posted on January 29, 2001 02:38:14 PMAnd I fail to see why this is of ANY concern, much less the numerous posts that have resulted.
It is of concern to me because you are attempting to exclude people from the cooperative. All I want to know is EXACTLY who is going to be excluded.
I don't want to put a lot of effort in to this, only to find out that I have been voted out because I have employees, because I am successful, because someone didn't like the way I looked at them -- whatever.
I think this is a very serious issue, and I think that the cooperative either needs to state upfront that no one will be excluded, or there needs to be a list laid out immediately of who can not participate. For example, will adult sellers be allowed? How about Nazi memoribillia? If this is not specified up front, I think it's a recipe for some serious discontent, lawsuits, and all kinds of problems.
posted on January 29, 2001 02:39:30 PM
Here is an excellent article, where it shows that MICROBUSINESS will win, as OOOOOONLY microbusiness can be succe$$ful on the Net.
posted on January 29, 2001 03:00:46 PMI have NO interest in the formation of a supposed cooperative which is simply another venue for the big megalisters
OK, what about the biggest megalister of them all -- OneCentCDS -- eBay's largest volume dealer.
You clearly said you don't want this to be a venue for "megalisters", so they would be excluded, right?
Well, probably not because they clearly fit your definition of a microbusiness.
So what I want to know is exactly what are the criteria that you are proposing for excluding people?
posted on January 29, 2001 03:12:49 PM
I think that requiring $100 up front will shut the door on folks who may have invaluable knowledge and input but are unable to come up with the cash.
posted on January 29, 2001 03:15:46 PM
I am all for the formation of a co-op. It's a wonderful idea that could be beneficial to all of us.
I do think you would be wise to hire an attorney before going any further. An expense, I know. But it could save a lot of expense later on. Get him to help you from the beginning-I mean right now!
I also think you need to be a little more specific in what you are saying. People have different ideas about what you might mean by big business. If an antique or collectibles dealer has enough inventory to list 1000 a month, more power to them-the more listings, the more appeal the site has. On the other hand, a dealer who lists 1000 auctions for eyeshadow or CD burners is not in the auction business and doesn't need to be on the site. Ebay is popular because it's a place to find the unusual. That's what it will take for a co-op to succeed. No one wants to dig through 500 listings for airplane tickets to find one piece of collectible airline memorabilia. Does that make sense??? (I'm on cold medicine right now, so the brain is a little muddier than ususal! )
To repeat, I would strongly support and work for the success of a co-op. But don't even start without careful planning, or it is doomed to failue. YOU contact half a dozen people who are willing to work at this, put a plan in WRITING, and then submit it to this forum..and count me in!
posted on January 29, 2001 03:19:29 PM
I will support this as much as I can. I will not be of any use on a technical level, as things develop I'll see if there's something I can do.
My financial situation being what it is $100 ($150 CDN) is a bit steep but we'll see.
I really hope this works.
On the topic of excluding sellers- why exclude anyone? In the begining you could always limit the # of listings (this will be important initially because of limited system resources.)
I brought a pile of bidders to Yahoo and they'd follow me to the co-op (they're a strangely loyal bunch.)
NOT Vorlon4 on Ebay
This is too early to ask this but I'll throw it out anyway- will sellers of adult material be welcome???
posted on January 29, 2001 03:21:20 PM
Gee, vorlon4, i dunno! That's the kinda thing i'd presume might be discussed about ALL interested parties, some time in April.
posted on January 29, 2001 03:23:49 PM
How about this for a criteria...
No business which has stock which is publicly traded, or is owned in part or in whole by a company which has stock that is publicly traded is allowed.
Once, during a conversation about banner ads on ebay, one of ebay's early employees told me they used to get calls from large companies who wanted to sell onsite. Their reply was to give them the URL's for the seller registration page and the listing page and they were told they are welcomed to register and list... Most of them were taken aback and didn't bother to register or list... they wanted 'special treatment', which, of course, they were willing to pay for... problem was, that wasn't for sale. Then. Pre-Meg. Pre-IPO.
