posted on February 12, 2001 10:35:06 AMIf you create a co-op that gets actively involved with sellers and buyers by policing listings, adjudicating complaints, punishing deadbeats and non complying sellers, handing out penalties, then you will certainly see folks leaving as the decision goes against them
Also, if you are actively involved, you may be legally liable. You will definately need some good attorneys early on, and that, obviously, will be quite expensive.
posted on February 12, 2001 10:38:18 AM
OK, I am a small seller. I've been reading these posts more or less since the beginning. There's tons of information, good opinions and advice.
Jamie; when this website is finished will this be the place where it could all be brought together in some organized fashion.
I agree we need a mission statement, if for no other reason to get it out of the way and it should be one of the simplest things to do.
From there although a lot of you won't agree I think we need to know how much this will cost, and where the money will come from. I really think we'll need a small business loan or grant to help get started. We don't want to look like amateurs from the get go.
Then we need to know how many people are even interested. How many names to you have?
That way when you present it to the group we should have some type of estimate of how much it'll take to join per member.
As for the cart and the horse. I don't really care which one comes first but a lot of the things discussed would make a difference in whether I wanted to commit my money or not. I suspect there are a lot of people out there with a wait and see stance waiting to get clear information of what this is going to be like in our day to day auction lives.
Perhaps when the site is up, all the information that has been gathered can be posted according to subject, and can be hammered out one at a time.
posted on February 12, 2001 10:51:49 AM
I already have a domain and and my business partner and I are buying a server.
Buying server with a co-location.
Co-location means it is our equipment and they house our server and maintain it.
Dedicated server contracts are BS. If any of you are in the business of services you will know that they are not in fact dedicated to your business..........dedicated servers are actually shared equipment. MAay they are low end servers running on pentium II 500mhz processors lol......some even run on celeron processors.
A lot of these newer sites started out with hosting accounts. I think pootah did and how many times were they down for upgrades and server moves?.......if they had their own server to begin with then there would have been no need to move data or upgrade so early in the game.....That down time had threads all over AW thinking they had already gone out of business.
I am looking at an opening date of April 1st. Starting out the right way.
I have also been talking to the add department for USA Today and have already priced out a half page add to be published once the site is on full swing.
I have 2 engineers working on the technicalities of the site and it will feature a collection of what I wanted as a seller and what have been the more innovative functions of auction sites in general.
posted on February 12, 2001 10:54:45 AM
Nobody is looking for a pat on the bottom.
The point was if you don't like any part of what was presented, fix it.
Nobody is trying to tell anyone what to say, all I am asking that what is printed be related to the thread.
We in another post printed a mission statement. I'm paraphrasing...
The mission of this co-op is to create a stable platform for online sellers to auction their items that would be of a non-profit nature, non-exclusive, non-saleable, one member one vote.
Now how we get there is the fun part. The work sheet is simply a collection of ideas to be discussed and improved on. If you find fault with a component that's super. Thanks. Now how about improving it. Let's get positive!!
Just my opinion but I think most of you are missing the point of this thread. While all good thoughts, ideas, and questions they do not address the thread issue. A platform has been printed for discussion. If you like any of it that's great. If you don't that's great too. How would you change or improve it?
With all due respect, I think you are missing the point of many of the replies here.
The 'platform' is invalid because it has no basis.
The creation of this 'platform' is out of synch with established standard process for creating a co-op.
This isn't a 'platform' at all. It's part of a business plan, created out of thin air, and with no facts or figures to support it.
You are pushing ahead to create a series of committees to address different areas. Again, this is contrary to appropriate process for creation of a co-op as it is defined by those who've done it before.
Jamie, you say you're not the 'leader' and yet you are doing things out of sequence and pushing them ahead. You are ignoring those who state this plainly. Saying you are not leading things while demonstrating the complete opposite in your actions simply doesn't wash.
