posted on March 2, 2001 09:56:45 AM new
OK. Everyone here who would be willing to pay a "per message" fee if AW created a special line for BidVille, raise your hands.
posted on March 2, 2001 10:00:03 AM new
All I said was that based on these stats they get no traffic. Or just not enough to register with the organization that did these stats.
posted on March 2, 2001 10:09:26 AM new
Based on those stats, Lowesytbids is #4, but their logo claims #2. Who would belive anything that looks like that bunch of tripe?
Even they don't have any statement disclaiming what is the criteria for inclusion.
posted on March 2, 2001 10:14:45 AM new
Well, Lowestbids did state that Amazon's numbers are from the entire site and AW doesn't have auctions.
I can't speak for anyone with that site but I can say that to me it appears like the same stats that Top9 uses for its stats, and Top9 states that they get its stats from PC Data Online.
posted on March 2, 2001 10:21:33 AM new
RB >
OK. Everyone here who would be willing to pay a "per message" fee if AW created a special line for BidVille, raise your hands.
I really think its comical that there's some who just cannot stand the idea of Bidville having a top page forum, especially since I don't see how having one would adversely impact your use of AuctionWatch.
I mean, really, if there was a top page forum for every leading or alternative auction site, it would have no impact on my activites, except to make following each of them easier.
posted on March 2, 2001 11:54:27 AM new
dim: "I really think its comical that there's some who just cannot stand the idea of Bidville having a top page forum..."
Actually, speaking for myself only, but perhaps for others, it isn't that we "can't stand" the idea, but rather that we feel bidville DOESN'T DESERVE it. You have not presented one iota of support for your assertion that bidville is somehow a "leading" auction. Of course, you originally mentioned the "hundreds of thousands" of listings, but I hope by now even you have given up promoting an auction site merely based on that number (see the discussion on bidbay if you still insist on doing so...).
Please...just answer the following two questions for us:
1. What evidence is there that bidville has any kind of backing or business plan that will even keep it in business in 6 months, let alone a "leading" auction. Most businesses fail in the first year; what will prevent bidville from being "the next golds".
2. How many items have SOLD from bidville, not mere listings. SALES make an auction a leader.
If you can successfully show that bidville meets those two requirements (staying power and sales), then your assertion that bidville is a "leading" auction will have some merit. Until then, bidville is merely a pretender ("promising" if you'd prefer a more politically correct term), with little to distinguish it from the large pack of ebay-wanna-bes that include bidbay, epier, edeal, etc.
A few people "shouting from the street corner" (or setting up tiny clubs in yahoo) do not a "movement" make...
posted on March 2, 2001 12:09:16 PM new
captainkirk,
First, are you speaking with the authority of AuctionWatch with regard to the decision making process of providing Bidville with a top page forum?
Oh, well, let try to answer your questions anyway:
1. What evidence is there that bidville has any kind of backing or business plan that will even keep it in business in 6 months, let alone a "leading" auction. Most businesses fail in the first year; what will prevent bidville from being "the next golds".
I am not privy to "inside" information regarding Bidville or any other auction site, but I would suggest that having a business plan or determining whether any auction site isn't all that relative in deciding whether to create a forum by adding a some lines to source code. If they don't make it, delete the lines of source code.
2. How many items have SOLD from bidville, not mere listings. SALES make an auction a leader.
It takes time for any auction site to develop its "market" and Bidville is no different. I would suggest that the ongoing listing increases being seen at Bidville is directly related to sales in some way since it certainly doesn't make sense to tying up even more of one's inventory without sales.
As a seller I have yet to make a sale there, but am certainly not going to write them off so early in the game. As a buyer, there are sales taking place in the categories of interest me, and I've made several buys myself.
posted on March 2, 2001 12:19:54 PM new
ah, so basically you have no evidence whatsoever that bidville will even be around in 6 months, nor that sales are even measureable.
And you wonder why AW isn't rushing out to annoint bidville as a "leading" auction?
And of course I'm not speaking authoritavely on behalf of AW. I'm just using plain old common sense (and basic business knowledge) to try and understand and explain their actions. Feel free to email their CEO or whatever if you want a "better" answer.
