Subject:
|
Re: Fool's Question
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.market.theory
|
Date:
|
Wed, 16 Jun 1999 16:38:36 GMT
|
Reply-To:
|
C576653@CCLABS.stopspamMISSOURI.EDU
|
Viewed:
|
568 times
|
| |
|
|
Hi,
David Sorkin and Mike Stanley both got parts right from my POV.
David Zorn wrote:
> Flame if you want. But an helpful answer might convert me to your
> opinion.
I don't want to flame or convert, but answering you will help me to
clarify my own thoughts, so completely ignoring the benefits of healthy
conversation, this is good for me :-)
> Why do sellers on Ebay care if there is sniping?
I have a large (over 100) pool of past customers. Many of them are
concerned with eBay sucking. I am exploring the possibility of using
eBay for a parts auction while disenfranchising as few as possible. I
have customer loyalty, just like I expect them to have seller loyalty.
(If nothing else, I know they'll pay, and they know that I'll ship such
that they have their LEGO while they still remember why they wanted it.)
There are also a bunch of fuzzy psychological issues too. I'll talk
about some of them below.
> I understand why bidders hate it. I understand that the Ebay rules are
> not the best ones.
Right, it's been done to death...that's why I was just talking about
fixes, rather than problems.
> But if you are going to sell an item on Ebay knowing what the rules
> are, why do you want to discourage sniping?
Ultimately, I guess sniping as worked well for me as a seller. And, in
the bottom line sense, I don't really care if the winner sniped to get
there, or not. (Hell, if I implement the system I'm talking about, I'd
prefer snipers to win.) But, I want to do something that balances my
win and my customers' wins.
But, here are some of those fuzzy issues. I like this online community.
Most of the people who benefit from my discounting strategy will be RTL
and LUGnet readers. I'll be helping y'all. Sometimes y'all help me.
Also, I derive pleasure from performing a value-added service. I don't
do this just to generate income...I'm an IT manager - even at public
university rates, this really isn't worth my time if that's all it were.
> I think that Chris Weeks has a clever way of discouraging sniping. But
I doubt it. I think sniping will still happen a lot. But, I'll be
giving the advantage to people who plan ahead, who are my previous
customers in good standing, etc.
> isn't he reducing his return substantially by going out of his way to
> discourage sniping? Under his system (described elsewhere in this
> group) a first day bidder with a WTP of $100 can bid $121 but if that
> bidder wins Chris will only get from him $100 minus his costs. A
> bidder seeing the auction on the last day with a WTP of $120 will not
> bid, and Chris will lose about $20 in the process. Why???
I think that I am _risking_ a reduced return in exchange for getting
more people to feel good about what I'm doing. I don't think said loss
is a certainty. Only in the case where the sniper's WTP falls between
the amount paid by the first guy and the amount they bid does it work
poorly for me. I'm also willing to take a loss (from maximal gain) to
work toward a solution to perceived problems with eBay. When this is
all done, I (we) will have more info on how using eBay in altered ways works.
> As someone with more interest than buying than selling, I'm hip to the
> problems in Ebay's rules. But I'm trying to see why those rules are as
> bad for the sellers.
Because as much as the benefit of eBay is HUGE market, I want my pool of
buyers to include you guys.
--
Sincerely,
Christopher L. Weeks
central Missouri, USA
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Fool's Question
|
| Alright. I know that lots of people have super-strong opinions about this issue. The question I'm about to ask is not a challenge. I honestly don't know the answer. Flame if you want. But an helpful answer might convert me to your opinion. Why do (...) (25 years ago, 16-Jun-99, to lugnet.market.theory)
|
7 Messages in This Thread:
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
