posted on March 7, 2001 11:14:24 AM
The buyers are the basis for eBay's value.
Glad to see that sellers are finally beginning to see what has always been true. Even from the first day.
Do you think eBay would have made it past a month of operation without buyers?
And as you bemoan the loss of the old eBay keep in mind that you are bemoaning it as sellers, not as buyers.
I've been happily collecting codebooks on eBay for three years now. If anything, there is more available to me now than there was three years ago. The same goes for tinsmithing tools.
I never browse categories. Not even three years ago when they were so much smaller. I know what I'm looking for. I know how to filter title and description word searches. If I want to browse I'll go to a place where I can see and touch the item and ask questions about it and get immediate answers.
_____________________________________________
If you can't tap the market that eBay delivers, virtually to your fingertips, or if you can't make a reasonable profit by selling on eBay then perhaps you need to figure out what you are doing wrong.
Selling in a cut-throat market? Find a market with less competition. Hot items and fad collectibles are easy to sell but not easy to make a profit selling. Do some research. The days of throwing a one line description and a blurry image of the latest McD's collectible and reaping huge bids are long gone. And good riddance!
Lacking the patience to list an item at the right time and price? You find something at the local flea market or estate sale and you've listed it before the weekend is out? Duh! Why do you think you found it to begin with? Whoever sold it to you at a good price probably didn't take the time to research the item and learn its true value either.
Selling too inefficiently? Spending hours writing the next great American novel as an eBay listing description? Spending hours in email chit-chat with buyers? Record keeping disorganized or nonexistent? Run to the post office every day you have something to mail? Run to the bank every day you have a check to deposit?
posted on March 7, 2001 11:14:37 AM
The big corps have separate contracts now- you don't see my banners on ebay's sight header, nor a mention of me on EOA emails.
The costs are less for eBay for these big corps, so naturally their fees are less. In fact they may pay a flat fee, given so much server space and no FVFs or listing per itme fees, not to mention banners and other branding and advertising.
I think that if the day ever comes that sellers need to be a gold power seller in order to list their wares on eBay, there will be another site just like eBay was 4 years ago that will be waiting for sellers like us.
I mean really, just how many people selling antiques & collectibles have minimum monthly sales of 25 K? [Gold PS requirement]
I know of one.
I think that it should be obvious that at some point eBay's fee will rise again. That's business for ya.
Will it put me out of business & force me to sell elsewhere? I guess only time will tell.
posted on March 7, 2001 11:39:42 AM
I forgot to mention earlier in the thread, but since I have gotten increasingly annoyed with the growing connection between eBay and direct marketers (and the other eBay-derived spam), I have learned to visit more and more B&M antique shops and even an occasion RL auction. Once I found that I could find as many, if not more things, off eBay that I'd been buying on eBay, I've been bidding at eBay less and less.
Maybe I should thank eBay for bringing in DoubleClick and Annuncio. Uh, no, maybe not.
These customer lists you're all talking about in this thread... I hope they're all based off the opt-in newsletters.
----
What's being done in the name of direct marketing nowadays is crazy.
The above are all just my opinions, except where I cite facts as such.
Oh, I am not dc9a320 anywhere except AW. Any others are not me.
Is eBay is changing from a world bazaar into a bizarre world?
I would only support gathering lists of customers if it was on an opt-in newsletter basis. Sellers joining a co-op would be contributing to the buyer base with their own group of opt-in buyers.
While "spamming" to a group of buyers we have dealt with may be legal, it would most certainly be unwelcome. I myself send every unsolicited piece of e-mail straight to spamcop, of which I am a paid member. I'd like to think I've contributed to making spammer's lives more difficult.
Unfortunately, that would never be deemed acceptable. Unsolicited e-mail is ALWAYS considered spam, and most folks I know (and me as well) HATE spam. The only ones we could e-mail to are opt-in buyers. Thus, we must make sure we offer the customer service that would make folks want to opt-in.
Spamming buyers would backfire because of people's disgust of spammers.
posted on March 7, 2001 01:08:18 PMReddeer...thanks for words of reason. Its refreshing to see someone who isn't screaming "the sky is falling, the sky is falling"
Code Thanks to you too. I agree with your questions....just who are these "big guys" who are pushing us "small sellers" out of the ebay bed?