The posts for this are spread over several boards. It's confusing. You say AW has rules limiting the ability to discuss this, yet the only rules that limit the discussion here are rules against personal attacks and rules against promoting other boards.
I AM interested in working on a co-op auction site. I have a lot of ideas, but really, with ebay and every other auction site reading this thread, I don't care to share them in public at this time. If it WERE time to bring these things up, sure, I'd pipe up with them, but really, it is NOT time for that at all, IMO.
Here's where we are supposed to be:
-----------------------------------------------------------
2. Hold an exploratory meeting of interested persons. Vote whether to continue. If affirmative, select a steering committee.
3. Conduct a survey to determine cooperative feasibility.
-----------------------------------------------------------
With all due respect, and clear recognition that you are putting in a whole helluva lot of work to try to establish something that the vast majority of sellers probably want to see work-
The below is NOT a mission statement, despite the presence of the word "mission" in it.
"The mission of this co-op is to create a stable platform for online sellers to auction their items that would be of a non-profit nature, non-exclusive, non-saleable, one member one vote. "
Every word after the word "items" appropriately belongs in a business plan. Sellers either don't know or don't care about the non-profit, non-saleable, part, and one-man one-vote doesn't explain who those "one men" will be, sellers? buyers? both? neither? Again, a mission statement addressing the conceptual nature of this thing is needed.
posted on February 12, 2001 11:34:38 AM
Bobby/Toyranch:
"With all due respect, I think you are missing the point of many of the replies here."
Bobby I'm well aware of the points and what's going on here.
"The 'platform' is invalid because it has no basis."
Sorry, but that's your opinion. We didn't ask for anyone to agree with the platform. It's simply a collection of elements to be discussed and improved upon as was repeatedly and clearly stated.
"The creation of this 'platform' is out of synch with established standard process for creating a co-op. "
Again, I would have to say that it's your opinion and of course you're entitled to that.
"This isn't a 'platform' at all. It's part of a business plan, created out of thin air, and with no facts or figures to support it. "
Bobby, I have personally sent you repeated emails asking you to be a part of the work that's already begun.
You have not replied and frankly there are too many people already working on this to wait.
All the numbers here were based on real budgeted estimates of several cost models.
"You are pushing ahead to create a series of committees to address different areas. Again, this is contrary to appropriate process for creation of a co-op as it is defined by those who've done it before."
We are following the co-op guidelines as best fits this scenario. Again, you have been invited to participate in these groups as most others are. If you choose not to you can't blame us for continuing can you??
"I AM interested in working on a co-op auction site. I have a lot of ideas, but really, with ebay and every other auction site reading this thread, I don't care to share them in public at this time."
Bobby, MAM has been around for awhile. Others have talked about a co-op for months. The fact is that a small group of us are actually "Doing" something to try and bring this forward at this time.
If you have ideas please post them here on AW or on any message board or email them to me. I'd love to see them.
Look, we knew that when we posted this platform there'd be the usual AW trashing. That's why I have a stack of emails from folks who simply refused to post.
I'll take some slings and arrows if it helps bring a few of us together or advances the co-op. It's worth some heckling for an idea or two!
I've already recieved a few great phone calls and offers of support, one from a group of power sellers.
"If it WERE time to bring these things up, sure, I'd pipe up with them, but really, it is NOT time for that at all, IMO."
Well, when would be the right time??? After the big 3 react to our frustrations? How many more price hikes and changes to the system should take place? How many folks aren't listing even anymore because of ebay's insensitivities to small sellers??
-----------------------------------------------------------
2. Hold an exploratory meeting of interested persons. Vote whether to continue. If affirmative, select a steering committee.
Believe it or not this has happened a few times. Each time the group gets bigger. We are now canvassing for a group to come to gether to do this on a larger scale.
3. Conduct a survey to determine cooperative feasibility.
-----------------------------------------------------------
Done this too.
I don't want to get into a pissing match with anyone. I simply want to make this happen and want to work with others who want to make this happen and aren't afraid to do some work.
