Subject:
|
Re: Thoughts on Brickbay fees (Re: Brickbay problems........again)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.market.buy-sell-trade
|
Date:
|
Mon, 2 Jul 2001 02:32:06 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
410 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.market.buy-sell-trade, Ray Sanders writes:
> In lugnet.market.buy-sell-trade, Jan-Albert van Ree writes:
> > Ray Sanders wrote:
> >
> > > Having said this, implementing such a fee (such as the one described
> > > above)
> > > would place an unequitable burden on the small sellers. Heres something
> > > that I believe would be a might more fair:
> > >
> > > 1) Charge the seller 1-cent for each lot when added to BrickBay (batch
> > > upload
> > > or manual)
> >
> > That MIGHT work, although some people might stop listing small batches of
> > parts because it makes the profit margin even smaller.
> >
> > > 2) On the last day of the month, for any lot which has been listed for
> > > more
> > > than 3 weeks...
> > > 2a) Charge the seller 1-cent for each lot present on the last day of the
> > > month
> > > (for lots with quantities less than 2000) *or*
> > > 2b) Charge the seller 1-cent for each lot present on the last day of the
> > > month
> > > (per whole multiple of 1000 units, when the quantity is at least 2,000
> > > units)
> >
> > 2a seems VERY unfair to certain sellers. If a seller had some very rare
> > parts, priced "fair" he might still not sell them within a month. Why fine
> > him for putting up rare parts, which might not be sold much? This would
> > lead people to only post certain parts (which sell very fast) on Brickbay
> > and perhaps mention in their shops that they have more parts on sale
> > elsewhere, so Dan might actually get less, since part of the deal is made
> > without Brickbay.
>
> Every lot listed on Brickbay consumes resources. Those resources might be
> bandwidth, disk space, etc. If someone has two 'Yellow 1 x 2 Brick's listed, the
> odds are small that those would be desirable parts. They have an intrinsic value
> that is small. Yet they take up the same amount of search resources, bandwidth
> to display, etc, as someone who has 800 'Yellow 1 x 2 Brick's listed. My
> suggestion is a minimalist proposal to fairly spread the costs to keep Brickbay
> running reliably.
>
> > I do know at least that the minute this system goes in affect I will close
> > my store... this idea is like slapping somebody in the face for trying to
> > sell non-regular stuff.
>
> Why is that ? When I looked at your store, you have 50 lots listed, while I have
> 1200 in my store. I would be impacted much more by this proposal than you would.
> I see this proposal costing you an additional 50-cents to $1 per month. In my
> store, the additional cost would be somewhere around $20 per month.
>
> > Besides : you'd need to have a special verification system, or otherwise I
> > could just delete all parts and re-upload them again every month, bypassing
> > your fee structure.
>
> Not true, the method which I proposed would charge a minimal fee at the time
> that the lot is added. Removing the lot at the end of the month, then adding it
> again would only change the timing of the fee, not avoid it. This is only one
> possible method of generating income for Brickbay (and not one that Dan has
> blessed or commented on).
>
> > > This would have several effects... it would place the burden more
> > > equitably on
> > > the sellers with 1) large number of lots, 2) large quantities on
> > > individual lots, 3) sellers who have listings, but little or no sales. I
> > > do not think this type of charge should be assessed on the price that a
> > > lot is offered at (something that I consider very eBay-esque). This would
> > > also have the effect of encouraging a few sellers, who have somewhat
> > > sloppy habits, to clean up their lots/inventory. I have observed more than
> > > a few instances of one seller offering the exact same part in 5-10 lots
> > > (small quantities) with varying prices. It would also have the effect of
> > > getting sellers to flush out very small quantites (1s and 2s) of parts
> > > which have a low resale price point. Small quantities of rare parts should
> > > be unaffected.
> >
> > Why do we NEED to flush out small quantities? Some people only need one or
> > two of a certain type of part. I for one only have a few parts in my store,
> > all small quantities. I have no problem with it, and I don't think anybody
> > else does. If you want more, don't buy from me but look for a seller which
> > has large numbers of what you need.
>
> Perhaps 'flush out' was a poor choice of words. We do not have to flush out
> small quantities of parts, but please see my comments above about intrinsic
> value vs resources consumed. It would be a good idea is to expect a seller to
> keep all quantities of a particular part (same color and condition) listed as
> one lot rather than multiple small lots. Call it store cleanliness. Almost like
> walking into a retailer and finding multiple copies of an item scattered all
> over the place rather then neatly organized. (This has happened to me many
> times, like trying to find all the Gungan Patrols in a K-mart this past spring)
>
>
> Ray
> <Brickbay://Cosmic Toys/>
I've commented on this before, but want to bring it up in the context of the
point raised above. Suppose you have 800 yellow 1x2 bricks listed, and a buyer
buys all but a few, lets say 798, (this stuff does happen, and often) then you
only have 2 of these less desirable bricks in your store.
Now, these are very likely going to be in your store for a long time, and a
monthly fee is gonna cost you dearly. Are you going to go through all your 1200
lots every month to see if the are no such small, unlikely-to-be-sold lots in
your store. I have over 1700 lots in my store, checking each lot every month
would be a major p...
A listing fee of 1 to 3 cents/lot would be my suggestion, maybe in combination
with a flat monthy store maintenance fee of a few dollars. Paul
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
34 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
