posted on August 23, 2002 10:31:51 AM new
Hi,
I am currently using Ebays Program SAPRO and was recommended by some folks to start using AUCTIONWATCH. I was wondering , perhaps anyone reading this can recommend which service from AuctionWatch would be superior to SAPRO and why and also perhaps be able to give advice how to go about importing all the inventory items and data from SAPRO to AUCTIONWATH.I would hate to start over from step 1 which is creating inventory for 100's of items .
posted on August 23, 2002 11:35:46 AM new
I use SA Basic and have used SAPRO as well as Auctionwatch. You will spend a ton of money more using Auctionwatch and it will take you longer to create your listings. SA is the way to go!
posted on August 23, 2002 04:42:20 PM new
Hi...We had to leave AuctionWatch because as we added more and more images....the program became slower and crashed more often...We use Ebays SA...THE ONLY COMPLAINT WE HAVE WITH THAT PROGRAM IS WE CAN NOT SET THE TIME TO LAUNCH LIKE WE COULD WITH AUCTIONWATCH...I think Auction Watch is great for the Auctioner who only runs up to 500 Auctions a week...and only maintains a low level of images...Good Luck with your choices!!!
posted on August 23, 2002 06:30:17 PM new
Sorry I don’t agree at all. I use AW have for years. I have 68 pages of pictures there.(No problem). I run 20-50 auctions a week. I use the AW inventory. I stage auctions 1 to 2 weeks in advance. I don’t have to learn a new imaging system. I don’t have to put up with shaky sites. I spend my time listing and collecting money. That is why I sell. Sure AW has hiccupped a few times, so has you ISP, your computer and ebay so what, that is the Internet. All that and my AW bill is 10-15 a month. Believe me you get what you pay for.
I use Quickbooks inventory, and it is on my own computer.
I stage auctions 1 to 2 weeks in advance.
As do I, using AuctionTamer.
I don’t have to put up with shaky sites.
Since Auction Tamer doesn't use an online site for setting up auctions, there is no problem with "shaky sites". And AuctionWatch seems to be having problems as of late, as their recent announcements have stated.
Sure AW has hiccupped a few times, so has you ISP, your computer and ebay so what, that is the Internet.
My computer never hiccups, since I installed Windows XP pro almost a year ago. Hasn't crashed since.
All that and my AW bill is 10-15 a month.
My bill is $25 PER YEAR.
Believe me you get what you pay for.
And believe me, you are getting what you are overpaying for.
posted on August 23, 2002 09:43:13 PM new
I'm amazed that AW has not locked this thread. They may be too busy working on the site's recent computer problems.
posted on August 24, 2002 12:50:47 AM new
I use inkfrog for my images and auctionwatch to post auctions. I dont use the checkout feature or the sellers records thing. I basically pay 70 a month for a lister =)
posted on August 24, 2002 07:31:50 AM new
Hello
since there is a nice dialoug going here and not the mud slinging I usally see I will respond to some good points made by revvassago
"I have thousands of pictures stored on my own domain, hosted at http://www.doteasy.com"
I have seen to many of these come and go. Perhaps this one will last however.
"I use Quickbooks inventory, and it is on my own computer." Interesting consept. Is it ready to launch with a couple of clicks?
"Since Auction Tamer doesn't use an online site for setting up auctions, there is no problem with "shaky sites". And AuctionWatch seems to be having problems as of late, as their recent announcements have stated." True but so has Ebay, Yahoo and any other site sooner or later. It is just the nature of the internet.
"My computer never hiccups, since I installed Windows XP pro almost a year ago. Hasn't crashed since." Mine is now fine also after finally useing Norton BUT my ISP goes down once in a while, so does Ebay. You and I have no control over that. Again is the nature of Internet systems. They get better but they never get "well".
"My bill is $25 PER YEAR." There is lots of ways to count costs (Ask Enron) but the point is AW is a small part of my operating expences and provides a large (to me) consoliated service.
"And believe me, you are getting what you are overpaying for." We just don't agree.
