posted on June 1, 2001 05:45:37 AM new
I found this statement in article on ebaY about its auction software that was created by Blackthorne.It was about that this was now offered on a monthly subscription basis.
Lots of people where not happy about it but it appears to be the trend in software updates.Once you have it to then charge a fee to keep updated.
Anyway one of the people they interviewed was the following and makes an interesting statement.
I agree with what he says and I think in some way it explains the buyer mentality on ebaY and in some cases the sellers too.
Here is the link to the aticle and the statement is at the bottom.
I would cut and paste but do not want to violate any copyright.
posted on June 1, 2001 06:09:18 AM new
Mr. Purseglove is the paid mouthpiece for ebay and his comments are sanctioned only by those who control him. He is not allowed to speak the truth, and certainly does not know the difference between greed and grace.
If I had a lease, and the property was sold to a new owner, they would be obliged to honor the terms of my original commitment, regardless of any "loss". It should have been calculated into the purchase price.
However, ebay believes that once they purchased the company, that all previous commitments of that company no longer had to be honored.
The nastiness of the situation is compounded by the fact that ebay made the changes that disabled this software. Deliberate? We can only speculate, but one thing is for sure. It was a costly, offensive, serious management mistake that should be corrected immediately.
posted on June 1, 2001 07:19:57 AM new
I agree with his statement, too. Just take one look around here and you can see all the people whining about having to pay fees for services.
I don't think the subscription model they talk about is going to work though. If all you get is an online update every so often, what happens when your computer crashes and you have to re-install everything? I've given up buying any software updates anymore. It's easier to start fresh every few years with the whole program.
posted on June 1, 2001 08:14:47 AM new
"...many users were caught off guard when their Auction Assistant programs stopped working last week. They accused eBay of intentionally making Auction Assistant useless to force them to buy the new software."
posted on June 1, 2001 08:18:03 AM new
If your referring to the statement that the internet has spawned a whole generation of people who expect something for nothing...yes I agree with it.
When I bought Auction Assistant I wondered how Blackthorne could make money if they had to keep updating the program free of charge in perpetuity.
When paypal came out I wondered how they were going to make money by giving away money and not charging for their services...especially when the credit card fees were going to be charged to them.
I wondered how AW or honesty were going to make money by offering their auction management services for free.
I wonder how buyers can expect a seller to remain in business if they only charged a portion (the postage) of the cost to ship an item.
I have often wondered how adults who have lived in the real world for years and KNOW a business has to recover its costs and make a profit to stay in business can suddenly think that because this is the internet all the "rules" of business are suspended.
I have often wondered how people can start to live in a fairy tale as soon as they get on the internet.
posted on June 1, 2001 08:26:58 AM new
Seems to me that the article belittles the fact that the users PAID for their software and were PROMISED free updates in perpetuity.
This issue has nothing at all to do with the "New Age" of software selling methodology and everthing to do with the fact that the software company (Blackthorne/eBay) not providing the services promised to their buyers.
There's a dangerous B.S. lawyer attitude being adopted in everyday business these days and it's going to lead to the demise of practicality and general business ethics. The idea of hiding behind legal rhetoric to cover wrongdoing is unconscionable to me!
I've been in business for myself for 15 years. I've never taken advantage of anyone in this time and never will. It's not my style and not how I was brough up...
posted on June 1, 2001 08:44:20 AM new
CB - I agree it is a matter of philosophy. The current way people look at agreemnts is that they are none binding. When you read of sports players and movie stars "renegotiating? their contracts it is just the surface of the problem. Years ago only a King or a government felt above keeping a deal gone sour for them. Today if a bad choice is made there is no hesitation to bail out of it be it a marraige contract or a contract for 10,000 computer drives. The idea of a man's word and handshake being his bond and the biblical "Let your yes be yes, and your no be no." are viewed as old fashioned and naive. The obvious next step is to form contract knowing ahead of time that you have no intention of honoring them. That is the current standard of sophisticated internet business.
posted on June 1, 2001 09:20:28 AM new
What does the quote about everyone expecting things for free have to do with the article?
Am I missing something?
The article was about Auction Assistant software, a package that users purchased. Blackthorne did not give away their software. The users were told that with purchase they would receive free upgrades. It's not far fetched to think that those upgrades were factored into the cost of the program otherwise they would not have been offered.
How frequently are updates issued? A few times a year maybe? And for that the users have to pay $15. a month? That sounds like a lot to me.
I agree, but think that the philosphy is not limited to internet companies.
I've run into more than my share of opportunists over the years and have made a few quite wealthy. I'm doing fine myself, but insist on playing the game straight. Somthing others sometimes find hard to do. I can't understand it, as it's a very shortsighted way to go through life. I sleep well at nigh knowing the work I do helps myself and others as well. Not just myself..
