posted on July 2, 2001 08:15:50 AM
These stats show that the Gallery auctions have a 9.8% sell-thru, the featured sell thru is 46.6% and the totally free are 1.4%.
The featured sell-thru is quite good and for less than what it would cost you to sell that item on Ebay. My sell thru on ebay is maybe 25% if I am lucky (too much competition and sellers willing to break even or even lose money).
I personally feel these numbers are very good for a site that officially opened in Dec. of 2000! Movin' on up!
And customer satisfaction is extremely good which is something Ebay can't even begin to compete with!
posted on July 2, 2001 08:21:59 AM
Rb,
Funny, LOL. Yes, Dimview is a AG2 wannabe, but does not have the support that AG2 once had. In fact, he has NO support. Also, I plag..., how about just copycat! A knockoff!
Dimview,
I do not care what anyone thinks of my numbers. I do make money. As far as BidVille's numbers, a lot of people care for the numbers, YOU STAND ALONE, in your silly game!
posted on July 2, 2001 08:28:14 AM
The 1.4 % rate is really nothing to write home to mother about is it? Dim just missed it by a bit. As for the other 2 rates they sound about right as sellers naturally put their best items on these features and use these features in an attempt to draw bidders to their other auctions, often offering the items at cost or below. A $5 fee to feature even when divided by 10 for a subscription membership is still a bit steep.
posted on July 2, 2001 08:28:33 AM
Wow. News travels faster than I do so I guess I don't have to provide the stats URL.
Dimview, your posts for the past few weeks have touted a .2% sell through for Bidville, not the .8% you recently (yesterday) claim. Error from .2% to 1.4% is 700%, not 75%. In my book, 700% error is way off and so is 75% error.
I happen to have much experience with statistics having been a physician in my past life. Any reputable statistic posts a "p value". A "p value" of 5% or less is the standard for decent work. Work that gets any respect has a "p value" of 1%.
Before yesterday, your "p value" was 700%. Yesterday it was 75%. I consider your numbers to be way off using the standard 5% p value of a "decent" job.
In any case, thanks for bringing this subject into the limelight. I am personally very pleased with the report we generated. Of course, the sell through has much room for improvement as it does at every free site. My own interpretation of the data is simple: spend one penny on a gallery listing and your sell through increases 7 times. Spend 50 cents on a featured item and your sell through increases 40 times.
Don't bother asking any more questions. I've reported as promised and won't be back for awhile.
Ed
[ edited by eddyodoc on Jul 2, 2001 08:30 AM ]
[ edited by eddyodoc on Jul 2, 2001 08:32 AM ]
posted on July 2, 2001 08:36:59 AM
eddyodoc >
Dimview, your posts for the past few weeks have touted a .2% sell through for Bidville, not the .8% you recently (yesterday) claim. Error from .2% to 1.4% is 700%, not 75%. In my book, 700% error is way off and so is 75% error.
The earlier 0.2% numbers were estimated a couple months ago.
I happen to have much experience with statistics having been a physician in my past life. Any reputable statistic posts a "p value". A "p value" of 5% or less is the standard for decent work. Work that gets any respect has a "p value" of 1%.
Before yesterday, your "p value" was 400%. Yesterday it was 75%. I consider your numbers to be way off using this standard.
Except that YOU have the real numbers and can therefore make a precise calculation; I can only make estimations.
Perhaps the best description would be that they are Fermi Calculations.
Clearly you do not have an understanding of the errors associated with estimating extremely small numbers.
-----------------------------------------
Once again you are showing your Ignorance in Statistics. It doesn't matter how small the numbers you work with. Heck the Scientific community work in nanos (10^-3) and micros (10^-6) on a daily basis, yet they are required to produce Statistically Signaficant numbers. Statistics is a very powerful tool that you clearly do not know much about.
posted on July 2, 2001 08:44:55 AM
dimview wrote:
Except that YOU have the real numbers and can therefore make a precise calculation; I can only make estimations.
-------------------------------------------
Light begins to dawn on DIMview. What have we've been trying to say the past several days: YOU'RE ESTIMATIONS ARE WRONG!! They're not even good estimations. You make too many assumptions and factor in too little.
I've been saying for the past TWO days that you CAN'T accuratly calculate Bidville's numbers. You said you can. Well... you finally admitted: YOU CAN'T
posted on July 2, 2001 08:48:15 AM
"I happen to have much experience with statistics having been a physician in my past life."
Not quite eddie-o - at least according to your posts on your own site. I believe you were an "almost a doctor".
I have worked in health care for 30 years, and with no disrespect intended, if the doctors would stick to doctor stuff, and let the finance guys deal with the statistics, a BIG part of the medical problem would go away ...
You DO know the difference between God and a doctor, don't you
Wrong. Our Bidville prez was a doctor. He was a 2nd or 3rd year Resident in Emergency Medicine when he quit. You become a MD when you graduate from medical school. You do know what a Resident is, right?
Also, just as side-note, you don't really do a lot of Statistics in medical school unless you're doing research and the like. HOWEVER, most pre-med undergraduate programs REQUIRE that you take a statistics course. I know I had to take one...
Dimview,
You show me yours and I'll show you mine. Hahaha. I know that'll be the day... but who cares? What do my sale numbers have to do with anything? We're talking about Bidville as a whole. Just admit it: You were/are WRONG.
