<< <i>MBA 101? Fixed price listings are the fastest growing part of Ebay Marketplace. Why do you want to discourage fixed priced listings? Ebay's marketplace margins were about 3% lower that forecast, this move is straight up fee increase to fix the margin problem. You give John Donahoe too much credit if you think he has a strategy. His first "strategy" was to emphasize fixed priced listings to compete with Amazon, I guess he gave up on that.
I think I'm not making my point clear. Let's throw out an example:
I am a high volume seller with an anchor store. I get a certain amount of free listings as part of that monthly subscription. Let's say the market is perfect and a 1986 Topps Nolan Ryan in PSA 9 sells for $10 every single time, no more and no less. Shouldn't I, an anchor seller with a monthly subscription, have the benefit of paying less than you, a small time seller that pays no monthly subscription, to list this card as a BIN for $10 assuming that we will end up getting the same visibility? Shouldn't the $150/month that I pay give me some sort of advantage over you in terms of listing fees? If your answer is no, please explain why you don't think that's fair. Because the way I see it, if they let you list $10 cards for free, I'm the one being treated unfairly since the $150/month I pay isn't giving me any sort of competitive advantage.
They are not discouraging fixed price listings, they are catering more to the customers that bring them the bulk of the revenue and giving incentive for more people to become that type of customer. That's what any responsible business would and should do. Ebay does want fixed price listings, but they want them from well-run businesses that have a system in place. Not house fraus shuffling through their junk drawers looking for crap to sell. In that sense ebay is becoming very much like Amazon.
Lee >>
This is called market segmentation....as a firm, you go where the money is...you make offerings to this segment and ignore the segment with low revenue potential...if you want to be profitable, this is standard operating procedure....they just scale it...once again, MBA 101.
<< <i>MBA 101? Fixed price listings are the fastest growing part of Ebay Marketplace. Why do you want to discourage fixed priced listings? Ebay's marketplace margins were about 3% lower that forecast, this move is straight up fee increase to fix the margin problem. You give John Donahoe too much credit if you think he has a strategy. His first "strategy" was to emphasize fixed priced listings to compete with Amazon, I guess he gave up on that.
I think I'm not making my point clear. Let's throw out an example:
I am a high volume seller with an anchor store. I get a certain amount of free listings as part of that monthly subscription. Let's say the market is perfect and a 1986 Topps Nolan Ryan in PSA 9 sells for $10 every single time, no more and no less. Shouldn't I, an anchor seller with a monthly subscription, have the benefit of paying less than you, a small time seller that pays no monthly subscription, to list this card as a BIN for $10 assuming that we will end up getting the same visibility? Shouldn't the $150/month that I pay give me some sort of advantage over you in terms of listing fees? If your answer is no, please explain why you don't think that's fair. Because the way I see it, if they let you list $10 cards for free, I'm the one being treated unfairly since the $150/month I pay isn't giving me any sort of competitive advantage.
They are not discouraging fixed price listings, they are catering more to the customers that bring them the bulk of the revenue and giving incentive for more people to become that type of customer. That's what any responsible business would and should do. Ebay does want fixed price listings, but they want them from well-run businesses that have a system in place. Not house fraus shuffling through their junk drawers looking for crap to sell. In that sense ebay is becoming very much like Amazon.
Lee >>
Lee - I get your point. Ebay stores already have lower FVF fees and more free listings. Shouldn't ebay find a way to give you more benefit for the $150 you pay rather than hammering the small seller? That is like taking away the drink and peanuts from coach class so that business class feels better for paying 3 times the cost for the ticket.
Lee - I get your point. Ebay stores already have lower FVF fees and more free listings. Shouldn't ebay find a way to give you more benefit for the $150 you pay rather than hammering the small seller? That is like taking away the drink and peanuts from coach class so that business class feels better for paying 3 times the cost for the ticket.
Yes and no. Yes they should give stores more benefits; all things being equal, ebay doesn't give a whole lot of perks to store owners. But on this particular topic I do believe that smaller sellers should have to pay to play. In many cases I am selling the exact same items as smaller sellers, so they are my direct competition for those items (which is why I don't think your airline analogy works). I should have more motivation to list cards that sell for $10 and under, and someone paying .15 or whatever it costs to list should have less motivation. The money that I pay every month should give me a competitive advantage.
Yes it's a hobby and yes it should be fun, but that part of ebay died a long time ago in the early 2000s. I think you're correct in saying that it looks like they're trying to send specific segments back to auctions. Maybe their research shows that for these areas sales are better overall (definitely not the case in cards, I think we can all agree), who the hell knows. I'm not trying to say they should crush the small sellers or push them out, but I am saying there should be more of a gap in what the store owners and the non-store owners receive from ebay. I'd be perfectly happy with them lowering my fees and keeping yours the same, but knowing ebay that ain't gonna happen.