Is it Sun? Is my housewife in middle America who just paid me $77 for a piece of collectible milk glass going to buy the same thing from Sun?
Is it Penneys? Will the football enthusiast who just paid me $910 for a 1928 Rose Bowl program find the same thing among Penny's ebay offerings? Somehow, that type of item doesn't seem like the kind of merchandise a "big guy" would have.
Is it Disney? While I can't offer the costumes worn by the stars of a recent Disney special as Disney can, Disney doesn't have a 1930s Mickey Mouse toy that was manufactured by a company OTHER than Disney...that type of merchandise just isn't in their inventory.
So just WHO are these big players who are going to push the little guy out?
Dottie...I don't think the average ebay seller has been sitting around with his head in the sand...they just haven't been running around with their chins tucked into their chests, arms folded over their heads, and crying loudly "the sky is falling, the sky is falling" like a small group of ebay users have for the past three years.
I think most ebay sellers have been learning to adapt...and have been adapting quite well.
I have made an observation before that we have now entered the "shake out" period. The ebay sellers who have been calling themselves a business now have to face the realities of being in the "real" business world...they will have to pay for the services they use (credit card acceptance, auction launching services, picture hosting, auction management) or they will have to learn how to do it themselves; they will have to deal with a very competative marketplace, including competitors who have deeper pockets than they do and competitors who have the advantage of scale.
I don't understand the tunnel vision that causes many here to think that ebay will be either/or (either big guys or small sellers) instead of seeing that it can be both co-existing. The little guy isn't being pushed out of the ebay bed...the bed is just getting bigger in order for more to sleep here. Ebay is becoming variety and it is that variety that will drive more and more buyers here...to the advantage of ALL sellers, big and small.
posted on March 7, 2001 01:18:07 PM
reamond wrote: "I think the best form for the co-op would be a Limited Liability partnership"
I did some checking on this, for California. LLP's are limited to certain professions:
"Limited liability partnerships may only be formed by licensed persons for the practices of public accountancy, law or architecture."
http://www.ss.ca.gov/business/llp/llp.htm
The other form I researched is a Limited Partnership (LP) which does not have the same occupational restrictions. An LP is composed of General Partners that have the same responsibilities/rights as partners in a traditional partnership, plus Limited Partners that have different rights.
So for example, our company is organized as a partnership with two partners. We could form an LP by selling part of our company to a group of Limited Partners (i.e., users of our site). The Limited Partners have specific rights and ownership based on rules established when the LP is formed. So one rule might be: "The LP cannot change fees without the consent of a majority of the limited partners."
I don't know if there are LP's setup with a huge number of limited partners as this would be. In reading the regulations, LP's appear to be designed for situations where a partnership wants to get investors to contribute money. In a LP, limited partners CANNOT be responsible for day-to-day operation of the business, or decision-making other than voting as specifically outlined in the partnership rules. If a limited partner is involved in running the business or decision-making, they lose their limited liability status and assume the liability of General Partners. For example, if we formed an LP and Ruby Lane did something illegal, the Limited Partners would not be liable.
The problem I see with using an LP to organize sellers is that there is a non-trivial amount of paperwork that must be filed with the state whenever a new partner (seller) joins the partnership. Also, there are lots of regulations about how the death of a limited partner is handled, i.e., are heirs assigned voting rights, can rights be assigned to others, other partners may have to vote on assignment of rights, etc.
In short, I think there is a good chance the administrative overhead and expense involved with maintaining a Limited Partnership with a huge number of Limited Partners would outweigh the advantages of having a vote on important policies.
We recently changed to a no-commission policy and solicited feedback on a private bulletin board from our customers for a 30-day period. No, it wasn't an official vote, but yes, we did consider their concerns and made policy changes based on that.
Another problem I do not see being easily solved is that if there is a decision to be made, for example, should we adopt policy a, b, c, d, or e, it seems unlikely that a majority (more than 50%) will vote for one of the options, unless some of the options are obviously stupid. For yes/no votes, I guess it works, but not for more sophisticated issues.
posted on March 7, 2001 01:39:19 PM
Amy- Your examples are exactly why ebay will abandon small sellers of used items. How many 1928 Rose Bowl programs did you sell this year ? How many will you sell next year - are you printing them yourself? Selling second hand collectables is a self limiting market and one that has topped out at eBay.
