy groups criticized Amazon this month when the bookseller told customers that it considered customer information to be a company asset that can be sold if Amazon goes out of business. It also stopped letting customers opt out of having their personal information shared with marketing companies and retailers partnered with Amazon.
In an earlier open letter 9/13 to Amazon.com Junkbusters President Jason Catlett pointed out several inadequacies in its privacy policy and practices, and asking for changes. Junkbusters terminated its participation in Amazon's affiliate program. (9/13) [USAToday] [AP] [Geek.com] [CNET] [TechWeb] [Newsbytes] [Wired] [Internet Retailer] [Ecommerce Times] [IDG 1] [ZD] [NY Times Op/Ed] [IDG 2] [CIO] [eCommerce Times] [Computerworld]"
END QUOTE
http://www.foxmarketwire.com/wires/0913/f_ap_0913_74.sml
QUOTE
"Amazon spokesman Bill Curry told IDG that Junkbusters was only one of 500,000 affiliates. He also said that ``the talk circulating that Amazon in the past had issued "some guarantee of never selling [customer data] wasn't the case."'' (9/13) The next morning Junkbusters checked the URL http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/subst/help/sec-priv-newuser.html and found the following statement:
We respect your personal privacy
We do not now sell or rent our list of customers to anyone. In fact, the Electronic Privacy Information Center cites the quality of our concern with customer privacy as one of the reasons they became an Amazon.com Associate. If you would like to make sure we never sell or rent information about you to third parties, just send an e-mail message to [email protected]."
END QUOTE
http://www.junkbusters.com/ht/en/new.html#unlawful
As you can see, the Privacy Policy isn't worth the bandwidth used to display it.
We also have the problem concerning all of the Dot Coms that have failed or are GOING to fail since there seems to be a lot of that going around. What happens to our personal info if we're on their customer list? To give you an example of what happens to our info, I recently checked out the homepage of http://www.living.com who have recently filed for bankruptcy and this is what I found listed under "Intellectual Property".
QUOTE
"November 17, 2000 - Notice of living.com Intellectual Property
Lisa Poulin, Chapter 11 Trustee, has determined the price for the component parts of the living.com intellectual property on a non-exclusive basis. These prices were determined after receiving several bids for the intellectual property. The components of the living.com intellectual property are being offered at the following prices:
End-to-end e-commerce system $150,000
Front-end e-commerce system $100,000
Room Designer $25,000
Magazine articles $10,000
Customer list - Registered purchasers $150 / 1,000 names
Customer list - Registered purchasers $100 / 1,000 names"
END QUOTE
This may not bother you and that's certainly your business but it DOES bother me. I hope that any professional seller will respect my concerns as a buyer and NOT "loosen up" by giving my personal info to a third party when I've asked them not to do so. If they don't honor my request, then I'm afraid it does become my business.
That was more than one question, but I'll answer them anyway.
Can you direct me to the proof that Andale is doing what you are accusing them of?
I didn't accuse them of doing anything.
Do you have anything to base these allegations on besides conjecture and paranoia?
I didn't make any allegations.
The next isn't actually a question, but I'll respond anyway.
I realize that you feel everyone is tracking your every movement, but I'm here to tell you that you're not that important, none of us are.
I don't think that everyone is tracking my every movement. Perhaps you have me confused with someone else? I've always known that I wasn't especially important, in the overall scheme of things, so your comment is hardly a revelation.
How do I know this you might ask?
I might ask, but I didn't.
I'm on the mailing list for the secret Cabal that runs the world, and so too would you be if you would just loosen up a little.
Do they write interesting newsletters?
I noticed you didn't answer the question in my previous post- is there a particular reason why not?
posted on December 9, 2000 11:59:40 PM
For my part, my concerns aren't about Andale per se, but about third parties collectively.