I don't have an ebay store, but I think I'd be content with a resolution that for $15.95/mo, you get unlimited free listings (i.e., no listing fees) for the entire month, regardless of whether you go with auction or fixed price. The benefits of the store are not financially advantageous if you factor in the frequency with which the average non-store seller receives invitations for periodic unlimited free listing promotions.
Separate question: is the power seller / top rated seller discount for FVF the same percentage for ebay stores as what we get for non-store sellers (20%)?
<< <i>I have a MBA as well from a top business school. I know ebay is not a charity and is still the top venue for my hobby. I will still list under the new FU rule and find a way to make it work....I have done it every time ebay changes the rules. >>
If you have a MBA from a top school then you would have it figured out already.
Random Question, has anyone seen anything that indicates what will happen to current Good Til Canceled Fixed Price listings on the 15th? WIll they be allowed to finish there current 30 day round, or will I be hit with fees on the 16th?
Looking to have some custom cuts or plain custom cards built? PM me.
If the 15th is the first day of the new deal then anything listed before that date will be on the terms of the old deal. So on the 14th you could load up GTC or 30 day listings and still get 30 more days out of them. On the 14th it would also make sense to end any GTC or 30 day listings you have that will be ending on the 15th and a week or so after, and relist them on the 14th to get another full 30 days more on the old deal. This would apply to non-store sellers who sell in a large quantity and will be affected by the new changes.
<< <i>I don't have an ebay store, but I think I'd be content with a resolution that for $15.95/mo, you get unlimited free listings (i.e., no listing fees) for the entire month, regardless of whether you go with auction or fixed price. The benefits of the store are not financially advantageous if you factor in the frequency with which the average non-store seller receives invitations for periodic unlimited free listing promotions.
Separate question: is the power seller / top rated seller discount for FVF the same percentage for ebay stores as what we get for non-store sellers (20%)? >>
Lee can verify but my understanding is that the FVF discount for top rated is the same regardless of the channel used.
I agree with you that the solution is to make the ebay stores a more attractive proposition to not only small sellers but every level of seller.
Lee can verify but my understanding is that the FVF discount for top rated is the same regardless of the channel used.
I agree with you that the solution is to make the ebay stores a more attractive proposition to not only small sellers but every level of seller.
I believe the discount is the same 20% for everybody but I could be wrong.
We definitely agree on the solution. I think the whopping 1% savings on FVF's for store owners is kind of ludicrous, as is the 2500 free listings for an anchor store. Not so much that 2500 isn't good savings, but after that you have to get to something ridiculous like 100k listings or $2 mil in business (nobody knows for sure what the threshold is, just guessing) to see any increased savings. I have about 7-10k listings going on Good Til Canceled in any given month and there isn't an immediate threshold goal that I'm working towards because there are no savings to be had.
<< <i>Lee can verify but my understanding is that the FVF discount for top rated is the same regardless of the channel used.
I agree with you that the solution is to make the ebay stores a more attractive proposition to not only small sellers but every level of seller.
I believe the discount is the same 20% for everybody but I could be wrong.
We definitely agree on the solution. I think the whopping 1% savings on FVF's for store owners is kind of ludicrous, as is the 2500 free listings for an anchor store. Not so much that 2500 isn't good savings, but after that you have to get to something ridiculous like 100k listings or $2 mil in business (nobody knows for sure what the threshold is, just guessing) to see any increased savings. I have about 7-10k listings going on Good Til Canceled in any given month and there isn't an immediate threshold goal that I'm working towards because there are no savings to be had.
Lee >>
Lee do you not get 5,000-10,000 free listings per month? I've been getting that and sometimes more every month for as long as I can remember. It's not good for GTC listing but is for 30 day day fixed price listings. Takes a bit of extra time to relist after 30 days (I usually just wait till the next free listings offer comes around) but it saves me 500 bucks a month or so.
Lee do you not get 5,000-10,000 free listings per month? I've been getting that and sometimes more every month for as long as I can remember. It's not good for GTC listing but is for 30 day day fixed price listings. Takes a bit of extra time to relist after 30 days (I usually just wait till the next free listings offer comes around) but it saves me 500 bucks a month or so.
I do get the offers but my goal right now is to get everything I do streamlined so I can spend more time buying and listing new inventory rather than futzing with what I've already taken the time to list. If half my time is spent trying to keep track of what needs to be relisted and keeping track of what's up and what's not that is counterproductive to what I'm trying to accomplish.