When I say "topped out" I don't mean for any particular seller, I mean for revenues for eBay. eBay has hit a wall of approx 6 million listings.
To meet Meg's projections, eBay must go to 9 million listings next year or raise prices.
The "big" guys are Disney, Sun, The US Postal Service, and any other huge company that eBay can get.
You say you don't compete with these big guys because they don't sell what you do? You are competing for disposable income from all buyers. Every dollar these big guys get is a dollar unavailable for the sale of your item.
The US Postal service is competing directly with sellers of books,coins,sports cards, and any other item that can be lost in the mails.
Ask the Disney collectable sellers if Disney is competing for disney collectors' dollars.
You don't see Disney, Sun, or any of the other big boys at flea markets, just as you don't see mom and pop sellers anchoring mega malls.
There is a reason you don't see these markets converging. Anywhere these big guys show up, the real estate prices go through the roof - in this case those prices are going to be listing and FV fees.
You think you can run with the big dogs? They'll eat you alive.
posted on March 7, 2001 01:42:55 PM
Well in my opinion there can be no co-existing big sellers, and small sellers it just wont work. First how many bidders want to search through thousands of retailers listings to find the item they want? The little guy will be squeezed out so fast they wont know what hit them. I agree that the mass-merchants would have contracts, and most likely pay only FVF's. Could you see a company like Penneys, walmart, etc. listing thousands and thousands of items. Why would they want chump-change, when they can have it all. If they want the projected monies look out for penneys real soon!
posted on March 7, 2001 02:02:28 PM
oxford wrote: "Unfortunately, that would never be deemed acceptable. Unsolicited e-mail is ALWAYS considered spam, and most folks I know (and me as well) HATE spam. The only ones we could e-mail to are opt-in buyers. Thus, we must make sure we offer the customer service that would make folks want to opt-in."
I cannot imagine 10,000 sellers each writing an interesting newsletter that buyers would want to stay opted-in-to month after month while sellers are organizing.
I bought a sign at the sign shop across the street a year ago. They have sent me two promotional pieces of mail about their business since then. Big deal.
There is a risk with sending past buyers a one-time note that a SPAM zealot will turn you in. There is a risk, and there is a reward. I doubt a one-time email would offend many people. Something you would all have to decide if it's worth it I guess.
posted on March 7, 2001 02:08:35 PM
Right on, Reamond & Chum.
People forget that there is a finite amount of disposable income out there. If they buy something from A, no matter how much they want B, there may just not be enough money.
We WILL get squeezed out; of that I have no doubt. I am, however, unwilling to sit around and yell that the sky is falling. I DO think it is extremely important to acknowledge what is happening, but then to start to define how to overcome this.
The small sellers will have put aside our competitiveness to cooperate to reach solutions. The ones that claim nothing will change for them can stay and sell as usual, but please do not negate others' justifiable concerns.
posted on March 7, 2001 02:13:17 PM
Wow, reamond, I find that sexual harrasment comment really abhorant. I'm truly changing my mind about you. AND I don't see how in H*ll it relates to spam.
I'm going to start a thread regarding spam; I think it will be enlightening to you.
posted on March 7, 2001 04:22:04 PM
I'm going to have to vote with reddeer, amy and codasaurus on this one. I keep reading comments like the following:
You are competing for disposable income from all buyers. Every dollar these big guys get is a dollar unavailable for the sale of your item.
and the only thing I can think to say is... well, duh! Of course, if I spend money on X, it is not available to spend on Y. I think most people are able to grasp that concept.
If you are in direct competition with one of the big guys, they'll definitely be a threat to you. However, if you are selling items that don't lend themselves to mass marketing (a 1928 Rose Bowl program, for example), I've seen no evidence presented that the presence of the big guys is going to have a serious negative impact on your business.
posted on March 7, 2001 04:55:19 PM
If you are in direct competition with one of the big guys, they'll definitely be a threat to you. However, if you are selling items that don't lend themselves to mass marketing (a 1928 Rose Bowl program, for example), I've seen no evidence presented that the presence of the big guys is going to have a serious negative impact on your business.