I don't feel like interpreting each third party's privacy statement, each of which is often a few hundred lines of legalese (not to mention potential doublespeak and loopholes), just to figure out whether I want to deal with the sale. Offline, I don't even have privacy policies (except from the cable company's) to go by. Besides, I agree with Blanche (bhearsch), that most privacy policies aren't worth the bandwidth they're written "on." If they aren't changing it, or forcing their registered users to re-opt-out every few months, or breaking the word (or slipping through a loophole), they're breaking the "spirit" of it (following the letter but finding another way to sell out their customers).
There's enough to check in regard to finding the item, looking at it, debating whether I really want it or have the room for it, its quality, the quality of the seller's FB, without spending additional time wondering about the presence and potential plans of a third party.
To me, the less parties involved in a transaction, the less junk I'll receive in the long run. It's a generalization, but it works very well -- well enough for me.
Simply put, I've long since given up trying to figure out which dot-coms will treat what I give them with respect, and as a result, have registered at not much more than a handful, and only buy, indirectly at that, at one.
Until most companies adopt the philosophy that unless they receive a court order or the explicit, intentional permission of the customer, that information will be kept solely to only those parties that need to complete the transaction at hand -- or until I have some highly reliable and rapid means of determining something similar about any single company -- I will continue to avoid the general situations that, as best as I'm aware of them, a company will arrogantly sell me out to a direct marketer.
Offline, this problem is more common with the larger chain retailers than the smaller, independent companies or individuals. Online, the metaphor is different, because DoubleClick-style advertising alone is much more intertwined with a greater variety of companies, almost irrelevant of size. Selling out customers to direct marketers isn't as hard to do, and the "payoffs" are more immediate, so again, size not much of an issue or barrier.
Regardless, I have more options offline, and that gets me outside and among people more often besides.
The "cabal?" Oh, please, whatever! I know my every movement isn't tracked in any major way, but what is tracked and sold for the sake of direct marketing has gotten to be enough to offend me. Direct marketing itself isn't a conspiracy either, it's a stinking nuisance of numerous mosquitos whose numbers and actions have collectively gotten out of hand over the years. The closest to a conspiracy, though a stretch at best, is that there are apparently some direct marketing political action committees that are apparently spending money in Washington, I guess because they don't like the idea of potential restrictions that would give consumers more power to say "no" to the often unwanted junk.
posted on December 10, 2000 12:34:12 AM
dc9a320 I couldn't possibly say more or say it any better then you have. You make several excellent points in a well written, intelligent manner. I detest the spam and marketing also. My choices have absolutely nothing to do with my being paranoid.
Bemused paints with a wide brush. I'm not a professional naysayer nor do I hate everything. I'm a good buyer and professional in my dealings with my customers. I've been around since AuctionWeb. I simply don't care to use Andale and my customers didn't like Andale's. Simple fact and I stated it without passing judgement on those sellers who use it. I think we should all be able to do our business in whatever way is best for us.
I see loooong diatribes against marketing tactics that have nothing specifically to do with Andale (the topic if you don't remember). You speak of me painting with a wide brush, but you seem to have no problem with heavily lacing any comments about Andale with the clear implication that they are selling Customer information, although you admit you have not one wit of proof.
As for the question about adding language to my TOS about selling information, I didn't repond becuase it was a silly question. I'm not in the business of selling information and neither is Andale to the best of anyone's knowledge here.
Now feel free to reply with the standard refrain oft heard on these boards that I work for Andale. That would probably make 3 or 4 companies I've been accused of collecting a paycheck from (oh where does all the money go!).
It's too bad that the AW boards have degenerated into an electronic version of an anger management squeeze toy. There used to be some pertinent information to be had here, now its just one JIHAD after another.
posted on December 10, 2000 07:48:06 AM
Bemused ...
Without knowing how a company's databases are secured from INSIDE scavengers as well as outside scavengers, I am reluctant to give most of them anything but a phony name and/or a thoroughly traceable email address.