<< <i>Lee do you not get 5,000-10,000 free listings per month? I've been getting that and sometimes more every month for as long as I can remember. It's not good for GTC listing but is for 30 day day fixed price listings. Takes a bit of extra time to relist after 30 days (I usually just wait till the next free listings offer comes around) but it saves me 500 bucks a month or so.
I do get the offers but my goal right now is to get everything I do streamlined so I can spend more time buying and listing new inventory rather than futzing with what I've already taken the time to list. If half my time is spent trying to keep track of what needs to be relisted and keeping track of what's up and what's not that is counterproductive to what I'm trying to accomplish. >>
I calculated it last month. It took me an extra 4.5 hours to take advantage of the free listings. It saved me 500 dollars. That's not a bad hourly rate. Is paying yourself 100 bucks an hour really counterproductive to what you are trying to accomplish?
There are other factors at stake: How much in sales are you giving up in the periods when your items aren't currently up? How many unsold listings fall through the cracks and forget to be relisted?
I currently have about 8k listings over 2 accounts and get 5000 total free GTC listings. So in the end I'm looking at saving myself $150 to completely throw my system into flux and take the focus off growing my inventory which is my main objective right now. Not worth it for me personally, but I can certainly see how it would be for others.
If ebay's primary goal it to increase their revenue, then from my point of view it would be logical to offer unlimited free listings regardless of category or format. Over the course of a year, I would have logarithmically more items listed and therefore be potential sales transactions from which they would earn FVF's, compared to the amount I put up now. It wouldn't take all that high a percentage of their sellers to act similarly before the profits would counterbalance any losses they may see from not acquiring listing fees from some people who sell less items.
I'm a coin & currency dealer and have done eBay since 1997... I'm sure there are a few sellers whom this will legitimately hurt to some small degree, but frankly I LOVE this change.
It's not an FU to small sellers; it's an FU to sellers who abuse free listings to put up a bunch of overpriced BIN listings just to see if they can find a sucker, at no cost to them.
I'm totally sick of doing a search and having my listings buried among a bunch of stupid money BINs that wouldn't be there if they weren't free.
Also, I imagine eBay's not happy about waste of time overpriced BINs taking up bandwidth, not generating income and reducing their income further in reduced sell prices for the other legit listings getting buried by the superfluous BINs.
On the buying side of it- If I'm looking for something and have to wade through a bunch of overpriced junk then I quickly lose interest...and I'm thinking that there are a few hundred thousand buyers out there who agree.
From a buying perspective, I find it fairly simple to just click the sort button that re-orders items by lowest price first.
From a selling perspective, that sort is useful too. If I'm doing a fixed price instead of an auction, I can just sort similar items to the one I'm selling by lowest price first and then set my buy-it-now a dollar or 2 lower than the cheapest BIN I see listed.
I guess I don't quite understand why it is so hard to wade through high BIN items when the sort features are present and easy to use?
The problem is that this isnt going to remove the clutter...all it is going to do is remove the BIN with high prices and change it to auctions with ridiculous low minimum bids. If everyone remembers last year when the original change for the 50 free listings started, it was mentioned (and argued against I might add) that there would be an increase in crap listings and there was. Now there is going to be DOUBLE the amount of free listings up, the only difference is the format.
<< <i>The problem is that this isnt going to remove the clutter...all it is going to do is remove the BIN with high prices and change it to auctions with ridiculous low minimum bids. If everyone remembers last year when the original change for the 50 free listings started, it was mentioned (and argued against I might add) that there would be an increase in crap listings and there was. Now there is going to be DOUBLE the amount of free listings up, the only difference is the format. >>
Still, why would you ever even need to acknowledge the high start price listings? Even if there are a million of them, just sort them by lowest price first and quit reading listing titles once you've passed the cost threshold of what you're willing to spend on that item?
<< <i> Still, why would you ever even need to acknowledge the high start price listings? Even if there are a million of them, just sort them by lowest price first and quit reading listing titles once you've passed the cost threshold of what you're willing to spend on that item? >>
True that on high dollar items, you can sort that way, but most of the clutter coming from BINS is not the higher dollar items, its from the thousands of $1.00 BINS. Granted if you are looking for a specific card you can usually avoid the mess, but myself and many others actually just browse whats listed, which many times gets lost in the thousands of $1 BINS for 1987 Topps commons
From a buying perspective, I find it fairly simple to just click the sort button that re-orders items by lowest price first.