[ edited by daredevil2010 on Jul 2, 2001 09:28 AM ]
posted on July 2, 2001 09:32:50 AM
"Also, just as side-note, you don't really do a lot of Statistics in medical school unless you're doing research and the like."
I rest my case.
"HOWEVER, most pre-med undergraduate programs REQUIRE that you take a statistics course. I know I had to take one..."
Me too, and it had nothing to do with anything related to the practice of medicine. And, like you, I remember everything I learned in that course and I use it every day ... along with calculus, which really comes in handy in my job NOT
Like I said unless you're doing research or reading a lot of journal articles you don't get exposure to a lot of Statistics. But maybe our Prez did do those things. My girlfriend (also in medical field) spent a full year just running statistical numbers off her data that she collected from patients. It all depends.
Actually, the statistics course that I took in college WAS tailored for the medical community. The University that I attended offered about 5 different intro stat courses depending on the field you were interested in.
Dimview,
Here's a clue: Put as little effort into finding my Bidville ID as you did calculating those sell-through rates... and you'll get my ID. Trust me won't be too hard since my IDs are almost the same.
posted on July 2, 2001 10:19:52 AM
What is with you people?? Dimview has done a lot of stat work here on AW. What makes you think that his estimates are wrong? Did Bidville show its methodology in coming to their numbers??
Maybe if some of you took the time to put the work in that DV has, he wouldn't be the predominant numbers person on this site??
Geez, Bidville does some things well but others not. Sure it's young but it's also pretty pathetic at marketing!!
If you're happy super. It won't be free forever though and then where will all of you cheerleaders be??
I'm not upset at Bidville, just folks who hack at the few people that do any work on these messageboards that help our community!!
posted on July 2, 2001 10:49:40 AM
There's a HUGe difference between Dimview's Yahoo numbers and his Bidville's.
1) All Dimview did was report the number of auctions for each category on Yahoo!. This required no statistical analysis. Pretty much cut and paste. That's fine. The raw numbers are there for everybody to see... you determine what they mean.
2) However, with Bidville, dimview is trying to calculate some statical values. His methods are flawed mostly due to his lack of raw data. Many here pointed out some "weak" points to his calculations.
I hope everyone here can appreciate the difference. If you're going to start making interpretations on data... you better make sure that you did the proper math and that you're data collection does not have too many biases. Bidvile's prez has come here and publically showed that Dimview's numbers are wrong. Dimview once claimed Bidville had a sell-through rate of 0.02% (slowly he's increased this number. How? Who knows). That 0.02% was 700% away from the truth. Minor error? I think not. Even a 75% error is too much: When did getting 75% of the test questions wrong be considered MINOR?
Let's just get some things straight:
1) Bidville is no eBay. Maybe never will be. Who knows. Bidville needs work... we all know that.
2) Why Dimview likes to pick on Bidville is a mystery. His explanations slowly change and pretty much make no logical sense. He wants FREE auctions sites to be like ebay and Yahoo! Sorry, can't happen... because they are FREE while ebay and Yahoo are not. It's pretty much an issue of being mutually exclusive: you can only one at a given time.
3) I have no problems with Dinview's numbers... as long as We realize that they are pretty much flawed. He should stick to reporting raw data numbers and forget about interpreting them. He just does not have the necessary data.
People have been sued over things dimview is doing. Dimview isn't part of the press. His written statements aren't protected by the Constitution. Heck, even the newspapers have to be more right (75% error) than Dimview to be protected by the Constition. You just can't start slandering any person or company in a public forum, throwing out false data and claims, and expect nothing to happen. Yet that's what dimview is exactly doing.
[ edited by daredevil2010 on Jul 2, 2001 10:56 AM ]
posted on July 2, 2001 10:56:36 AM
daredevil2010,
People have been sued over things dimview is doing. Dimview isn't part of the press. His written statements aren't protected by the Constitution. Heck, even the newspapers have to be more right (75% error) than Dimview to be protected by the Constition. You just can't start slandering any person or company in a public forum, throwing out false data and claims, and expect nothing to happen. Yet that's what dimview is exactly doing.
So now I'm making slanderous comments and committing fraud?
That must be some agenda you have.
(If true, wouldn't that be libel?)
[ edited by dimview on Jul 2, 2001 11:08 AM ]
posted on July 2, 2001 11:07:25 AM
This isn't my agenda... IT'S YOURS.
I'm stating the obvious facts of what you're doing. Unless you plan on "editing" all your statements... the proof is in the pudding. These statements are here for eveyone to read.
A "real" man can admit when he's wrong. Well, obviously you can't. You attempt to turn the argument towards a different direction: You ask me what my real ID is? Who cares? You ask me to calculate the inventory warhousers sell-through rate. Who cares? Sorry dimview, but your one trick is up. You went to the well one too many times. Your guns a'blazin just ran out of ammo.
Your Numbers are WRONG, and they are wrong by a LARGE amount. No matter what you say, claim, or how many times you Laugh Out Load [LOL]... it's not going to change those numbers.
posted on July 2, 2001 11:11:55 AM
Geez... I turn my back for a few days and FINALLY people are seeing dimview's statistics for what they really are... shady numbers with lot's of personal opinion peppered in.
It looks like all the BidVille Bashers are here too. This is great! It's the best indicator of all that the $1-Sale at BidVille is a complete success! (they only come out when they feel threatened)