One MAJOR online card processor had an employee scavenge several thousands of email addresses from their billing database and sell them to marketers of similar merchandise, who promptly spammed the stolen addresses with dozens of emails. The site who had a legitimate business dealing with the owners of the stolen addresses almost lost their internet connectivity AND their reputations because of it ... it looked like they had violated their own stated privacy policies and sold out their customers.
FYI ... valid email addresses of persons known to buy online are worth $150-500 oe more per thousand. And all it takes is one dataprocessing clerk with a floppy diskette to steal hundreds of thousands of them.
Thanks for illustrating my point so well. What does this have to do with Andale (the topic) specifically. The scenario you laid out concerning a rogue employee could happen anywhere: AW, eBay, PayPal, Yahoo!, ANYWHERE.
The best way to combat all these doomsday scenarios is to unplug that box you're looking at right now. I'm in business not the witness relocation program, I don't want to deal with buyers (or sellers) who feel the need to feed me phoney info. Most legitimate business transactions just don't happen that way in real life. Did it ever occur to you that maybe Andale just retains this info so that the seller can mail the buyers package and contact them in case of a problem later on?
Contrary to what you may believe you're not schooling me on these issues, I'm well aware of them already. If I or most other Andale sellers believed customer info was being sold their boards would be all ablaze about the issue, its not exactly a pep rally over there either.
What bothers me is all the sweeping indictments of Andale(topic) sellers: don't care about customer privacy, can't be bothered to service customers, checkout system never works. My replies: prove it, 900+ sales w/no negs, never had a complaint.
Bad sellers don't need Andale to be bad sellers, but it can make a good seller (like me) a better more profitable one.
posted on December 10, 2000 10:32:38 AM
Make of it what you will...
Every one of the buyers who have posted to this thread either refuses to bid or is ambivalent about bidding on auctions using an online service to manage the auction, while the majority (although not all) the sellers like the online services.
posted on December 10, 2000 11:23:45 AM
Well said again, bemused. I am a buyer and a seller who has posted earlier...I have had hundreds of satisfied customers, many of them repeat customers since I started using Andale, Paypal and Billpoint. I get an email from almost everyone that I sell to, asking me questions, thanking me for my promptness, whatever..... The "canned" emails from Andale have my return email on them, so the customers can just hit reply on them to get directly back to me, which most do. The very few posters on here do not represent the vast numbers of satisfied customers who deal with sellers who use automated systems to sell. Or perhaps we should demand a recount?
posted on December 10, 2000 12:19:52 PM
I too do not bid on Andale auctions. My reasons may be a little different than those mentioned here.
With Andale the buyer has to do the work. If I win an auction I don't want to have to go to a page and enter all of my information and any of the other stuff Andale sellers require. I have won an auction. I haven't agreed to do the sellers record keeping for them too. The only people I ever hear tout Andale are sellers saying how much time it saves them.
When I win an auction I want to get a confirmation email from the seller, reply to it, either send payment electronically or by mail and receive the item. Period.
I should note too that I sell on eBay. I wouldn't think of asking a buyer to do my record keeping for me, or have them think that their information is being harvested. I want to make it is easy as possible for a buyer to complete the transaction. There is too much competition on eBay. I also don't want to alienate buyers any more than they are with some of the threatening TOS and high shipping charges I see on auctions. To me Andale is just one more turn off for a buyer, me included.
posted on December 10, 2000 12:57:51 PM
But you still have to send all this informtion to the seller, name, address, etc. What difference does it make if you go to a web page to do it, or you send an email? One thing that posters haven't mentioned here, is that Andale gives you the ability to give feedback AUTOMATICALLY!! When I ship, I Andale automatically sends an email to the buyer, letting them know it's on the way (which I would think they would WANT to know), and I have set it up so they get their positive feedback as well, without me having to post it manually. I have seen many posts on Auction Watch where people are complaining they don't get their feedback when they pay or sell. Well with Andale, they can get that feedback each and every time guaranteed! That is one plus that no buyer would refuse.