You're assuming that all buyers are looking for the cheapest item. Most collectors want something that is premium for the grade... and any collector will tell you that all MS64s (or more appropriately in your case, PSA9s) are not created equal. So simply sorting by cheapest price doesn't work for everyone.
From a selling perspective, that sort is useful too. If I'm doing a fixed price instead of an auction, I can just sort similar items to the one I'm selling by lowest price first and then set my buy-it-now a dollar or 2 lower than the cheapest BIN I see listed.
Again, you're making an assumption that everyone thinks the same way you do, and it just isn't necessarily true. Not all sellers simply try to undercut price. For starters, one of the cheap sellers could be someone who inherited the item or through some other means by which he/she has nothing in it and simply wants to make it go away-whereas I as a dealer had to pay fair money to get the item and need to price it at a level that affords me a profit. Why do I want to lose money just to undercut on price? Answer: I don't...so the "simply sort and price it cheaper than the lowest guy" idea also fails.
One final aside... in my experience, folks who buy strictly based on cheapest price are seldom happy in the long run. The bitterness of poor quality remains long after the sweetness of low price has been forgotten.
<< <i>I'm a coin & currency dealer and have done eBay since 1997... I'm sure there are a few sellers whom this will legitimately hurt to some small degree, but frankly I LOVE this change.
It's not an FU to small sellers; it's an FU to sellers who abuse free listings to put up a bunch of overpriced BIN listings just to see if they can find a sucker, at no cost to them.
I'm totally sick of doing a search and having my listings buried among a bunch of stupid money BINs that wouldn't be there if they weren't free.
Also, I imagine eBay's not happy about waste of time overpriced BINs taking up bandwidth, not generating income and reducing their income further in reduced sell prices for the other legit listings getting buried by the superfluous BINs.
On the buying side of it- If I'm looking for something and have to wade through a bunch of overpriced junk then I quickly lose interest...and I'm thinking that there are a few hundred thousand buyers out there who agree. >>
Listing overpriced BINs is not limited to small sellers. Many of the larger sellers do it as well. So if I pay for store, I now have the right to list overpriced BINs?
76% of ebay's marketplace revenue is from fixed priced sales. It grew 19% this past quarter. Auctions only grew at 10% even though the base is only 1/3 the size of fixed priced. So basically fixed priced is a larger share of the pie and is growing almost at twice the rate of auctions.
Therefore John D and ebay management decided to reduced fixed priced and drive more auctions. Does that sound like a reasonable plan to you? It would appear that buyers like BIN, why are you forcing them to go to auctions?
<< <i>From a buying perspective, I find it fairly simple to just click the sort button that re-orders items by lowest price first.
You're assuming that all buyers are looking for the cheapest item. Most collectors want something that is premium for the grade... and any collector will tell you that all MS64s (or more appropriately in your case, PSA9s) are not created equal. So simply sorting by cheapest price doesn't work for everyone.
From a selling perspective, that sort is useful too. If I'm doing a fixed price instead of an auction, I can just sort similar items to the one I'm selling by lowest price first and then set my buy-it-now a dollar or 2 lower than the cheapest BIN I see listed.
Again, you're making an assumption that everyone thinks the same way you do, and it just isn't necessarily true. Not all sellers simply try to undercut price. For starters, one of the cheap sellers could be someone who inherited the item or through some other means by which he/she has nothing in it and simply wants to make it go away-whereas I as a dealer had to pay fair money to get the item and need to price it at a level that affords me a profit. Why do I want to lose money just to undercut on price? Answer: I don't...so the "simply sort and price it cheaper than the lowest guy" idea also fails.
One final aside... in my experience, folks who buy strictly based on cheapest price are seldom happy in the long run. The bitterness of poor quality remains long after the sweetness of low price has been forgotten. >>
I guess I understand where you're coming from, but you're seeing my point a bit incomplete; I don't mean just buy the cheapest one, I mean sort by lowest price first, and then after that, lets say for an arbitrary example you're looking for some particular card in a PSA 8 and there are 100 of them listed. Then maybe look at the lowest priced 10 or 20 out of that 100 or so and pick the best one that falls within the range you're willing to spend. Just sorting by lowest price does not carry an additional requirement to actually purchase the lowest price one, it just gets you a starting point. As we all know, there are some cards over-graded, some under-graded, and some just about spot on, and all could have the same grade on the flip.