Just think how it would be if it were STILL that way on ebay! It COULD be that way somewhere else...
toyranch: I think that's a greaT definition; however, realistically speaking, as there are over 20+ million registered userids, I imagine that MANY of them do NOT share my own odious disdain for the term, IPO.
posted on January 29, 2001 03:42:43 PM
We share that disdain...
But it's a fair line of delineation, I believe... and really, what it keeps OUT is only those who would prove to be difficult and disruptive in the extreme. At least those who have a 'mandate' to be difficult and disruptive, rather than a mere propensity . Otherwise, BOTH of US would be left out
posted on January 29, 2001 04:11:33 PM
My turn to play Devil's advocate. What if all those big money companies organized together and built their own site??
Ya ya, I know, we're all laughing while we say EBAY! But the fact is that the bidders will go where they feel they will get the best overall deal. (no I'm not even going to try and define that here)
If a co-op has bylaws, whatever they are. Then all members have to abide by them. And it's a lot easier to change things in an organization like that than a company like ebay, Yahoo, or Amazon.
One member, one vote, non-profit and let's plow all those fees into the best site money can buy.
I think this is a formula for success for all of us.
posted on January 29, 2001 05:01:36 PM
Yes, toyranch, closely after the launch of that travesty called amazon auctions, I noted that Fairmarket decided that they had the wherewillall to crush eBay.
...y~a~w~n...
If other people wanna form a co-op with the idea of similarly crushing, they are free to pursue such an unrealistic goal.
WE live in the FREE World, and can pursue all manner of dreams and ideologies.
However, I will not personally encourage ANY of the liddle widdle itsy bitsy teensie weensie sellers who are are either Microbusinesses, or Sole Proprietors or Individualist~Shrill~Olde-Biddees to put their heart & dreams into same, MUCH LESS their blood, sweat & tear equity, and NEVER any money -- until and unless, AFTER the creation & formation & successful functioning of same, that it is to them, a very werrie wise business decision.
eBay is unstoppable. I do not think the goal of providing competition to eBay is realistic.
I do believe that the Individual has a RESPONSIBILITY to DE-disempower him/her-self, if you will.
Hi Susan. Currently, I am trying to go over in my mind all the things that I'd like to point out to Tim Berners-Lee, in a snail mail letter. I am positive, from simply flipping through the pages of his recent book, that the inventor of the WorldWideWeb views the current status of ecommerce *maybe* even more abominable than me.
I am also wanting to examine in DEPTH the eff.org - the Electronic Frontier Foundation, and determine how I wish to approach them about the dilemma facing INDIVIDUALS who sell online.
I think that among the total universe of Netizens, there are many many many many many brilliant experts and geniuses and socially concerned souls who might be interested in an examination of the Plight of the Digital Peon.
posted on January 29, 2001 05:17:38 PM
I'm probably about the smallest,most "micro" seller who has responded thus far. I am interested...very interested...in this concept, because the fees (combined with the recent increase in postage rates) are wreaking havoc with the old bottom line. I'm doing my best to keep my prices down to attract customers, but it's getting tougher every day.
I sell one-of-a-kind items...collectibles (mostly antique silver and crystal) and plus-size clothing. I have no desire to be a web retailer on the same scale as most of the power sellers. But I have to say that this "teensie-weensie iddle-liddle" stuff is giving me a stomach-ache. Would it be possible to discuss small sellers and just call them "microbusinesses" or some such thing?
I'd really like to know more and learn more. I understand there is a discussion board that Twinsoft (is that the right person?) is running, on this very topic. I guess it's not okay to post the URL, but could somebody email it to me? [email protected]. Thanks.
posted on January 29, 2001 05:45:31 PM
radh - Surely you are aware there is a great gap filled with many steps between an individual and a "megalistermultinationalconglomerateKorporations" Are you really wanting to exclude anyone successfull enough to hire an employee? Are you opposed to family owned businesses?
Have you ever seen a truck going down the street that said Jones Brothers or Thompson and Sons on the side?