Maybe the co-op won't get off of the ground? Maybe it won't be as large as we like to start? Maybe there'll be more than one. I'm not sure of the answers anymore than I'm sure that ebay will be here in six months from now.
I again invite all who want to build this to join and help.
You've had meetings, selected a steering committee, and done a feasibility survey? First I've heard of any of this, and I've read the threads on most of the boards. Where did you announce the date/time of the meetings? Who is on the steering committee?
This whole thing is making me uncomfortable-- it's hard to put my finger on it, though. I think part of it is the fact that the early discussions keep getting steered to the need for $$, and lots of it, soon. Makes me very cautious......
In my view, undertakings like this can only be successful if there are a number of people who are passionate about the concept. People whose passion is contagious, and people who are willing to work to make it happen. And most or all that gets done in the early stages is done via sweat equity, not by collecting $$ from hundreds of people for vague purposes.
Sweat equity. If people believe in the concept, if it is well defined through discussion, people will volunteer their time and effort to help make it happen.
[ edited by magazine_guy on Feb 12, 2001 11:51 AM ]
posted on February 12, 2001 11:51:42 AM
Well one thing has become clear to me at this point in time is we are in need of a Mission Statement and no one seems to be able to agree on what it should be. By the way what the heck is a MISSION STATEMENT. Through all this gobbelly gook I don't have a clue.
And if your wondering why your not getting more input from more outsiders, its because everytime someome types out a whole page of leagalizes, it makes people turn away scratching their heads in confusion.
You all should go to your perspective corners and bang out what YOU think a mission statement should be.
Bring it back here or SOMEWHERE and let all of us supporters get a gander at just exactly what is on your minds.
You may be closer then you think of trying to say the same thing.
Then we can take the best from each and MAKE ONE "MISSION STATEMENT"
Now, if your unwilling to do this then I see NO hope of any of you working TOGETHER to form a coop.
*sigh* packer
edited to add another name.
[ edited by packer on Feb 12, 2001 11:53 AM ]
posted on February 12, 2001 12:18:22 PM
OK Packer~
Here ya go...
Mission Statement:
We help people trade practically anything on earth. We believe that people are basically good. We believe that each of our customers, whether a buyer or a seller, is an individual who deserves to be treated with respect.
We will enhance the online trading experiences of all - collectors, hobbyists, dealers, small business, unique item seekers, bargain hunters, opportunistic sellers, and browsers. The growth of the co-op community comes from meeting and exceeding the expectations these special people.
posted on February 12, 2001 12:20:55 PM
It appears we have hit a bump in the road. What we need is a steering committee. I have said many times that we need experts on the committee, not just well-wishers. I believe that over the course of a short time, enough qualified and experienced volunteers will become available. I know that I do not have the expertise or experience to serve in a planning capacity. No offense to Jamie, and recognizing his hard work and enthusiasm, but I do not believe he is qualified either.
This is not the time to rush ahead with haphazard plans. Mistakes made in the early planning stages will cause unnecessary delays and expenses. Mistakes made now could cripple our efforts. If we wind up with a co-op that charges higher fees than eBay, we will have failed. Moreover, we will be worse off than having no co-op at all.
The steering committee (or planning committee) is crucial to the success of the co-op. Take a look at the NCBA’s Co-op Primer and you will see that membership drives and funding come way down the road. Let’s do this right, get qualified volunteers, then draw up a business plan and approach the NCBA and SBA. There are tremendous resources available, if only we can exercise a minimum of care at the start.
There is certainly room for everyone to participate. The steering committee reports back to “interested persons” (the auction sellers community at large, or us) for approval of their plans. Suggestions and changes will be hammered out by everyone. No one wants or expects to see final plans drawn up in some back room. We can all help by continuing discussions of various policies. Designing a co-op isn’t enough. We must make a co-op that meets the needs of eBay sellers; and for that, everyone’s help will be needed.