Again I like this thread and appreciate ideas (Even those I dont agree with) That is how we all get a little better at the game.
posted on August 25, 2002 08:01:42 AM new
Doteasy has been around for years now. They aren't one of the fly by night web hosting services.
I can list my items with one click using Auction Tamer. Quickbooks sends invoices to my customers, and I can accept credit card payments with my Quickbooks merchant account. Quickbooks also keeps all my books current, and automatically does all my tax forms.
Yes, eBay has problems, but when eBay is down, then NOBODY can list - not you, not me. AW versus AT is irrelevant when eBay is down - BUT, when AW is down (or slow), I can still list lightning quick.
My cable modem has dropped offline twice in the past year - and I was back up within hours. My computer never crashes anymore, so my listing software is rock solid.
If you like using AW, then by all means, use it. My point was that there are cheaper alternatives. Yes, AW has all the services in one place, so you don't have to go find them. However, you are paying for that convenience. I'll take my no per-image fee over the $0.10 that AW charges.
posted on August 26, 2002 03:52:39 AM new
My thoughts:
-Did some quick calculations, for the last payment I made to AW -- less then 1% of my total revenues went to pay for the AW service and that was during a period I tested a lot of new products and my methods for testing new products weren't as refined as they've become in the past couple of weeks.
-For the next payment I make to AW, I suspect that AW costs will take up less 0.5% of my total revenue, even less if I'm able to increase my storefront sales.
-Maybe that's a lot to pay for convenience, BUT convenience saves time -- time I could spend doing things besides auctions, OR devising ways to write better ads, sourcing new products, etc.
Now something that would save me time, is if Citibank C2it, Yahoo Pay Direct, Pay Pal, et al, would create a feature that would generate a in/out report at the end of the day, detailing how much was received, how much you paid in fees and how much was spent on each vendor.
posted on August 26, 2002 07:53:05 AM new for the last payment I made to AW -- less then 1% of my total revenues went to pay for the AW service
This percentage can be misleading. If you did $100 in sales last month, then it is $1.00. Pretty good. If you did $10,000 in sales, that is $100, and is quite high.
posted on September 2, 2002 02:10:37 PM new
>>for the last payment I made to AW -- less then 1% of my total revenues went to pay for the AW service<<
>>This percentage can be misleading. If you did $100 in sales last month, then it is $1.00. Pretty good. If you did $10,000 in sales, that is $100, and is quite high.<<
Now it isn't, simple math, 1% is always 1% you're simply balking at paying $100, a number you feel is "high" simply because its $100 vs. $1 which you don't feel is high -- you're looking at the numbers not the percentages.
$1 to make $100 is NOT cheaper then $100 to make $10,000 -- simply because the costs to make that money are porportionally equal. E.g. 1% of the total revenue earned.
The numbers with respect to $1 vs. $100 don't matter in this example, it's the Percentage or ROI in terms of how much you have to spend to generate X amount in sales and/or profits that's important.
If the AW service costs me 1% of total revenues (actually closer to 0.5% at the moment), that means that I have to spend a penny to make a Buck, a fact (or cost) that doesn't change whether I make $100/month or $100,000/month - I spend a penny make a buck.
If I told you that if you gave me $100 I'll give you 10k, you'd take it right?
So how is the example different?
This even carries over to Ebay, Pay Pal and other electronic payment service/auction fees. Based on the lsat 30 days (Sunday is my Financial Analysis day) I spend roughly 7% of my revenue on fees, so it costs me to 7 cents to make a dollar (Neglecting sourcing costs) now regardless of whether I spend 7 cents to make a dollar, 70 cents to make 10 dollars, 70k to make a Million, it just doesn't matter, your cost in relation to the total revenue is the same.
E.g. If I told you that I'd give you $100 if you gave me $7, but that if you gave me 7k I'd give you 100k, would you take the first deal and ignore the second because the second is too high, or you would give me the 7k and enjoy the $93,000.00?
posted on September 2, 2002 03:29:13 PM new$1 to make $100 is NOT cheaper then $100 to make $10,000 -- simply because the costs to make that money are porportionally equal. E.g. 1% of the total revenue earned.
Then that is where AW's problem lies. Their costs do not go proportionately down.