Regarding the eBay Auction Assistant fiasco, there's a right way the situation could have been handled and a wrong way. eBay chose the wrong way. It would have been no skin off ebay's back to grandfather the existing Blackthorne members into the new program. Instead, because of their current strength and dominance in the marketplace, they chose the selfish and shortsigted option. It's these types of unnecessary actions that are isolating ebay from their customer base. They're pointless from an overall revenue standpoint and do more harm than good.
In my opinion, eBay is straddling a very fine line with their business practices. They insist that they are just a "venue" when issues arise regarding company and website liability, while at the same time feel the necessity to dictate how buyer's and seller's conduct business on the website. While I feel it is perfectly appropriate for eBay to lay fundamental rules of conduct on the site and its usage, I feel that their current restrictions overstep their boundries.
Rest assured, eBay will someday be slain by their own actions. The friendly community has grown to become a revenue pig that will someday be slaughtered. Meg Whitman has promised unrealistic returns to her investors and each quarterly revenue hurdle that she faces is higher and more optomistic. There will be hell to pay when the first earning shortfall occurs and it will be know as the "Day of the Shorts" in the market.
Somewhere lies a bright, aggresive, calculated, patient attorney who gathers evidence on a daily basis. He silently builds a case, waiting for the right time to strike with a powerfull suit. He's smelling for scents of weakness... It will be this day that eBay falls as a consequence for their selfish and irresponsible actions.
posted on June 1, 2001 11:23:32 AM new
There was a widely held and clear understanding among the buyers of the software that they would not have to purchase upgrades to keep their program operational and that the program would be expanded so that they could use it for posting on venues other than eBay.
This belief was based on repeated public statements from the owner/developer of the program and was confirmed by the long standing practice of the company to provide upgrade patches for free whenever they made a change critical to the operations of the s/w package.
This ongoing support was made as a distinct separate issue from the optional enhancements occasionally offered for an additional fee which were not fundamental to the function of the program and the development and sale of an expanded version (Professional) of the program which included the functions of the basic program and added accounting, inventory and other completely new features for large volume sellers.
In return the users showed appreciation for what everyone understood was a great value by providing beta testing, making constructive suggestion, helping to develop improvements, providing user to user support and promoting new sales among other eBay sellers.
If you look back to old posting on chat boards there was an often repeated pattern. A user would ask for suggestions about listing programs. Approx. half of the replies would be comments about a wide range of the available s/w. The other half of the replies would be from near fanatical users and believers in the Blackthorne program, like me, who felt that the program, the community of users, the integrity of the developer and the continued updating to meet and exceed our needs made Auction Ass't the best possible choice and value available in the auction management field. We felt you either used Auction Ass't or you really didn't understand what was going on.
Maybe we were a little arrogant but that's not the point. We believed in the developer. He had a separate full time job and the stories of his staying up all night to write code for immediate upgrades when eBay made changes or spending hours on the phone with users to resolve problems(usually a fault at the users end) were legendary.
The fear that users expressed when the company was sold to eBay was only offset by the universal feeling that no one more deserved to be rewarded for his outstanding dedication to his customers than John S.
I believe if the program had remained in his ownership the user base would had gladly done whatever John needed to financially support the s/w and I personally know of many users who purchased some of the optional theme enhancements without ever intending to use them, solely as a contribution or expression of financial support for him.
In buying the company, eBay's lawyers determined that wording in the user agreement allowed for the possibility that additional charges could be required of the users in the event of certain circumstances requiring major upgrades to the program.
They purchased the program, put a new face on it, changed the name, stated their effort constituted a major upgrade and exercised the legal right expressed in the user agreement to charge an additional fee which they determined would take the form of a monthly subscription. The existing program became unusable because of changes in the eBay listing procedure and they did not offer any work around which effectively disabled all programs that did not accept the subscription upgrade.
They are legally right and morally wrong.
In the "Old West" men were shot for less.
Today we will have to wait for the day when eBay is finally taken into court by the Federal Government, as is Microsoft at the present, and questioned about their practices. It will take a decade before that happens and in the meantime Queen Meg and her merry band of integrity challenged MBA's will ride off into the sunset with every last billion dollars they can squeeze out of the customers.
The well documented ongoing customer abuse by eBay will eventually build sufficient negative mass to create a backlash but the economic fear in many users of speaking out against their source of income and the denial (delusion?) in others that anything is even wrong will delay the inevitable day of reckoning much too long.
I do not believe these circumstances would exist if the Founder was still in charge. He appears to have vision, a regard for people and integrity.