I agree that a central location for discussion of co-op policy is important. Heck, we are completely fractured and we don’t even have a mission statement yet. People are still talking about for-profit sellers associations and buyer/seller co-ops. I don’t want to stifle discussion, but I would personally like to see discussion continue re: a not-for-profit sellers co-op. That is what we need. Buyers have no place as members in a sellers co-op, though we will certainly have to consider buyers’ needs.
To be fair to everyone, and to get this discussion off the privately-owned AuctionWatch forum, I would suggest that ToyRanch volunteer to create a co-op related forum at his Million Auction March. (Alternately, Magazine_Guy’s OTWA site would be a good, non-biased location, but I don’t believe Magazine_Guy will have time to participate fully as a planner.) I also expect discussion to continue in a limited fashion at AW, though I am not comfortable with repeated spamming of AW boards as part of a membership drive.
Jamie, you should listen to what people are saying. The very idea of a democratic co-op requires you to heed the majority. One of the main reasons for the fracturing of our support is your dogged insistance on rushing ahead and doing things your own way. “Sorry, that’s your opinion” just doesn’t cut it. You need to stop making this a personal issue and stop attacking anyone who disagrees with you.
The mission statement is unchanged. Everything around it has changed considerably, basically making the Mission Statement itself null, or at least dulled.
Still, I offer it as proof of both good intentions, and how they can go awry... as well as being a well done mission statement.
I have some specific ideas I know would work. They haven't been tried anywhere before. Right now is not a good time to put them out there. I think we need to wait until it's MUCH closer to realization first. As I said in an earlier post, ebay is watching these threads, and so are other auction sites. Best not to tip your hand quite yet.
A mission statement would include stuff like I posted before-
One of the purposes of this Coop would be to provide a fee/pricing structure to be agreed on by the entire Membership that would be fair, reasonable, and competitive, yet substantial enough to provide funds for the continuing survival of the Coop. This fee structure would of course (again) be decided by the consensus of the Membership...
This would be entirely appropraite to a mission statement as distinguished from a business plan, and would steer clear of anything that would be appropriately discussed as part of that businees plan. You don't micromanage mission statements. They are used to develop a unifying basis for everything that may come after. The minute you start talking nuts-and-bolts specifics like specific fees, etc., you invite DISunification before anything ever even gets off the ground.
posted on February 12, 2001 01:05:01 PM
Mission Statement:
The goal of the Auction Co-op is to provide Buyers and Sellers an Auction site and community that is driven by the needs of the users. It is the intention of the Co-op to divide the decision making power equally between these users to ensure the interests of the community are protected.
All revenue generated by the co-op will be reinvested into the co-op in such a way that will best benefit the membership. This will include but not be limited to upgrades in equipment, additional support services, and advertising.
The Auction Co-op shall be self-supporting and will not accept outside advertisers or partnerships that would compete directly with any of its members.
It is understood by all members that the co-op will operate in a Democratic manner in which each member shall be entitled to an equal vote in any matter that effects the future and direction of the co-op.
The long range goals of the co-op include negotiating discount business services for their members, such as Group Medical Insurance.
............
Edited to add:
As for Fee Structure, Catagories, Allowable Items, Financial Structure, and such ...
posted on February 12, 2001 01:07:47 PM
Have at it folks. I can see that my comments are only being interpreted as negative and therefore unwanted.
I was interested in this co-op because it held out the promise of certain features that I, as a buyer, would like to see. I made my interests very explicit in another thread initiated by Canvid and I've given my honest opinion on various proposals that I've seen presented here on AW. Some observations on my own personal experiences with organizations, businesses and self governing groups.
Canvid, please don't take this personally as it is not meant to be a personal criticism. Indeed, I will retract it from this post if you object to what I have to say.
