posted on January 29, 2001 11:54:37 AM
An alternative to an co-op auction site is a co-op advertising site, broken into categories. Sellers would pay to list pages. A page could consist of links to the seller's auctions on other venues or web site. If a seller sells in more than one category, he/she could pay for similar pages in other categories.
If this concept is a success with many sellers, then it might be easier to launch a true co-op auction site at a later date. Profits from the Advertising site could even be used to help set up the co-op auction site.
Irene
[ edited by stockticker on Jan 29, 2001 11:56 AM ]
posted on January 29, 2001 12:01:26 PM
Jamie, I'm intrigued by your "states" concept. I really like it because it assures representation by all the facets of the community, i.e. not too many antique dealers or too few jewelry sellers, etc. that might skew planning/discussions.
IMO, it should be mandated in the Bylaws that the Board of Directors should be comprised of xx members, xx representing antiques/collectibles, xx autos, xx books, etc., etc.
I envision these as additional seats over and above the usual Pres., VP, Treas., Membership Chair, etc.
posted on January 29, 2001 12:06:49 PMmorningglory AKA tuition44: Thank YOU for filling in a liddle bit o' the EnIgmA I've experienced about that darling, indeed: daHRling liddle webpage.
I reaLLy like it, it appeals to whatever sensitivities within me which find *cute* appppppealling, and more important - the design and jist and the KEEP IT SIMPLE format of the webpage have a true affinity to a MORAL Imperative.
To wit: The WorldWideWeb is meant to empower the Individual, not to make him thankless prey to the stooooooopidy of vulture kapitali$ts, insipid marketers, and anyone with an MBA who happens to resonate to the same ilk.
This current ABERATION of megamultinationalconglomerateKorporations considering the masses to be a captive laboring audience to be fed memetic advertising and to PAY for it ----- this is an aberation, and it will all disappear in the Future.
posted on January 29, 2001 12:08:45 PM
Kenlee: Thank YOU for your post, sage as ever, articulate to the max, you remain one of the BEST POSTERS I've ever read throughout the entire Internet!
PleeeeeeeeZ keep those *random* stray thoughts arriving......
posted on January 29, 2001 12:13:30 PM
Stockticker, I was thinking along those lines too. We've got to leave the door open to casual sellers, not just those with their own e-stores. That means we need to offer photo hosting, email notification and other core services that small sellers require. Sellers with their own setup shouldn't have to pay for other sellers' server space. Perhaps a small fee (a few cents per photo hosted) would allow for a sliding fee according to extra services required.
If we're going to run this right, we should look at the traditional co-op model. The Co-op Home Page says one reason co-ops fail is that sellers "shill" the co-op by using it to build customer lists rather than sell actual goods. This is the same issue eBay is addressing now and we will have to face it too. For the co-op to succeed, members must contribute by putting their best goods up for sale. (Not selling cheap stuff to get customer lists.) We can't allow members to draw business away from the co-op. That's why educating sellers about the purpose of a co-op is so important.
posted on January 29, 2001 12:49:40 PM
Fountainhouse: If you want to share some more ideas email me or sign in on twinsofts message board.
Anyone who wants to be part of the planning committee should email me as I want to put a group together of 8-12 folks to get us through stage 1.
I believe there's room for everyone in the co-op. Even radh! (g) I don't believe in being exclusive. I do believe in being fair and very well organized. There's room for everyone and the bidders will demand this in the end just like they do on ebay.
posted on January 29, 2001 12:59:30 PM
There have been BILLIONS spent by techie companies EVERYWHERE to crush the mighty, the magnificent, the unstoppable uncrushable eBay.
I wouldn't dream of joining such a silly stoopid venture, and I certainly aint puttin NO MORE blood sweat & tear equity into the creation of GARGANTUAN online auction venues which showcase the merchandise of the megamultinationalconglomeratecorporations.
WHAT is your rush?
LOLOLOLOLOL - afraid there are toooo many other Netizens who may, just MAY, agree with ol' shrill radh?
posted on January 29, 2001 01:41:05 PM
radh, I really do understand what you're saying (really!). The idea of Disney et al moving in is probably repugnant to alot of sellers here.
BUT don't you see a big distinction between selling our souls to the "conglomerates" vs. standing back as an owner with a meaningful voice to see where this goes, knowing full well that, should said "conglomerates" become a problem that they could easily and forthrightly be banished by us "liddle" sellers?
You have a lot of insight to offer to this project and I hope you'll at least think about it some more.
I'm jumping threads. Let's not focus on one person for now and what we need. I'm ready to fill some positions of the initial group. I would like 8-12 folks who are willing to do this and can bring something to the table.
posted on January 29, 2001 11:26:15 PM
Copied Most of my post on radh's thread......
My thought (to be understood as just a contribution)on this is that the #1 issue before this
venture even gets off the road is to take it outside Auction Watch Chat Board where anyone
who initially becomes involved - must verify an auction item# which was sold on some auction
site within the last 2,3 months. At least, this allows some validity of the person(s) and their
feedback.