But I'm glad to see that your whole bidville crusade is merely wishful thinking on your part, with nothing to really back it up. Of course, that is your perogative, but just so everyone understands its really just a whim on your part.
posted on March 2, 2001 12:32:26 PM newah, so basically you have no evidence whatsoever that bidville will even be around in 6 months, nor that sales are even measureable.
Nor am I required to.
And you wonder why AW isn't rushing out to annoint bidville as a "leading" auction?
AuctionWatch support three fee-based auction sites -- Amazon, Yahoo and eBay -- of which by most accounts only the latter has any significant traffic.
AuctionWatch has put all their eggs into the eBay basket, and is ignoring all the alternative auction sites to either their advantage or disadvantage. I happen to believe it is to their disadvantage.
And of course I'm not speaking authoritavely on behalf of AW. I'm just using plain old common sense (and basic business knowledge) to try and understand and explain their actions. Feel free to email their CEO or whatever if you want a "better" answer.
I would suggest this "plain old common sense". Let's say I have ten items to sell. I click on Auction Manager and see my three choices. eBay - ugh, fees, but lots of listings. Amazon - ditto, stagnant listings count. Yahoo - ditto, stagnant listings count.
Hmmmm. Bidville has grown from some 200,000 listings about one month ago to some 400,000 listings today. There must be bidding going on there otherwise sellers would not be committing more of their inventory to the auction site. I'd like to take the no fees approach and would like to list some of my stuff there.
But wait, Auction Manager doesn't have a Bidville button. Goodbye, Auction Manager. Goodbye, AuctionWatch.
See, I think its to their disadvantage.
But I'm glad to see that your whole bidville crusade is merely wishful thinking on your part, with nothing to really back it up. Of course, that is your perogative, but just so everyone understands its really just a whim on your part.
I'll be looking into the usenet creation process next week for both Yahoo!Auctions and Bidville.
I guess you could say I prefer the libertarian approach that let's me decide; not the socialist in which the social engineers decide for me.
posted on March 2, 2001 12:45:22 PM new
dim: "ah, so basically you have no evidence whatsoever that bidville will even be around in 6 months, nor that sales are even measureable.
Nor am I required to."
Nope, its america, you can cheerfully post anything you want here. Of course, no one is required to take you seriously if you have nothing behind your statements, but feel free to try to convince everyone by saying the same thing over and over ("bidville is a leading auction...trust me...bidville is a leading auction..trust me... ). Most people can now cheerfully discount your position on this as being merely your whim.
"AuctionWatch has put all their eggs into the eBay basket, and is ignoring all the alternative auction sites to either their advantage or disadvantage. I happen to believe it is to their disadvantage."
I don't necessarily disagree with you on this one. It probably is to their benefit to support more sites rather than less. The problem is...which ones? They can't support them all, they have to decide which ones have the staying power and potential size to justify spending software development dollars.
"Hmmmm. Bidville has grown from some 200,000 listings about one month ago to some 400,000 listings today. There must be bidding going on there otherwise sellers would not be committing more of their inventory to the auction site. "
Ah, you are falling back on the "lots of listings" argument again! Wow, you must be a BIG fan of bidbay and their "millions and millions" of listings then! Actually, the big rise is most likely attributable to the fact that yahoo is charging fees, and all the low-end auctions migrated onward. You have presented NO evidence whatsoever that any significant bidding on these "hundreds of thousands" of items is going on. Actually the most likely explanation is that people selling $1 baseball cards can't afford ANY fee, so they run from free auction to free auction, and bidville was "a port in a storm". when (not if) the fees arrive at bidville, you can bet they will "shove off" to the next no-fee auction.
"I guess you could say I prefer the libertarian approach that let's me decide; not the socialist in which the social engineers decide for me."
Uhh....which "social engineers" are you talking about here? I see BUSINESS people here at aw, managing their business as best they see fit, choosing products, fees, etc as is their LIBERTARIAN prerogative. Could you point out the social engineers that are "deciding for you" in this situation? Don't like it here...move on! Its a very simple, very capitalistic choice! < even bigger grin >
Edited to add that i'm now in danger of violating my self-rule against endless repetition of my position, so I just leave you with my posts, which pretty clearly lay out my concern with bidville: business plan and sales. Enjoy! (weekend and family time have arrived!)
posted on March 2, 2001 12:58:10 PM new
captainkirk >
saying the same thing over and over ("bidville is a leading auction...trust me...bidville is a leading auction..trust me... ).