Also, as a seller, I make a different percent profit on just about every item I sell due to a whole lot of factors. Some I break even or lose on, and some I might make 1000% profit on; it all depends on a number of things. And when I set the start price, I have to consider the amount of investment I have into it including raw purchase, grading fees, ebay fees, paypal fees, shipping, and then I assess the high, low, and average for currently listed similar items by other sellers, sold items, and completed yet unsold items, as well as the scarcity on the population report and the quantity of registry participants who might be interested, listed under the player set collectors and the factory set collectors. After all that analysis, I don't even bother with SMR or VCP since the other items I mentioned give me a better idea. It isn't as simple as you make it sound, just going out and undercutting. You do have to consider other items' prices when you list yours though if you want it to actually sell instead of become a museum piece.
Despite the previously expressed rule changes about free fixed listings for sports cards among other categories, has anyone else noticed that it seems to be the case that the rule change only applied to your monthly 50-free items? The by-invitation free listings for fixed price items going on today through June 6 is still showing $0.00 for fixed price items in the sports card category.
I'll still plan to check my invoice next month just in case; I'm no contract lawyer, but I don't expect them to be able to go back and place charges on the account for the fixed price listings during this promo even though they are sports cards if they are free when submitted right now.
Comments
<< <i>MBA 101? Fixed price listings are the fastest growing part of Ebay Marketplace. Why do you want to discourage fixed priced listings? Ebay's marketplace margins were about 3% lower that forecast, this move is straight up fee increase to fix the margin problem. You give John Donahoe too much credit if you think he has a strategy. His first "strategy" was to emphasize fixed priced listings to compete with Amazon, I guess he gave up on that.
I think I'm not making my point clear. Let's throw out an example:
I am a high volume seller with an anchor store. I get a certain amount of free listings as part of that monthly subscription. Let's say the market is perfect and a 1986 Topps Nolan Ryan in PSA 9 sells for $10 every single time, no more and no less. Shouldn't I, an anchor seller with a monthly subscription, have the benefit of paying less than you, a small time seller that pays no monthly subscription, to list this card as a BIN for $10 assuming that we will end up getting the same visibility? Shouldn't the $150/month that I pay give me some sort of advantage over you in terms of listing fees? If your answer is no, please explain why you don't think that's fair. Because the way I see it, if they let you list $10 cards for free, I'm the one being treated unfairly since the $150/month I pay isn't giving me any sort of competitive advantage.
They are not discouraging fixed price listings, they are catering more to the customers that bring them the bulk of the revenue and giving incentive for more people to become that type of customer. That's what any responsible business would and should do. Ebay does want fixed price listings, but they want them from well-run businesses that have a system in place. Not house fraus shuffling through their junk drawers looking for crap to sell. In that sense ebay is becoming very much like Amazon.
Lee >>
This is called market segmentation....as a firm, you go where the money is...you make offerings to this segment and ignore the segment with low revenue potential...if you want to be profitable, this is standard operating procedure....they just scale it...once again, MBA 101.
<< <i>MBA 101? Fixed price listings are the fastest growing part of Ebay Marketplace. Why do you want to discourage fixed priced listings? Ebay's marketplace margins were about 3% lower that forecast, this move is straight up fee increase to fix the margin problem. You give John Donahoe too much credit if you think he has a strategy. His first "strategy" was to emphasize fixed priced listings to compete with Amazon, I guess he gave up on that.
I think I'm not making my point clear. Let's throw out an example:
I am a high volume seller with an anchor store. I get a certain amount of free listings as part of that monthly subscription. Let's say the market is perfect and a 1986 Topps Nolan Ryan in PSA 9 sells for $10 every single time, no more and no less. Shouldn't I, an anchor seller with a monthly subscription, have the benefit of paying less than you, a small time seller that pays no monthly subscription, to list this card as a BIN for $10 assuming that we will end up getting the same visibility? Shouldn't the $150/month that I pay give me some sort of advantage over you in terms of listing fees? If your answer is no, please explain why you don't think that's fair. Because the way I see it, if they let you list $10 cards for free, I'm the one being treated unfairly since the $150/month I pay isn't giving me any sort of competitive advantage.
They are not discouraging fixed price listings, they are catering more to the customers that bring them the bulk of the revenue and giving incentive for more people to become that type of customer. That's what any responsible business would and should do. Ebay does want fixed price listings, but they want them from well-run businesses that have a system in place. Not house fraus shuffling through their junk drawers looking for crap to sell. In that sense ebay is becoming very much like Amazon.
Lee >>
Lee - I get your point. Ebay stores already have lower FVF fees and more free listings. Shouldn't ebay find a way to give you more benefit for the $150 you pay rather than hammering the small seller? That is like taking away the drink and peanuts from coach class so that business class feels better for paying 3 times the cost for the ticket.
