I just found a letter I sent Meg in 2002 warning her, among other things, that bumping bids to to match increments was unjust and illegal. They just LOST a $$$ class action suit because of this stupid feature she invented.
I was dumped out of Turbolister for having Windows 98 so hadn't sold for 2 years. Now I have a new computer and sold several art works for about $16,000. I wondered why I wasn't back as a power seller. It's because an average of 4 listings per month is required. Why?? Because Wall St. judges Meg by LISTINGS -- not $ volume. What IDIOTS!!!!!
I just listed 2 items and both were searchable in 15 minutes and thumbnails were included in 30 minutes. She's worried! My problem is that I want to also list in UK and Turbolister is making it impossible. What stupid programmers!!!!
Have to wonder..if that is why sellers get the runaround from ebay techs about getting the "glitches" fixed. They must have the same view over there (i.e. that sellers will just accept it to get buyer exposure). Read the boards over there and you'll find sellers are ready to jump as soon as google or any other large company comes up with some competition. With the monthly and per items fees many sellers have given up and moved on to run their own sites with a shopping cart...using ebay only once in awhile to acquire new customers. Wake up ebay and stockholders.
I once was in a small company that had many obvious mistakes in it's operations. I always thought if a crisis ever came, just making these obvious fixes would preserve stable operations. The CEO ran off with his girlfriend -- and nothing got fixed; all decisions went wrong and wronger, the obvious corrections weren't taken. When Meg's flawed system collapses, which may be soon, decisions will go haywire, the site will be in failure, and there will essentially be no management. A company that has made as many poor operating decisions as EBAY will never survive the crisis -- which is inevitable,
Had a minute to jump back on the board. Been busy with family stuff today and can only stay on a minute, but I'll be back soon as time permits. Thanks for wishing me back, Walking! Seichiro, thanks for the input. It's quite helpful, except for the sniping between you and Pull (lol). Actually, everyone has been helpful.
Nice to see the healthy dialogue. Much to digest. Hopefully I can add a slightly different perspective, which may also be helpful.
Best to all.
Just use caution with those who downplay the problems on Ebay. Some have the motivation of protecting their investment. There is nothing wrong with that but they may skew one side. I have no investment interest in Ebay, I do however would like to see a change of management. I am an honest and long-time businessman and I would like to see Ebay for the better believe it or not. I do understand how to treat customers and see where Ebay is failing. I�ve been on Ebay for ten years and I have not seen it so bad in the whole time I�ve been there with many, many issues. I�ve never seen a company mistreat it�s users like Ebay has. They probably think they can get away with it because they are a monopoly. This will work in the short-term but I believe it�s very bad in the long run. I�ve never seen a company run where it does not listen to its users and what the users want. Ok, I can think of one and that is AOL. I�ve never seen a company put money ahead of the security of its users. Well, I can�t think of a case of this but this may end up being the test case.
Don�t discount Alexa, Medved, and Dealscart completely. While people may dispute their accuracy they do show disturbing trends. The chart shows daily reach by percentage for Ebay for the last five years.
As you can see over a five year period Ebay is back at where they were in 2002. Alexa does claim more accuracy over time than a short period of time. The trends show quite a drop in traffic since last year. While Medved below shows the listing counts since 1998.
I�ve been watching the listings for some time now and without the listing sales the listings flatten out at 12 million. You have to go back to the end of 2003 when they started flattening out at 12 million. The strategy last year, and they admitted it was a big risk, was to force more items in core. So far you can see that is not happening. Dealscart worldwide listing counts show the worldwide counts since Feb 2006.
The first huge drop was when store listings were taken out of core. The second big drop was when the new store-to-core strategy was implemented. As you can see the counts dropped significantly when they tried to force management�s will on their market. This was a big risk and so far it appears to have failed.
This is why I question Ebay�s numbers. Though these sites may not be entirely accurate, the trends are there and it�s not favorable for Ebay. Where is there auction growth going to come from? China? They�ve already failed there. There will be people post and tell you these can not be relied on. Not 1 or 2 but all three are showing disturbing trends and that�s hard to dispute. As a user you understand what is going on with Ebay. They can�t hide these things forever. It�s too bad because I really liked what Ebay was. I still have some hope, though it�s eroding over time, a new management team will be able to fix IT. As a long-time businessman I do understand goodwill is sometimes hard to get back though, just ask AOL.
I'd better qualify that last sentence of mine. I should have said, "for most of us" when I compared a bad day on Ebay to a good day elsewhere.
I think swissinstrument can do well on Etsy but she has to put a price on her paintings. It is comparable to Ebay's BIN option in operation. Ruby Lane is good for some things too. Higher end items and things that are highly sought after. Not too many bargains there in my opinion but still a decent traffic site. Car parts and tools won't do well there. Both sites are somewhat niche oriented, unlike Ebay as a whole.
Seichiro, I can't argue about it. You're doing well so far. What I think is interesting is that some of the more intelligent short side posts (IMO) are focused on the global market and less on Ebay itself. If one were to be shorting this stock, that makes sense to me. But betting against Ebay by itself (on the basis of Ebay in a healthy market) does not make sense.
As far as impact on the stock from site problems, I don't see it happening unless the SYI3 PREVENTS sellers from listing. The buyers are at Ebay. The sellers will accept all kinds of glitches to get to them but if the seller's cannot list, that is a different animal.
Sellers begrudgingly accept Auctiva's free but unreliable picture services and inaccessable site problems during high traffic periods. Auctiva lets them add Ebay photos for free so the risk of disappearing auction photos is worth the reward it seems. So.... I have to reason that any site problems that Ebay has are also trumped by the reward of buyer exposure. Buyer exposure is better on a bad day at Ebay than a good day anywhere else.
Seichiro, you got this much:
<<I'd like to make clear that I don't think Ebay is going away, it is not going chapter 11, everyone is not leaving.>>
I think the doubters are ones who expect the problems to impact the stock and it just doesn't happen. The problems are "priced in". Or, that is the way it appears to me.