Forming a co-op or any other organization that people are going to committ time or money to is a heavy responsibility. It is not the type of thing to appraoch with an attitude that I see you exhibiting, namely to pooh pooh the very serious concerns and questions being brought to the discussion as so much negative interference that should or could somehow be offered as one's own plan to make it better.
It borders on the totally naive to think that all that is necessary is to get a bunch of people to commit X dollars to a vague idea with no business plan. Democracies do not come up with business plans. It simply does not happen. Democracies elect leaders who come up with business plans.
You either take control of this idea and accept the responsibilities that entails or you continue to duck the necessary decision making necessary to move off square one with this idea.
So form your committees and make your plans or continue to just talk about what could be if only people could get organized.
It wouldn't be the whole thing, and could be shortened, but it very well could be a part of one... What MrJim posted is entirely more appropriate, since mission statements should be a lot broader than the one I just wrote as an example, and MrJim's is that...
posted on February 12, 2001 01:22:18 PM
OK Packer~
Here's my stab at it...
Mission Statement:
Our mission is to create and maintain a person-to-person global trading marketplace which provides a level playing field for all who use it. We are dedicated to promoting a safe and vibrant venue for the economic and social enrichment of our unique community of individual sellers, small businesses, collectors, and all who enjoy the pleasure of people trading with people.
posted on February 12, 2001 01:22:32 PM
YES!
MrJim,
You did an excellent job. Even I can understand and get behind that. Very well said.
tentwentytwo,
Unless you want to revise yours a little I will copy what you have and mark you as responded.
Thank you...I think we can start to get somewhere now.
coda your on my list,
Please make your mission statement.
Of the ones that will commit to making a statement I feel then there should be a show of hands as to who is willing and then who WE AS A GROUP to lead us on.
packer
edited to make the last sentence make more sense, I'm still not sure it does.
[ edited by packer on Feb 12, 2001 01:32 PM ]
posted on February 12, 2001 01:32:42 PM
Not such a bad idea to throw it all into the blender, and see what we can come up with...
I'd shorten mine to-
And to provide a fee/pricing structure for our auctions site that would be fair, reasonable, and competitive, yet substantial enough to provide funds for the continuing survival of the Coop.
-and then stick it somewhere in the middle of a merged MrJim's/Toyranch's...
posted on February 12, 2001 01:39:15 PM
tentwentytwo,
Good, thats just what I'm talking about.
Take the best of each and make ONE REALLY GOOD ONE. Groom all of them down to one.
I'll copy both your statements as I think they both add value.
I hope the rest respond...for those that do we will know that their commitment is genuine.
posted on February 12, 2001 01:41:21 PM
Packer, I'm no good at these things but I think the words "cooperative," "education" and "self-determination" should be in there.
Also, RubyLane, Abacaxi, Shaz and many others have all provided valuable input.
As I said before, I think we should get more volunteers before proceeding to the planning stages. I don't think a show of hands at this time is necessary. Let's get a central discussion forum established, get the talks back on track, and find out what everyone's special talents are.
There's still talk of buyer/seller and other types of arrangements. I don't see the advantage of buyers as co-op members. Sellers will naturally be concerned with the needs of their customers. Buyers aren't impacted by the fee changes at eBay, Yahoo, Paypal, etc. I'd be grateful if someone could explain to me why buyers should be participating in the co-op's decisions. Don't get me wrong, I LOVE buyers. But unless buyers are receiving actual services from the co-op (not the co-op sellers), then I just don't see how they fit into the equation.
(edited to add...)
I think buyers' needs could adequately be addressed by periodic surveys, and also a Board Of Buyers would not be inappropriate.)
"All the numbers here were based on real budgeted estimates of several cost models."
I commented on what I saw as the lack of feasibility of your numbers. Where are your several cost models to back up your numbers? And why do you not address my objections to your numbers?
Wouldn't it make sense to present those cost models that you used to produce those numbers for everyone to have a look at? If you seek people's co-operation and you insist that it will be the will of the membership that provides the direction then you really ought to give the prospective members all of the information you have.