He was replaced with the modern day, profit focused, equivalent of "gunslingers". They are cold efficient and effective. They well might be some of the best available in their field today.
I admire wolves but I shoot them when they endanger my animals.
We don't have that option when our businesses are endangered by ruthless but legal management of monopolies.
We will have to find other remedies but the process is long and painful and a lot of small sellers will be hurt before it's resolved.
posted on June 1, 2001 12:08:49 PM new
I agree with computerboy 100%. Legal rhetoric to cover wrongdoing is absolutely correct. It is a BS lawyer attitude.
Speaking to Imabrit's question, yes I do think there are many on the Internet who see it as a free-for-all. However, in the case of Auction Assistant and others, that criticism does not apply. What you have are a lot of computer and business-illiterate folks who have been hoodwinked into investment. They've been sold on the idea that the Internet is the next gold rush, and they go out and spend money without thinking. These people are the ones ripe for the "subscription" scam whereby they must pay and pay to continue using a product (in the case of AA, one that they bought outright).
I've sold auction management software at eBay for years. My programs are simple. They don't interact with eBay, but I've had every opportunity to observe how the bigger programs deal with the changes. This isn't about significant upgrades. Every tiny change eBay makes leaves those third-party programs unusable. A software developer faces two choices. Either work feverishly every two weeks to come up with a fix (aka, "update" ) or abandon the software completely (and leave existing customers holding the bag). Most software developers start out with a good idea, and then find it's not worth dealing with the constant changes and irate customers.
"Something for nothing" is too vague and sweeps the real problem under the carpet. The claim of "free upgrades for life" was used as a marketing tool to entice customers. Such claims should be seen as a legal contract, but unfortunately, the law favors those who can best pay for representation. I agree with Gravid, companies form agreements with no intention of honoring them. That is the real problem.
posted on June 1, 2001 12:32:32 PM new
I'm sorry but I have never used Auction Assistant. I do not know what contract they made with users. I can speak to many other programs that have come out on eBay, because they advertise, in big bold letters, "free upgrades for life." For life usually means until the developers get sick of the need for never-ending bug fixes due to eBay, and the constant complaints from customers.
In all fairness, I haven't observed that eBay intentionally juggles the requirements for third-party software. Yes, they do make changes every few weeks or so, but I haven't noticed a malicious attitude behind this. Maybe I'm missing something.
As to whether the Auction Assistant --> Sellers Assistant was a major upgrade, or just a cosmetic change, that is another matter.
eBay is offering their API for some $50,000 dollars. Buy it, you get access to eBay. Otherwise, forget it. That seems clear enough. But considering eBay's monopolistic hold on the online auction industry (what industry, there's only eBay) that kind of practice might be seen as an unfair trade practice. Fifty thousand dollars is way out of the range of many software developers who could otherwise write perfectly good and functioning programs. Is eBay making their API available, or are they attempting to shut out third-party developers? Eventually this will all be decided in court.
posted on June 1, 2001 12:36:56 PM new
According to my information, the fee is $250K for their API, not $50K. This makes it even more out of reach for small softwqare developers.
posted on June 1, 2001 12:41:29 PM new
Just want to clarify that last a bit. Developing third-party programs for eBay is not difficult. There are lots of good programs out there. The problem is that eBay is constantly making changes which leave the programs unusable.
What's questionable is whether eBay has a right to make money off those programs or not. In essence, eBay wants a cut of third-party developers' action.
For example, let's say I write a software program that automatically sends a letter to my congressman. It's simple, it works. And let's say I sell a bunch of copies of my program.
Now what happens is, my congressman hears about what I'm doing. So he changes his mailbox address. His new address is publicly available, so I find it and "update" my program. Then he changes his address again. I update my program again.
Then my congressman sends me a letter. "I really appreciate your work, and I'm sorry I need to keep moving my mailbox every week. I'd like to help you by notifying you in advance of my new address. If you'll send me $50,000 dollars, I'll put you on my list and make sure you are informed of changes before they happen."
That's exactly what we have with eBay. It's all about pie-slicing and share-grabbing.
posted on June 1, 2001 12:50:26 PM new
Yes, $250.000.00!
eBay wants to be in the auction management game themselves and wants $250,000 for source code access. They obviously want to keep the small players out. Fortunately, they use forms, so the little guys can figure it out with some time and effort.
I say give me the damn tools free, so I can list more auctions. I can't even count the number of times I've been listing auctions one by one, only to decide and say F-it, I need some sleep. This after repeated attempts to use bulk relist programs with failure.
It must be killing eBay that other companies are DELIVERING the products that are being auctioned on their website! Look for eBay delivery service coming this fall...