Yes and no. Yes they should give stores more benefits; all things being equal, ebay doesn't give a whole lot of perks to store owners. But on this particular topic I do believe that smaller sellers should have to pay to play. In many cases I am selling the exact same items as smaller sellers, so they are my direct competition for those items (which is why I don't think your airline analogy works). I should have more motivation to list cards that sell for $10 and under, and someone paying .15 or whatever it costs to list should have less motivation. The money that I pay every month should give me a competitive advantage.
Yes it's a hobby and yes it should be fun, but that part of ebay died a long time ago in the early 2000s. I think you're correct in saying that it looks like they're trying to send specific segments back to auctions. Maybe their research shows that for these areas sales are better overall (definitely not the case in cards, I think we can all agree), who the hell knows. I'm not trying to say they should crush the small sellers or push them out, but I am saying there should be more of a gap in what the store owners and the non-store owners receive from ebay. I'd be perfectly happy with them lowering my fees and keeping yours the same, but knowing ebay that ain't gonna happen.
Lee
I don't have an ebay store, but I think I'd be content with a resolution that for $15.95/mo, you get unlimited free listings (i.e., no listing fees) for the entire month, regardless of whether you go with auction or fixed price. The benefits of the store are not financially advantageous if you factor in the frequency with which the average non-store seller receives invitations for periodic unlimited free listing promotions.
Separate question: is the power seller / top rated seller discount for FVF the same percentage for ebay stores as what we get for non-store sellers (20%)?
<< <i>I have a MBA as well from a top business school. I know ebay is not a charity and is still the top venue for my hobby. I will still list under the new FU rule and find a way to make it work....I have done it every time ebay changes the rules. >>
If you have a MBA from a top school then you would have it figured out already.
WIll they be allowed to finish there current 30 day round, or will I be hit with fees on the 16th?
Commissions
Check out my Facebook page
<< <i>I don't have an ebay store, but I think I'd be content with a resolution that for $15.95/mo, you get unlimited free listings (i.e., no listing fees) for the entire month, regardless of whether you go with auction or fixed price. The benefits of the store are not financially advantageous if you factor in the frequency with which the average non-store seller receives invitations for periodic unlimited free listing promotions.
Separate question: is the power seller / top rated seller discount for FVF the same percentage for ebay stores as what we get for non-store sellers (20%)? >>
Lee can verify but my understanding is that the FVF discount for top rated is the same regardless of the channel used.
I agree with you that the solution is to make the ebay stores a more attractive proposition to not only small sellers but every level of seller.
I agree with you that the solution is to make the ebay stores a more attractive proposition to not only small sellers but every level of seller.
I believe the discount is the same 20% for everybody but I could be wrong.
We definitely agree on the solution. I think the whopping 1% savings on FVF's for store owners is kind of ludicrous, as is the 2500 free listings for an anchor store. Not so much that 2500 isn't good savings, but after that you have to get to something ridiculous like 100k listings or $2 mil in business (nobody knows for sure what the threshold is, just guessing) to see any increased savings. I have about 7-10k listings going on Good Til Canceled in any given month and there isn't an immediate threshold goal that I'm working towards because there are no savings to be had.
Lee
<< <i>Lee can verify but my understanding is that the FVF discount for top rated is the same regardless of the channel used.
I agree with you that the solution is to make the ebay stores a more attractive proposition to not only small sellers but every level of seller.
I believe the discount is the same 20% for everybody but I could be wrong.
We definitely agree on the solution. I think the whopping 1% savings on FVF's for store owners is kind of ludicrous, as is the 2500 free listings for an anchor store. Not so much that 2500 isn't good savings, but after that you have to get to something ridiculous like 100k listings or $2 mil in business (nobody knows for sure what the threshold is, just guessing) to see any increased savings. I have about 7-10k listings going on Good Til Canceled in any given month and there isn't an immediate threshold goal that I'm working towards because there are no savings to be had.
Lee >>
Lee do you not get 5,000-10,000 free listings per month? I've been getting that and sometimes more every month for as long as I can remember. It's not good for GTC listing but is for 30 day day fixed price listings. Takes a bit of extra time to relist after 30 days (I usually just wait till the next free listings offer comes around) but it saves me 500 bucks a month or so.
I do get the offers but my goal right now is to get everything I do streamlined so I can spend more time buying and listing new inventory rather than futzing with what I've already taken the time to list. If half my time is spent trying to keep track of what needs to be relisted and keeping track of what's up and what's not that is counterproductive to what I'm trying to accomplish.