And please, don't tell me I can come over to the other board for this information. If you choose to promote the co-op here on AW then respond here on AW to questions put to you.
For those who are concerned about a statement of purpose. A statement of purpose is explicit in the organizational papers of any corporation. And it usually is about as bland and innocuous as you could possibly imagine. Something along the lines of:
"We intend to offer services and products in the _______________ field and any other fields or endeavors deemed suitable by the corporation."
The real guts of a startup is always in the business plan. And the success of a startup is always measured against the projections in the business plan.
I personally am not going to join a co-op that doesn't satisfy my needs and desires as a buyer or as a seller (possibly my needs as either).
I've already posted elsewhere what I want as a buyer.
As a seller, I want as inexpensive a showcase for my crafts as I can find. I really don't give a fig for being able to vote on new features or rules or whatever. Just give me an affordable showcase.
Given that an affordable showcase for me as a seller is all I really want (and I suspect all most sellers really want) I believe that in order for a co-op to succeed it must attract an audience comparable to eBay's while costing me less than eBay. What does that tell you about a fee structure or membership fees for a co-op?
I've suggested here that the auction format be as simple as possible. No bells and whistles of any sort. Featured auctions? Highlighted titles? Gallery pictures? Anything at all that is optional will be perceived by most of the sellers as a means to superficially differentiate their auctions over other auctions. That perception leads to all sellers employing these features and therefore no differentiation.
Charge an optional fee for these added features? Oops! You just defeated the purpose of the co-op. Now you are taking money from sellers who are artificially competing with their co-op neighbors. Who is going to vote for that? The sellers with some bucks, obviously. And eventually you will have a co-op of tiered membership. End of co-op.
A tiered membership based on entry fees or listing and FVF fees? The membership will gravitate towards that class that gives the most benefit for the cost. Eventually, you will have a conflict between the minority classes and the majority classes. And because the majority class will have the final say in everything because of its voting power the minority classes will eventually find an alternative that better suits them.
And think about why you are dissatisfied with eBay in the first place.
Because it raised its listing fee? Why not organize a shipping co-op and attack the real increase in your overhead instead by taking your business away from the USPS?
Because eBay doesn't come down hard enough or fast enough on deadbeats? How will the co-op improve on eBay's record? Give a deadbeat user fewer second chances? How will you know that they haven't come back under another email address and userid? Credit card verification?
Because eBay suffers down time and won't extend auctions that are affected? How will the co-op ensure that their site is any more stable than eBay's. How long must the site be unavilable before auctions are extended?
Because eBay seems to give special treatment to certain users? How will the co-op membership react to a complaint against a high volume seller or buyer?
Because eBay doesn't have a concise and clear explication of the rules and procedures? How will the co-op react to complaints as sellers and buyers find workarounds to the clear and concise rules of the co-op?
Think I am a dour, pessimistic and unduly negative critic of this idea? Only of those who continue to rah rah the idea while failing to address the questions that are being asked.
posted on February 12, 2001 01:54:52 PMBut unless buyers are receiving actual services from the co-op (not the co-op sellers), then I just don't see how they fit into the equation
I think the opinions and input from buyers is both valuable and important to the long term success of the site. Many of the decisions relating to features and functions of the site itself should be based on the needs and desires of the bidders not the sellers. An example would be the question of sniping. Should auctions be automatically extended (as mentioned previously) or should the best sniper win. This is a decision for the bidders to make, not the sellers.
Bidders should also be invited to vote on any potentially controversial items, as they would be the people offended by them.
Inviting bidders to join the co-op would also give them a sense and feeling of ownership that could very well result in them visiting the site more frequently and preferring to buy from their brothers and sisters in the co-op rather than a stranger somewhere else.
And finally, if the site is going to offer support services (hosting, tutorials, etc.) for new sellers, it is very likely that these "bidders" may very well be our future sellers.