Well may be not selling rose bowl programs, but lets say Blockbuster makes a deal with eBay to list thousands of pre-viewed movies at a low price, then video sellers have a problem. But it will also hurt sellers of non-mass merchandise since your one listing will be lost in a flood of mass merchandise. Also bidders that may be looking for your items will get upset at the mass of pages and just leave. eBays search isnt that great to begin with.
posted on March 7, 2001 05:11:29 PMBut it will also hurt sellers of non-mass merchandise since your one listing will be lost in a flood of mass merchandise.
Again, it depends on what you sell.
The category I sell in typically has less than a thousand items at any one time, and the "New Today" and "Ending Today" sections are rarely more than three pages long- very easy to browse.
When I started on eBay, they had what... 2 million current auctions, and now, it's 5 million? I don't have any more trouble finding things today than I did 3 years ago. The bids on my items are every bit as good now as they were when I listed my first item, which leads me to believe I'm not the only one not having trouble finding things amid the "flood".
posted on March 7, 2001 05:28:51 PM
Amy: I think I agree with much of what you have to say regarding eBay and how big businesses will co-exist with smaller businesses. *smile*
The only difference is that I'm not so busy bragging about my own accomplishments or how the "shake down" isn't going to affect ME because I've adapted over the years...
I realize that there are MANY MANY MANY folks that will NOT survive the "shake down".... folks that were making good money at eBay whether YOU or eBay considers them a "real business" now or not.
I do well on eBay when I put forth a little effort. I do well, because I have the means to travel and acquire inventory of my choosing for resale. It's fun for me! However, this isn't about ME... and eBay is not income that my family is counting on to pay the bills... it's probably easier for someone like me to take a chance and change with the times. And I recognize that there are others with different circumstances... and yes... for THEM... the sky might be falling! *sigh*
(sorry, if this post comes across as a bit gruff... I don't mean to... but it's the best I can do at the moment)
posted on March 7, 2001 05:37:45 PM
I would have to disagree that it is as simple as "it depends on what you sell".
It also depends on where you sell it and who your competitors are. You also site an atypical category, which by its small nature would be irrelevant to the majority of sellers. I would be more worried about the category being discontinued than competition.
What if Ty decided to start selling beanies on eBay 4 years ago? Would it still be just a matter of "it depends on what you sell".
How would the booksellers compete if bibliofind dumped its database onto ebay- is it still just a matter of "it depends on what you sell"?
I suppose it comes down to how a small seller who wishes to remain small, stay small, when big is in ?
posted on March 7, 2001 06:31:13 PMYou also site an atypical category, which by its small nature would be irrelevant to the majority of sellers. I would be more worried about the category being discontinued than competition.
By the same token, the categories in which the majority of sellers list their items are irrelevant to me. It's all in how you're looking at it. Out of curiosity, what do you consider to be a typical category?
I guess what I'm trying to say is that a comment such as:
You say you don't compete with these big guys because they don't sell what you do? You are competing for disposable income from all buyers. Every dollar these big guys get is a dollar unavailable for the sale of your item.
is a generalization, and it does not necessarily mean the same thing or pose the same threat to everyone.
I suppose it comes down to how a small seller who wishes to remain small, stay small, when big is in ?
I don't knopw what to tell you- I guess some of us are just operating in areas where "big" is not necessarily "in".
posted on March 7, 2001 06:32:54 PM
This would be the perfect moment for the co-op to capitalize on ebay's weaknesses.
Here's a couple new ideas. Every seller should abide by the same standard shipping cost per pound. Anything that can't fit those standards shouldn't be sold there.
Every seller will have a 14 day guaranteed refund.
Listing fees: Charge every item a straight $1, refunded if sold on first try, half refunded if sold on the second try. Unlimited relists no extra cost, but you lose the initial $1 even if the item sells.
posted on March 7, 2001 07:45:52 PM
Reamond...why do you feel ebay will push out the seller of used merchandise in favor of the "big guys"?
Ebay may have topped out in the collectibles field and now want to expand into other areas, but expansion does not mean they are going to turn their back on 6 million listings. I don't think ebay or Meg is that stupid. They WANT the current 6 million AND 6 million more. And there is no reason they can't do it.
The idea that there is only a finite amount of money available to go around among the sellers has a couple of problems with it in my opinion. The argument has merit if one believes the number of buyers is static and will not increase...but if that is the case it doesn't matter if the big guys come or not because when a buyer buys from you he doesn't have the dollars to spend with me, and we are both "little guys".