<< <i>Lee do you not get 5,000-10,000 free listings per month? I've been getting that and sometimes more every month for as long as I can remember. It's not good for GTC listing but is for 30 day day fixed price listings. Takes a bit of extra time to relist after 30 days (I usually just wait till the next free listings offer comes around) but it saves me 500 bucks a month or so.
I do get the offers but my goal right now is to get everything I do streamlined so I can spend more time buying and listing new inventory rather than futzing with what I've already taken the time to list. If half my time is spent trying to keep track of what needs to be relisted and keeping track of what's up and what's not that is counterproductive to what I'm trying to accomplish. >>
I calculated it last month. It took me an extra 4.5 hours to take advantage of the free listings. It saved me 500 dollars. That's not a bad hourly rate. Is paying yourself 100 bucks an hour really counterproductive to what you are trying to accomplish?
I currently have about 8k listings over 2 accounts and get 5000 total free GTC listings. So in the end I'm looking at saving myself $150 to completely throw my system into flux and take the focus off growing my inventory which is my main objective right now. Not worth it for me personally, but I can certainly see how it would be for others.
If ebay's primary goal it to increase their revenue, then from my point of view it would be logical to offer unlimited free listings regardless of category or format. Over the course of a year, I would have logarithmically more items listed and therefore be potential sales transactions from which they would earn FVF's, compared to the amount I put up now. It wouldn't take all that high a percentage of their sellers to act similarly before the profits would counterbalance any losses they may see from not acquiring listing fees from some people who sell less items.
It's not an FU to small sellers; it's an FU to sellers who abuse free listings to put up a bunch of overpriced BIN listings just to see if they can find a sucker, at no cost to them.
I'm totally sick of doing a search and having my listings buried among a bunch of stupid money BINs that wouldn't be there if they weren't free.
Also, I imagine eBay's not happy about waste of time overpriced BINs taking up bandwidth, not generating income and reducing their income further in reduced sell prices for the other legit listings getting buried by the superfluous BINs.
On the buying side of it- If I'm looking for something and have to wade through a bunch of overpriced junk then I quickly lose interest...and I'm thinking that there are a few hundred thousand buyers out there who agree.
RIP Mom- 1932-2012
From a selling perspective, that sort is useful too. If I'm doing a fixed price instead of an auction, I can just sort similar items to the one I'm selling by lowest price first and then set my buy-it-now a dollar or 2 lower than the cheapest BIN I see listed.
I guess I don't quite understand why it is so hard to wade through high BIN items when the sort features are present and easy to use?
<< <i>The problem is that this isnt going to remove the clutter...all it is going to do is remove the BIN with high prices and change it to auctions with ridiculous low minimum bids. If everyone remembers last year when the original change for the 50 free listings started, it was mentioned (and argued against I might add) that there would be an increase in crap listings and there was. Now there is going to be DOUBLE the amount of free listings up, the only difference is the format. >>
Still, why would you ever even need to acknowledge the high start price listings? Even if there are a million of them, just sort them by lowest price first and quit reading listing titles once you've passed the cost threshold of what you're willing to spend on that item?
<< <i>
Still, why would you ever even need to acknowledge the high start price listings? Even if there are a million of them, just sort them by lowest price first and quit reading listing titles once you've passed the cost threshold of what you're willing to spend on that item? >>
True that on high dollar items, you can sort that way, but most of the clutter coming from BINS is not the higher dollar items, its from the thousands of $1.00 BINS. Granted if you are looking for a specific card you can usually avoid the mess, but myself and many others actually just browse whats listed, which many times gets lost in the thousands of $1 BINS for 1987 Topps commons
You're assuming that all buyers are looking for the cheapest item. Most collectors want something that is premium for the grade... and any collector will tell you that all MS64s (or more appropriately in your case, PSA9s) are not created equal. So simply sorting by cheapest price doesn't work for everyone.
From a selling perspective, that sort is useful too. If I'm doing a fixed price instead of an auction, I can just sort similar items to the one I'm selling by lowest price first and then set my buy-it-now a dollar or 2 lower than the cheapest BIN I see listed.
Again, you're making an assumption that everyone thinks the same way you do, and it just isn't necessarily true. Not all sellers simply try to undercut price. For starters, one of the cheap sellers could be someone who inherited the item or through some other means by which he/she has nothing in it and simply wants to make it go away-whereas I as a dealer had to pay fair money to get the item and need to price it at a level that affords me a profit. Why do I want to lose money just to undercut on price? Answer: I don't...so the "simply sort and price it cheaper than the lowest guy" idea also fails.
One final aside... in my experience, folks who buy strictly based on cheapest price are seldom happy in the long run. The bitterness of poor quality remains long after the sweetness of low price has been forgotten.