If you are going to quote me, please do so without deletions otherwise some folks might conclude you are distorting the discussion.
The correct quote is:
No, I believe Bidville has earned a top page forum because it has generated substantial interest as what is probably the leading alternative auction site.
Ah, you are falling back on the "lots of listings" argument again! Wow, you must be a BIG fan of bidbay and their "millions and millions" of listings then! Actually, the big rise is most likely attributable to the fact that yahoo is charging fees, and all the low-end auctions migrated onward. You have presented NO evidence whatsoever that any significant bidding on these "hundreds of thousands" of items is going on. Actually the most likely explanation is that people selling $1 baseball cards can't afford ANY fee, so they run from free auction to free auction, and bidville was "a port in a storm". when (not if) the fees arrive at bidville, you can bet they will "shove off" to the next no-fee auction.
You should really take a look at Bidville sometime. The range of items is rather evenly distributed.
And don't be so quick to dismiss sporting cards. Even Yahoo!AuctionsLITE pushes sporting cards from the Yahoo! portal page.
Don't like it here...move on!
Remarkable how similar this thread is to Yahoo!Auctions approach of getting rid of the "clutter".
posted on March 2, 2001 01:07:50 PM new
Which of BidVille's 15 users do you think create this substantial interest, dimview?
Here's something that you fail to mention. In Bidville's first 7-14 days of existence (or at least after Yahoo! implemented fees) they got about 200,000 listings. In about the last 6 weeks, they have just BARELY pulled out another 200,000 listings.
As for bids, sure there are bids on the site. But they are (for the most part) so few and far between that it takes going through the site with a comb to find them.
Plus, as documented by the stats that I linked to earlier, they don't get any traffic based on not showing up in the rankings. Even BidBay got about 100,000 unique visitors last week.
posted on March 2, 2001 01:18:19 PM new
dim: "If you are going to quote me, please do so without deletions otherwise some folks might conclude you are distorting the discussion. The correct quote is: ..."
Its clear that I wasn't trying to actually quote a specific quote from you in the past. This is clearly a way to represent my analysis of how you present your argument (no substantiation, just saying the same thing over and over) - its a common writing style in this situation.
I'm sure people, if so motivated, can follow our discussion and see clearly what you, and I, have actually written. Not that doing so would be to your advantage, of course.
"You should really take a look at Bidville sometime. The range of items is rather evenly distributed."
Uh, I see 150,000 trading cards, 50,000 books, and 50,000 stamps and coins. That is 60% of the total. On ebay, those categories total 20% or less (are they up to 5,000,000 items yet?). "evenly distributed"...NOT!
" (yahoo) Now that's what I call a business plan"
The lack of quality of another auction's business plan (even assuming it is "bad", again, you present no evidence of your assertion), does not, of course, mean bidville has a good one. Or even that they have one, period.
You're still "zero for two".
And now I really am goin for the weekend. If you want to keep beating this horse, I wish you the best of luck, but it will take more than just your say-so to make bidville special in the eyes of the world...
[ edited by captainkirk on Mar 2, 2001 01:22 PM ]
posted on March 2, 2001 01:28:02 PM new
Animaniac >
Which of BidVille's 15 users do you think create this substantial interest, dimview?
Visitor number four.
Here's something that you fail to mention. In Bidville's first 7-14 days of existence (or at least after Yahoo! implemented fees) they got about 200,000 listings. In about the last 6 weeks, they have just BARELY pulled out another 200,000 listings.
I posted some earlier numbers but cannot find them using "site search" because the search doesn't go back that far.
Still the listings count was substantially less than 150,000 on January 10.
Even so, from 150,000 to 400,000 in just over one month translates to a 167% gain.
What has Yahoo!AuctionsLITE done during this same time period?
As for bids, sure there are bids on the site. But they are (for the most part) so few and far between that it takes going through the site with a comb to find them.
Yes, but do you really expect Bidville to have an "instant buyer pool"? Certainly you understand that that will take some time.
Plus, as documented by the stats that I linked to earlier, they don't get any traffic based on not showing up in the rankings. Even BidBay got about 100,000 unique visitors last week.
