posted on October 28, 2002 05:31:34 PM new
I have noticed there is alot of sellers out there selling without pictures. I even found a few with several hundred feedbacks who have been selling without pics for several years. I would never, ever list an auction without a pic....EVER. If my camera took a &*$#% I would replace it if I had to steal one. No picture, no auction!!
posted on October 28, 2002 05:52:21 PM new
I don't use pics about 98% of the time, and never have seen a decrease in bids due to lack of a photo. It's a waste of money. I have seen other sellers with great photos and get no bids, and mine with no photo get high bids, so it's an illusion that photos increase bidding.
If you feel otherwise, I couldn't care less, it's your money. I feel bidders already have a picture in their head before they click on the listing, and with a good title I already have them sold.
Everyone is entitled to my opinion.
posted on October 28, 2002 06:12:08 PM new
This is a really interesting thread! I can't imagine not using pictures. Quickdraw, I wonder if you could give us a hint what you sell? I've often wished I didn't have the hassle of photos, but I sell a lot of collectibles, and condition is important there. (But isn't it everywhere?)
posted on October 28, 2002 07:08:57 PM new
I'd never sell without pictures -- why?
Because I have a couple of competitors, selling similar items as me, who use either Bad Pictures or no pictures at all -- and I sell the same item in higher volume and for more money.
For the "you don't need pictures" camp, how can you really tell until you start running duplicate auctions, one with a picture and one without and observe the results?
You can't just say, "I run auctions with no pictures and I'm making money" and base your decision on that -- it's not very scientific. Until you chart the results and have some concrete data to back up your findings, it's just conjecture.
I use pictures because I've got hours of research to back me up -- and in the end, that's how EVERYONE should make these kind of decisions, you're a business, so analyze the issue and make the decision that results in the most cash.
posted on October 28, 2002 07:16:49 PM new
I don't know what you are selling, but I wouldn't even try to sell the items I sell w/o a picture. My auctions average at least $50.00 per item. These are rare or hard to find items & no one would bid on them w/o seeing what I had to offer.
posted on October 28, 2002 07:21:22 PM new
No way would my clothing sell without a picture .. correct me if I am wrong !
Do you know of any clothing sellers that sell ithout them ?
posted on October 28, 2002 08:08:39 PM new
Sanmar,
Couldn't you just imagine trying to write up descriptions for a bunch of Vernon Chintz and trying to sell it without pictures? Then follow it up with auctions for Mayflower and Cosmos. One description fits all!! Some of the plaid patterns would be even more fun. At least it would provide us a good excuse to invest in a bottle of Jack Daniels or Absolut.
The light at the end of the tunnel will turn out to be an oncoming train.
posted on October 28, 2002 08:20:36 PM new
I buy and sell mostly antiques and collectibles and pictures are mandatory.
I feel bidders already have a picture in their head before they click on the listing, and with a good title I already have them sold.
LOL, some of the titles sound great but when I see the picture I would never, ever bid on the item.
What do you sell, quickdraw? I can understand if it's CD's or something like that perhaps. Or are you just saying that to see what kind of reaction you get?
posted on October 28, 2002 08:58:00 PM new
If the seller is using a WEBTV Classic to sell there is no way that they can put pictures in their auctions. I have a friend who sells like that and does real well. Some of the pictures out there that I have seen would be better off not having pictures at all than the ones they have. Some are unbelieveable.
posted on October 28, 2002 09:22:57 PM new
Libra,
Some time back, there was a group of WebTV users over in the image hosting forum that figured out a workaround to get their pictures on their auctions through Auctionwatch. As well as I recall, their biggest obstacle was the incompatability of the WebTV units with the Java that AW utilizes, but they managed to develop a workaround that let them use AW to launch their auctions, pictures and all. Those webbies are an ingenious bunch!
The light at the end of the tunnel will turn out to be an oncoming train.
posted on October 28, 2002 10:52:57 PM new
"I wonder if you could give us a hint what you sell? I've often wished I didn't have the hassle of photos, but I sell a lot of collectibles, and condition is important there."
Books, videos, Cds, clothes, posters, vintage collectible's, cards, comics, girl accessories, Poker tables, wholesale, dolls, toys, exercise equipment, photo equipment and related, houshold related, and misc. $2-$200. Condition is important that's why I describe the condition accurately. Pics aren't that great for showing condition unless closeups are used. A lot of sellers use pics for books, why? I have sold $100 books w/o photos. My best selling books get double than ebay's average selling price.
"I have a couple of competitors, selling similar items as me, who use either Bad Pictures or no pictures at all -- and I sell the same item in higher volume and for more money."
Just the opposite results for me, I do better than those who use pics. I took a bad pic(due to poor lighting) of an expensive camera and the bidding actually went 50% higher than any identical item. That's because my title and description pulls the bids in. But keep doing whatever works for you.
"For the "you don't need pictures" camp, how can you really tell until you start running duplicate auctions, one with a picture and one without and observe the results?"
I've done duplicate auctions, also have compared mine with other sellers. I continuously update my research. If I'm getting $10 for my items w/o photos, and other sellers are getting $5.00 with photos, I'd say I don't need to bother with photos.