RIP Mom- 1932-2012
<< <i>I'm a coin & currency dealer and have done eBay since 1997... I'm sure there are a few sellers whom this will legitimately hurt to some small degree, but frankly I LOVE this change.
It's not an FU to small sellers; it's an FU to sellers who abuse free listings to put up a bunch of overpriced BIN listings just to see if they can find a sucker, at no cost to them.
I'm totally sick of doing a search and having my listings buried among a bunch of stupid money BINs that wouldn't be there if they weren't free.
Also, I imagine eBay's not happy about waste of time overpriced BINs taking up bandwidth, not generating income and reducing their income further in reduced sell prices for the other legit listings getting buried by the superfluous BINs.
On the buying side of it- If I'm looking for something and have to wade through a bunch of overpriced junk then I quickly lose interest...and I'm thinking that there are a few hundred thousand buyers out there who agree. >>
Listing overpriced BINs is not limited to small sellers. Many of the larger sellers do it as well. So if I pay for store, I now have the right to list overpriced BINs?
76% of ebay's marketplace revenue is from fixed priced sales. It grew 19% this past quarter. Auctions only grew at 10% even though the base is only 1/3 the size of fixed priced. So basically fixed priced is a larger share of the pie and is growing almost at twice the rate of auctions.
Therefore John D and ebay management decided to reduced fixed priced and drive more auctions. Does that sound like a reasonable plan to you? It would appear that buyers like BIN, why are you forcing them to go to auctions?
<< <i>From a buying perspective, I find it fairly simple to just click the sort button that re-orders items by lowest price first.
You're assuming that all buyers are looking for the cheapest item. Most collectors want something that is premium for the grade... and any collector will tell you that all MS64s (or more appropriately in your case, PSA9s) are not created equal. So simply sorting by cheapest price doesn't work for everyone.
From a selling perspective, that sort is useful too. If I'm doing a fixed price instead of an auction, I can just sort similar items to the one I'm selling by lowest price first and then set my buy-it-now a dollar or 2 lower than the cheapest BIN I see listed.
Again, you're making an assumption that everyone thinks the same way you do, and it just isn't necessarily true. Not all sellers simply try to undercut price. For starters, one of the cheap sellers could be someone who inherited the item or through some other means by which he/she has nothing in it and simply wants to make it go away-whereas I as a dealer had to pay fair money to get the item and need to price it at a level that affords me a profit. Why do I want to lose money just to undercut on price? Answer: I don't...so the "simply sort and price it cheaper than the lowest guy" idea also fails.
One final aside... in my experience, folks who buy strictly based on cheapest price are seldom happy in the long run. The bitterness of poor quality remains long after the sweetness of low price has been forgotten. >>
I guess I understand where you're coming from, but you're seeing my point a bit incomplete; I don't mean just buy the cheapest one, I mean sort by lowest price first, and then after that, lets say for an arbitrary example you're looking for some particular card in a PSA 8 and there are 100 of them listed. Then maybe look at the lowest priced 10 or 20 out of that 100 or so and pick the best one that falls within the range you're willing to spend. Just sorting by lowest price does not carry an additional requirement to actually purchase the lowest price one, it just gets you a starting point. As we all know, there are some cards over-graded, some under-graded, and some just about spot on, and all could have the same grade on the flip.
Also, as a seller, I make a different percent profit on just about every item I sell due to a whole lot of factors. Some I break even or lose on, and some I might make 1000% profit on; it all depends on a number of things. And when I set the start price, I have to consider the amount of investment I have into it including raw purchase, grading fees, ebay fees, paypal fees, shipping, and then I assess the high, low, and average for currently listed similar items by other sellers, sold items, and completed yet unsold items, as well as the scarcity on the population report and the quantity of registry participants who might be interested, listed under the player set collectors and the factory set collectors. After all that analysis, I don't even bother with SMR or VCP since the other items I mentioned give me a better idea. It isn't as simple as you make it sound, just going out and undercutting. You do have to consider other items' prices when you list yours though if you want it to actually sell instead of become a museum piece.
RIP Mom- 1932-2012
Despite the previously expressed rule changes about free fixed listings for sports cards among other categories, has anyone else noticed that it seems to be the case that the rule change only applied to your monthly 50-free items? The by-invitation free listings for fixed price items going on today through June 6 is still showing $0.00 for fixed price items in the sports card category.
I'll still plan to check my invoice next month just in case; I'm no contract lawyer, but I don't expect them to be able to go back and place charges on the account for the fixed price listings during this promo even though they are sports cards if they are free when submitted right now.