This has been addressed in another thread. The table does not even cover several auction sites, including Bidville, and thus the usefulness of the data is questionable.
posted on March 2, 2001 01:40:26 PM new
The table showed the top auction-related sites based on that company's (which I firmly believe to be the same company that Top9 uses) own system. I'm sure they could have continued on down the rankings until they got to BidVille, but how far down would they have had to go? 100? 1,000? 10,000?
While a 167% gain in over a month is good, after the first 7-14 days, they tailed off as far as listing goes. They should have it 400,000 by the end of January, but didn't.
And yes, getting buyers does take time. But to get buyers you need traffic, which AGAIN goes back to my link showing that they aren't getting any.
posted on March 2, 2001 01:41:05 PM new
Whoa, Someone just overloaded the Amazon boards with a post. AW better use their 3 thread limit before this gets out of hand.
posted on March 2, 2001 01:52:01 PM new
Animaniac >
The table showed the top auction-related sites based on that company's (which I firmly believe to be the same company that Top9 uses) own system. I'm sure they could have continued on down the rankings until they got to BidVille, but how far down would they have had to go? 100? 1,000? 10,000?
Please explain how the site doing the evaluations obtained the raw data for pageviews, etc., then we can try to get an idea of why some sites were excluded.
While a 167% gain in over a month is good, after the first 7-14 days, they tailed off as far as listing goes. They should have it 400,000 by the end of January, but didn't.
Do you realize that continuous large percentage gains are unsustainable?
The frequent mistake that brokerage firm analysts make is taking two closely-spaced datapoints, drawing a line, and telling you that in the next year company XYZ will control everything.
And yes, getting buyers does take time. But to get buyers you need traffic, which AGAIN goes back to my link showing that they aren't getting any.
And again, that link leads to data that is questionable until some information about how the data was collected.
posted on March 2, 2001 02:01:01 PM new
Why don't you ask PC Data Online, since they are the ones that provide Top9 with their stats, and they are the ones that I believe did these rankings? If these rankings are questionable, then you must also question the rankings that show Yahoo! has the number 1 site in the world as being questionable (via Top9's current rankings), and that eBay is the number 1 auction site is also questionable.
posted on March 2, 2001 02:12:07 PM new
You can't have it both ways, dimview. You either have to view the rankings as correct or questionable/wrong. Not both depending on how you see fit.
Did it occur to you that they did rank BidVille, but because its numbers weren't high enough it didn't make the list?
posted on March 2, 2001 02:19:30 PM new
"OK. Everyone here who would be willing to pay a "per message" fee if AW created a special line for BidVille, raise your hands."
Or you can join the Bidville club on Yahoo Clubs for free. They also have like a network of Bidville clubs on Yahoo that are all linked together on a website. You can create your own club as kind of a storefront and join the network.
posted on March 2, 2001 02:22:41 PM new
Animaniac >
You can't have it both ways, dimview. You either have to view the rankings as correct or questionable/wrong. Not both depending on how you see fit.
Okay, how about this table.
THE WORLD'S LARGEST NUCLEAR POWERS
#1 United States
#2 The Bahamas
Well, the rankings are correct in that the United States is the largest nuclear power, but they are also questionable in that there appears to be several omissions.
posted on March 2, 2001 02:27:14 PM new
Funny how you chose to ignore the second half of my post. Maybe because you realize that I'm correct in saying that BidVille didn't rate high enough to be included on the list.
posted on March 2, 2001 02:34:51 PM new
Animaniac >
Did it occur to you that they did rank BidVille, but because its numbers weren't high enough it didn't make the list?
This is really getting silly.
You are suggesting that Bidville did not have sufficient users or receive sufficient pageviews to be included in the rankings. Well, guess what, neither is Yahoo!Auctions included in the rankings.
Do you really believe that Yahoo!Auctions had fewer than 94,000 users or 182,000 pageviews?
Even I believe that had more, substantially more.
For those interested in this silliness, here's the link to the rankings in question:
posted on March 2, 2001 02:39:48 PM new
Actually, that was a question that I had about it concerning their addition of Amazon (which does a whole lot more than auctions), yet they decide to keep Yahoo! off the page. I'm pretty sure that Yahoo! was listed as a web portal/search engine which is why they aren't listed in the auction category. But that still doesn't explain the inclusion of Amazon.