"You can't just say, "I run auctions with no pictures and I'm making money" and base your decision on that -- it's not very scientific. Until you chart the results and have some concrete data to back up your findings, it's just conjecture."
Exactly, I bet most sellers don't. My testing isn't scientific but I test and retest and go with what works.
"I wouldn't even try to sell the items I sell w/o a picture. My auctions average at least $50.00 per item. These are rare or hard to find items & no one would bid on them w/o seeing what I had to offer."
Right, I use photos sparingly, usually when it's hard to describe an item with words. Some items sell best with photos, most do not imo. I'm not trying to change anyone's opinions, I couldn't care less what you all do, I'm just saying what works for me.
"LOL, some of the titles sound great but when I see the picture I would never, ever bid on the item."
You just proved my point, photos can actually hurt your sales, even if it's a good one. I know because I have backed out of bidding because the photo didn't match what I had imagined it to be.
"..are you just saying that to see what kind of reaction you get?"
The kind of reaction I get is always predicatble. The "Obvious" people say whatever seems obvious, which is, "photo's help increase bidding." It's true even I am shocked to see people bid on some of my auctions that don't have photos, but they do in droves, and part of the reason is because I sell them on the title and let their imagnation do the rest.
posted on October 28, 2002 11:42:29 PM new
When I said that I wouldn't bid after seeing the photo I should have expanded on that comment. What I meant was that many times the item isn't even what it claims to be in the title and I can tell immediately when I view the picture.
At times the china or glass pattern does not match the title given in the auction. And many times the item is not Depression or Carnival glass though it is identified as such in the title and the description.
Most buyers that I know prefer to bid on auctions with pictures. Quickdraw, the only way I can judge what you claim works for you is by viewing your auctions. But I also understand if you don't wish to identify yourself.
posted on October 29, 2002 12:28:15 AM new
You gotta have photos on most items. You can rationalaze all you want but there has to be a lot of lost sales due to a lack of a photo(s).
You can not accurately measure something like the lack of photos by looking at other sellers with the same item.
posted on October 29, 2002 02:57:30 AM new
I would probably buy any new item and or used consumer item such as CDs, DVDs, Videos, Toys, Software, etc. (the list could be extensive) without a picture. Most of the time with these items I have already had my eye on them and know what they look like. If the description is good I might take a chance.
But when it comes to old vintage collectables, I won't bid without a picture. I collect antique bottles and I have bypassed more than one of those auctions due to poor photos or no photos. I think a poor photo is worse than no photo because it says something about the work ethic of the individual. If you can't provide a picture I can see, Why should I believe the description?
I sell postcards and old bottles. In the area of coins, Postcards, stamps, any of these types of collectables, grading is always subjective. We all want to be positive about condition but we may not always agree. I think I grade my postcards higher than some would, but my picture is big enough (and I don't mean weight, usually less than 40K) and clear enough that one can make up their own mind.
I have tried the gallery a little bit lately and I think for the few folks that might wonder in and buy because they see the picture first, is not worth the expense. this might be good for high dollar items.
posted on October 29, 2002 05:09:54 AM new
I use pictures for everything, and there have been times (I can't think of an example off the top of my head) when I thought "I really don't need a picture", but I put one in anyway. When I sell videos I put in a scan of the front and back so they can read the description. I have had many people email me and say how much they like that. I don't know if they necessarily bid more because I have these pictures, but they're free through AW anyway. I was looking for the Special Edition Spiderman DVD Gift Set yesterday and there were 3 listed - one person didn't have a picture. The description sounded the same, but I wanted to see a picture to make sure it was the correct one - I didn't buy his even though the BIN was a few dollars cheaper. I know a lot of the huge powersellers like onecentcds don't use pictures - I'm sure it saves a lot of time when you have thousands of listings going at one time.
posted on October 29, 2002 07:05:53 AM newI can't imagine not using pictures.
I know of 2 of the highest volume sellers on eBay with rather decent feedback (94,000 & 76,000) that don't use pictures. I can imagine not using pictures.
posted on October 29, 2002 07:46:06 AM new
It all depends on what type of items you are selling as to whether or not a picture is crucial. I use pictures in about 85-90% of my auctions... but there are cases where it is simpler not to include a picture.
For example, I sell a lot of generic used widgets that are designed for a certain purpose. They all do the same thing, and are all in excellent condition... but they may be manufactured by different companies (which for this widget does not affect the value at all). That means, that I would need a different picture each time I listed the auctions. It's much easier and much more efficient to write a detailed description of what the widget does, then to deal with different pictures every time I want to relist the widgets.
Now, I'm not saying that this type of thing is very common... but it is definately an example of how I can save time as a seller on my listings. Because I save time, I can sell the widget at a lower price, under cutting my competition. As a result, I find that my widgets sell much better than the competitions... even if they have similar feedback ratings AND have pictures. It just goes to show that not all bidders care about pictures for every item.
posted on October 29, 2002 08:13:43 AM new
"What I meant was that many times the item isn't even what it claims to be in the title and I can tell immediately when I view the picture."