As Toyranch pointed out if the big boys have to play by the same rules with one vote and no special treatment they will go play else where even without being excluded.
In an enterprise that is going to require a lot of compromise and accommodation you could help it along by not scaring off people early with big shouting capitalized words and repeated posts that are like shouting someone down in a meeting. Lighten up.
posted on January 29, 2001 05:46:59 PM
Okay, ToyRanch. Welcome aboard. You've got an equal say in how things play out, so please share your ideas. I know you've got the ear of eBay, and a lot of little sellers under your wing. I'm sure we'll need your skills as a liason.
Amalgamated, stop making a scene. Let's all drop our personas. I can tell you I expect a minimum of gamesmanship from co-op members and especially planners. Grr!
I think this is moving WAY TOO fast! People are offering to send money, without a clear understanding of the goal. That is a recipe for disaster. If we flub the forming of a planning committee, it can add lots of extra time and expense both before and after the launch. Poor planning just gets harder to fix.
Radh, we have to consider our customers. Who are they? What can we offer them that will serve them? A big chunk of new online sellers are "click and mortar" businesses, new small storefronts trying to move onto the Web. These people will come to us looking for help setting up their new e-businesses. We must be prepared to accomodate them. We can't shut them out because IRL they own a store.
Let's focus on the planning committee. I think we need to invite and handpick our planning committee members. They may need some convincing. We can't have a planning committee composed entirely of cheerleaders, we need some players in there too. I don't think any of the contacts or discussion should take place at AW, this is nobody's business but ours. I have permission from the moderators to invite folks to email me for the link to the other board.
posted on January 29, 2001 05:52:01 PM
I don't know, I kinda *like* the idea of the "megalistermultinationalconglomerateKorporations" answering to US for a change!
[ edited by fountainhouse on Jan 29, 2001 05:53 PM ]
posted on January 29, 2001 06:07:43 PM
toyranch: I want MORE people involved in this, people who are NOT part of the OAI, but who are Net LITERATE to the max, as they comprise the Integentsia who created same. The Internet was never meant to be a tool of marketers to hook, line and sinker digital peons.
There is a fetid stench associated with what is happening to individuals, and you see, this needs to be acknowledged and discussed and REAL remedies found.
Can you begin to imagine how GRIM things are gonna be by next year this time, if we do not collectively take back our power -- in some AUTHENTIC genuine manner which truly makes a difference. BIG firms everywhere are announcing tens of 1000s of layoffs, and this will impact microbusinesses, who will find more competition and lower prices or lower sales.
posted on January 29, 2001 06:19:55 PM
radh - Yup they just laid off twenty some thousand Chrysler employees where I live and there are not going to be any bonus checks this year. The bonus checks are usually big enough to buy cars and boats.
In a few months there is going to be a lot less disposable income floating around and
it is going to impact the recreational/hobby kind of buying first. It could get pretty tough to sell and you are right the big companies will be very good at figuring how to get their cut. The cost of natural gas is supposed to go up 60% in April here in MI and I know people will pay their gas bill before they buy a widget off me online.
posted on January 29, 2001 06:32:48 PM
Well radh I was not trying to put words in your mouth. That is what I thought you were saying. You keep saying individual - that means one person. So a partnership or a person who has hired help, or a family with 2 or 4 or 6 people that all have an interest in the business are not INDIVIDUALS.
If that is not what you meant well fine explain that instead of getting in a huff and storming off. I am sure others thought you meant that very literally as you were VERY emphatic about it with capital shouts like that.
Amalgamated certainally thought you were saying he was unwelcome in the coop because he is big enough to have employees.
If you would also READ my post you would see that I was ASKING if that wass what you were trying to say. See the question marks????
Here it is again -not a statement a question.
Are you really wanting to exclude anyone
successfull enough to hire an employee? Are you opposed to family owned businesses?
If that is not what you mean by individual clarify and we will listen.
[ edited by gravid on Jan 29, 2001 06:34 PM ]
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.
Email me soon. And let's continue this on twinsofts message board or the other thread here on AW.
)
. Otherwise, BOTH of US would be left out 