posted on February 14, 2001 09:33:53 PM new
I have tryed to get this vote but had it closed down posted it wrong.
I am listing on Bidville a little on bidbay. I would like to launch on these other sites like I did no Yahoo (Face it Yahoo has dropped the ball.) Also why should Yahoo have top billing on this site since it has dropped to number 4 and still falling.
Auction Watch I vote drop Yahoo's and bring on the new number 2 and 3 Bidbay and Bidville so I can get back to work on AW like I did before the Yahoo mess. AW I hope will let the members vote!
posted on February 14, 2001 09:52:23 PM new
Good chance BidBay will never get their own forum here especially after stealing the auction templates from Auction Watch.
And pray tell how did Yahoo drop the ball?
Because they began to charge?
All of these other companies are going to charge as well don't you know.
Some may do it with only FVF's but if there are no buyers there those companies will go bankrupt...so in effect they will have to start charging listing fees as well in order to create revenue to stay afloat but then sellers will flee from there and guess what...they will still go out of business.
Do you guys see what kind of vicious cycles are being created here jumping from one site to the next?
posted on February 14, 2001 10:17:15 PM new
auctiongallery2 >
Do you guys see what kind of vicious cycles are being created here jumping from one site to the next?
Do corporate executives understand that they will lose 90% of listings should they decide to implement listing fees in their low traffic auction sites?
posted on February 14, 2001 11:24:46 PM new
Dimview,
yes I'm sure they do know that.
But there is no avoiding it. Just check out the BidBay SB2 filing.
They have only earned $17,000.00 in revenue over the last year and are over 3 million in the hole.
Why do you think they have avoided charging fees for so long?
I joined BidBay in June of 2000 and the free listings were supposed to end that month. They were extended through July and supposed to end August 1st...then another extension...and then another and now it's February of 2001.
The simple fact is they are going to have to charge as all companies will eventually.
This can have some benefits but an extreme detriment.
One thing it will cut down on all of the garbage listings, but of course the sellers will flee to the next "viable alternative" to eBay.
So now the sellers will have to build up yet another buyer base at a new site.
Then that site will have to eventually charge.
Sellers flee...hence the circle is unbroken and repeats viciously I might add.
People claim that they would have stayed if only Yahoo charged FVF's.
But once again if the buyers are not there they would have continued to lose money and eventually that division would have to close down or start charging insertion fees.
I have no problem with insertion fees. I gladly pay them at eBay because it in the end it all works out.
I think if sites like BidBay were a little wiser...they would have started charging FVF's once they opened up as well as feature enhancements. Not insertion mind you...but the FVF's.
This would have allowed for some revenue for the company without punishing sellers for helping build up a buyer base on the site as they would only pay a fee if and when they sell. Plus the feature enhancement charges would have kept garbage off of the front page and in feature category listings giving the site more credibility.
This revenue could have been directed at offsetting some of the costs or just pumped directly into some kind of ad campaign.
Then after building up a decent buyer base charge an extremely small insertion fee with anywhere from 1 to 5 free relistings. A site like BidVille that claims over 300,000 current auctions running could have made $15,000 on a nickel insertion fee.
Once again the seller is not punished for helping build a buyer base.
Only increasing the insertion fees as actual transactions completed increase on the site.
I also think if a seller is truly interested in helping to build up that "viable alternative" to eBay they wouldn't be so opposed to a fee structure like that.
These companies are in the business of making money. They are not in the business to supplement our costs that are associated with our business.
As long as a company can provide me access to a decent sized buyer pool and can back that up with real numbers I will have no problem paying an insertion fee or FVF fee. That is the gamble associated with doing business.
I for one thing $.30 at "feebay" is incredibly reasonable and will continue to do my business there as I associate not only a listing fee with my cost of business but my time as well and have learned that even though a site is "free" there is a cost in time and having an item tied up that could be listed and sold on eBay.