A definite problem category where the unskilled sellers need to use photos to save themselves from misrepresentation. Maybe the one's who don't use photo's are more accurate in their description, have you learned out yet if that's the case?
"You gotta have photos on most items."
Why? I don't and my overall sales are good. I track average sale prices and I beat the average most of the time. So your theory doesn't reflect reality.
"You can rationalaze all you want but there has to be a lot of lost sales due to a lack of a photo(s)."
True, there's some items I sell I wouldn't bid on myself without a photo, but then again, I'm not the type of customer I'm trying to attract. Therefore, I get the type of bidder who is wiling to pay more, and is more easily persuaded to buy something with just words. That's reality. In the end it helps my sales.
"You can not accurately measure something like the lack of photos by looking at other sellers with the same item."
Is there a reason why I can't? All I care about is the final sales price, if my final price is high compared to other sellers then that's all I care about. Is it possible to sell higher than what I already do? I doubt it, people have their spending limits.
How much time do you take taking photos, and loading them? It's time consuming, does your sales price reflect that extra time? How do you know? Did you compare it to auctions with no photos?
posted on October 29, 2002 09:51:44 AM new
As a way to illustrate the importance of photos in auctions all one has to do is read some of the old AW threads here when the AW photo hosting service went down a while ago. Sellers were screaming bloody murder at the lost sales because of the occurence and demands for compensation.
posted on October 29, 2002 11:00:15 AM new
"Sellers were screaming bloody murder at the lost sale."
Probably more emotion than rationality. If their sales actually dropped it was likely those sellers depend on the photo more than a description and the buyers had no idea what they were bidding on. That doesn't prove photos are necessary.
posted on October 29, 2002 11:09:17 AM new
Here is an example of why I must have pictures, not just one but several. "Pitcher & 6 glasses. From the 1880's may be Fenton, has the shape of Fenton. Do you know any one who would bid $250.00 with out seeing this set
posted on October 29, 2002 11:13:55 AM new
LOL. Here's another example of an auction that needs a pic. Title: "THING." Description: Don't know what it is.
posted on October 29, 2002 02:21:06 PM new
I think it really depends on what is being sold. For example, selling a music CD: "New, AC/DC - Back In Black CD, sealed, original" That tells me everything that I need to know...no picture is needed. However, if I was buying a vintage Lesney Matchbox car with the box, the seller just telling me that the car and box are mint wouldn't cut it for me. I'd need to see a couple pics of the car, 1 pic of the box, in addition to a decent feedback for the seller. That's how I prefer to buy, so that's how I list...with plenty of pics, clear TOS, and a good description.
I find myself skipping over auctions that don't have a picture icon when I browse or search through auctions...unless of course it's an item that I don't need a pic for, as in the first example.
If no pictures work for you quickdraw, then that's great...keep on making the $$ I firmly believe, though, that the majority of the buyers out there want to see at least 1 pic of what they're spending their money on.
"Who's tending the bar? Sniping works up a thirst"
I agree with you. I sell built model kits, a picture showing constructions is critical. Selling a common revell 68 chevy factory sealed does not. The factory sealed says it is new condition.
posted on October 30, 2002 09:52:06 AM new
quickdraw:
I am surprised you have such success without pictures. I would never bid on a book, poster etc without pics.
I don't use pics when selling my old 45 vinyl as it doesn't show much anyway (unless it is a pic sleeve), but a pic is up there with everything else.
I have noticed lots of record sellers though who do not put any up and they seem to be very successful.
I wish I could be that brave. But, I must add the only reason I have seen so many without pictures is because I was browsing to buy. I NEVER buy anything without a picture attached. Too many surprises about condition of item when it arrives anyway, much less taking a blind chance.
[ edited by lindajean on Oct 30, 2002 09:53 AM ]
posted on October 30, 2002 10:33:46 AM new
I have tested with and without pics on identical items, and there's no difference in bidding.
There's this board game I tried to sell using no pics and never got one bid. I noticed other sellers getting good prices with photo, so I used a photo and relisted, again no bids. Several months later I relisted it and got a good price, but that goes to show you, photo or not, same results, this one just took the right timing.
posted on October 30, 2002 11:37:17 AM new
You are right...timing is crucial.
Here's a test you could run: list two auctions at the very same time...identical items, listing verbage, price, ending time, etc...one with a pic and one without. I'd be curious to see how it turns out.
"Who's tending the bar? Sniping works up a thirst"
posted on October 30, 2002 12:10:03 PM new
I've noticed with the collectibles market that items can sell in a very wide range of final prices for items that are the same. Ebay has some many categories where an item may fit and there is a lot of leeway where a seller can list the item via closing day and time.
Conventional wisdom says photos are vital for most ebay items and the more photos the better.
posted on October 30, 2002 12:32:50 PM new
There is another seller that is kind of my competition and he tries top match me item for ite. He waits till I list something and them he tries to put on something real similar and offer it like $1 less sometimes. It doesn't really bother me though because this guy has the worst pictures ever. I honestly believe he spins in a circle till he is very dizzy and takes the picture right before he falls down. It is hard to tell what the item even is. I have seen the guy in person and he looks fit as a fiddle- can't believe he can't take a still picture.
Sniping works up a thirst"