But this argument is flawed because we have yet to "top out" the buying public....there are still many people who do not shop on ebay. The big guys will draw another group of buyers, buyers who will more than likely look around and decide they want that hand painted plate I'm selling for their home, or that piece of jewelry someone else is selling, or that used Chanel suit another seller is offering.
Most of these big guys will not be selling in the collectibles categories. Penny's will be selling new items, not used. Sun sells computers not old china. Disney sells new collectibles that are not available to seller on ebay.
Actually, Disney might be a good example of why I don't think the big guys are going to hurt us. I looked at the Disney site when it opened. What I saw was costumes from an upcoming TV special, newly made items that only Disney has, and old Disney items from their vaults. I also saw a link to ebay telling the browser that they could go there for more Disney items. the Disney items on ebay are not items Disney would have in their vaults for the most part. The collector of vintage Disney items wuold more than likely find them being sold by the little seller, not Disney.
Maybe the big guys will eat me alive, but I'm not going to sit here quaking in my boots with fear. I will be putting up a valiant fight....although I personally don't think there even will be a need to fight
(ps...I'm not printing those Rose bowl programs but I DO have two more )
Dottie...was I bragging? Well, maybe a tad
Seriously though...the fear of the big guys is unfounded. We have an advantage over them...we have small inventories in comparison to them, we are able to change directions swiftly while they can't, most of us don't have to pay employees to list our items or ship them. Price wise we can compete because our overhead is lower. and we give personal service which is difficult for them to do with hired help.
We can co-exist with the big guys and still be profitable.
Instead of fearing the changing ebay landscape we should be envigorated by the challenge it gives us.
posted on March 7, 2001 08:54:41 PM
Amy I think you hit the proverbial nail on the head! Its a big wide world out there and there will always be people looking for that 1928 rose bowl program or that Victorian oil painting of roses, etc. How far and wide would collectors have to travel to find that elusive piece to complete their collections? Before ebay, many miles and many antique shows and flea markets and shops, now its just the click of a mouse away, I don't think anyone is going to turn their backs on this venue. I also have no fear of the "Big Boys", until the day some big boy can stock a warehouse full of Victorian textiles in every shape and color I will not lose any sleep over it.
posted on March 7, 2001 08:55:14 PM
I have been a small seller on ebay for a little over 2 years now. With the recent postal increases and increase in ebay fees I'm really getting squeezed. As it looks I'll be out of selling on ebay by the end of the year, if not before, off to the proverbial "real job". It's becoming a matter of diminishing returns. I'm paying almost twice what I did in fees three months ago. Ebay probably is going to kill the goose that laid the golden egg to supposedly increase profits. It'll be interesting to watch. It'll be like watching a hit TV show fall into the hands of bad writers and management. We've all seen those. The scripts become stale, people leave the cast, folks flip the channel.
posted on March 7, 2001 10:24:31 PM
JMHO~
I don't really like ebay all that much but when I do go there, I'm usually looking for something specific and so I do a search. Sometimes, although I don't find what I originally wanted, I do find some truly unique item that I "need". If ebay had all new stuff, I would have no reason to go there-ever. So the buyer, which is the most valuable commodity at ebay, who doesn't find anything satisfying, may not go back if all they see are things they can go to their local dept. store and find. I mean, why would I pay shipping if I could just go out and buy it at the store?
If ebay pushed out the small seller, don't you think an alternative would become available~Necessity is the mother of invention! Someone will see $$ and it will happen.
Citygirl
posted on March 8, 2001 03:01:21 AM
Small can be good if adaptability is one's strength.
For instance, TIAS - the antique collectible on-line mall. They forged an eBay alliance.
Later, that changed - why? They charged fees on top of the eBay fees....mall dealers weren't dumb. They learned how to load and present their own auctions.
Like others, I think the tree is being shaken. But, if we can bent a little, learn a little more - we'll survive.
We need to give ourselves a little more credit. Remember, those of us who have been around the eBay experience for several years - we took a chance. It was so new, others laughed - scoffed at us.
I wish us all success and these boards (while sometimes extremely negative) do provide a source of knowledge and inspiration...thanks...