This could narrow down the initial "round table" discussion groups.
From there-- perhaps certain people will offer their individual talents etc... Couldn't people
unofficially sign on as potential members -- and consent to a minimal agreement as to
demeanor - allowing all to speak - only postslimited to a certain size, etc.
Perhaps things like the "name" of site and other important issues could be hammered out.
Would this not be a diplomatic way to grease the wheels of success?
If the pre-planning stage gets testy--- it will be doomed.
There is some confusion here -- is radh's thread a different approach than this one?? We NEED to know this.
"We've got to leave the door open to casual sellers, not just those with their own e-stores. That means we need to offer photo hosting, email notification and other core services that small sellers require."
Well, does AW offer photo-hosting, auction mangement, and other services that small sellers need? Do other sites? Why re-invent the wheel and duplicate the services? LOCATE existing resources and help the new sellers use them, don't duplicate them.
FYI EVERYBODY ... If you know of any CREDIT UNIONS, they are perhaps the largest co-ops in the USA.
posted on January 30, 2001 06:01:37 AM
posted on January 30, 2001 02:50:33 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Twinsoft -
"We've got to leave the door open to casual sellers, not just those with their own e-stores. That means we need to offer photo hosting, email notification and other core services that small sellers require."
Well, does AW offer photo-hosting, auction mangement, and other services that small sellers need? Do other sites? Why re-invent the wheel and duplicate the services? LOCATE existing resources and help the new sellers use them, don't duplicate them
Exactly. Nobody is suggesting that casual and Mom&Pop sellers be left out of any process of creating the co-op. Most of us started out small.
posted on January 30, 2001 07:01:37 AM
If there is some way that you can promote the new things side of the co-op as being cheaper
you won't have to worry about advertising - they will flood your server seeking to save a few pennies.
Perhaps a mail campaign to other co-ops who will be asked to make their members aware of the on-line trading co-op.
A lot of them must have web sites/newsletters etc.
I am not familiar with co-ops. I will read the links tonight. In other co-ops like farmers co-ops do the members get the same price as the public?
Maybe a small discount could be offered by sellers who are members to buyers who verified their idenity. Itwould be worth the decreased risk of non payment.
posted on January 30, 2001 07:49:30 AM
From what I've looked at the co-op would be cheaper, especially in the long run. I advoctate that once all the costs are in any surplus go towards lowering fees.
And the co-op would not be exclusionary in any form. It would have bylaws that we'd all have to abide by and all have a role in building.
posted on January 30, 2001 08:49:37 AM
In another messagethread is a good post where smw has kindly done some research and has pointed out that according to definitions a cooperative cannot be formed, that what the ideas discussed lead to would be a business association.
I just want to clarify that radh is only speaking for herself. If you want more info just read through this thread or email twinsoft or myself for his message board url.
I advise everyone who is interested in forming a seller-owned, seller-run cooperative that they read a post by smw in the other major messagethread, in which she pointed out that by its very definition, a cooperative is comprised of individuals who then work for the co-op - it's not comprised of businesses in the way that this idea was initially discussed. This is not smw's opinion - she was alerting us to some basic LEGAL definitions of the legal entity entitled: Cooperative.
posted on January 30, 2001 11:55:41 AM
Um, that link (which I originally posted on page 5) also states that Ben Franklin was in a co-op.
The underlying concept of a co-op lives to this day and is as applicable to internet auctions as it was when horses were the main mode of transportation.
posted on January 30, 2001 12:12:43 PM
Hopefully, your lawyers will have good news for you, in terms of co-op formation rules & regulations, and if indeed they do, that the actual venture is a success - however, as I am very supicious of anything being successful anywhere on the commercial sector of the Internet, and frankly unable to deal with any further pathos, whatsoever, from same, I am cancelling all my online accounts, email addies, isp, etc, and returning to 3-D Land, when I might access a few edu.sites and Usenet groups occasionally on public access computers at the local library.
posted on January 30, 2001 05:39:29 PM
Radh -
"I wouldn't dream of joining such a silly stoopid venture, and I certainly aint puttin NO MORE blood sweat & tear equity into the creation of GARGANTUAN online auction venues which showcase the merchandise of the megamultinationalconglomeratecorporations."
OK, we won't force you to. However, please stop denigrating the idea by calling it silly and stupid.
"I am cancelling all my online accounts, email addies, isp, etc, and returning to 3-D Land, when I might access a few edu.sites and Usenet groups occasionally on public access computers at the local library.
posted on January 30, 2001 07:26:33 PM
Just went to the COOP message board and Jamie,Canvid13 has posted a proposed outline for a coop.It looks like a lot of ideas from posts from this board were included. He needs everyone's input!So it's time to throw in your 2 cents and help hone these ideas! There have been so may good ideas posted here- can you now fit them into this proposal?Now Everyone will have some basis to work with when adding comments and suggestions!
This coop is important to our businesses!!! Please take the time to look at the post and comment-constructively.