With my selling system, I am paying approx. $20/month, plus eBay fees. Now, if I am selling $100 a month on eBay, I am paying 20% to sell it.
BUT......If I am selling $10,000/month, I am paying .2% - That is two-tenths of one percent. That is a lot better than AW.
Heck, even eBay's fees go down the higher the final price. AW's don't.
THEREFORE, to pay 1% of your total sales just for the "convenience" of using AW, is not a good business plan in my book.
E.g. If I told you that I'd give you $100 if you gave me $7, but that if you gave me 7k I'd give you 100k, would you take the first deal and ignore the second because the second is too high, or you would give me the 7k and enjoy the $93,000.00?
No, I wouldn't take the first deal over the second. HOWEVER, what you are proposing is apples and oranges. You are talking about "giving" money, not sales. Your costs to sell should be fixed, not a percentage. All AW is doing is charging a percentage fee where a flat fee should be.
How many B&M stores would stay with their utility companies if the utilites started to charge a percentage of the B&M's total sales? After all, you can't run a store without electricity......
posted on September 2, 2002 05:23:18 PM new
I've found the the average ebay sellers does not care about the ebay fees because the buyer is almost always paying for those fees with some form of excessive s/h passed on to the buyer.
Only when the seller makes bad decisions listing auction goods that do not sell does that seller pay ebay for something not gained. Even then, there are many sellers that pass on those listing fees of unsold items to buyers of their other auctions in the form of very excessive s/h.
posted on September 2, 2002 07:08:45 PM newI've found the the average ebay sellers does not care about the ebay fees because the buyer is almost always paying for those fees with some form of excessive s/h passed on to the buyer. Only when the seller makes bad decisions listing auction goods that do not sell does that seller pay ebay for something not gained. Even then, there are many sellers that pass on those listing fees of unsold items to buyers of their other auctions in the form of very excessive s/h.
Actually, I don't think anyone is complaining about eBay's fees. They are an unavoidable if you are selling on eBay. However, AW fees are avoidable.
posted on September 2, 2002 07:56:49 PM new
>>$1 to make $100 is NOT cheaper then $100 to make $10,000 -- simply because the costs to make that money are porportionally equal. E.g. 1% of the total revenue earned.<<
>>Then that is where AW's problem lies. Their costs do not go proportionately down.<<
That's not entirely true, as I sell higher ticket items/increase my margins the % of revenue that goes to AW is decreasing...will probably be 0.5% when I make my next payment.
In any event, considering that cost of using AW doesn't go UP in porportion to your usage and that's pretty much a Quasi-Fixed cost that either stays constant or goes down, I don't think it's a big issue.
>>With my selling system, I am paying approx. $20/month, plus eBay fees. Now, if I am selling $100 a month on eBay, I am paying 20% to sell it.
BUT......If I am selling $10,000/month, I am paying .2% - That is two-tenths of one percent. That is a lot better than AW.<<<
>>Heck, even eBay's fees go down the higher the final price. AW's don't.<<
AW only charges (Me Anyway) a flat rate + a flat charge per listing, the final cost of the item has nothing to do with it. E.g. The more expensive and profitable items I sell, the less AW costs me in terms of % of total revenue and/or profits.
>>THEREFORE, to pay 1% of your total sales just for the "convenience" of using AW, is not a good business plan in my book.<<
1. It's a constant cost; as long as the cost is constant and the convenience allows you to process orders faster, launch products faster and spend more time doing things that grow your business instead of doing administrative duties it IS a good business plan -- since the cost either remains fixed or decreases.
Let's say you and I sell the exact same product lines, or types of products and I'm always able to ship faster, have more time to source new products, OR simply spend less time to make the same money that you do -- isn't paying for the convenience cost effective?
That's what I'm getting at, if the cost is more or less a fixed percentage and saves you time, it's a smart business decision.
>>E.g. If I told you that I'd give you $100 if you gave me $7, but that if you gave me 7k I'd give you 100k, would you take the first deal and ignore the second because the second is too high, or you would give me the 7k and enjoy the $93,000.00?
No, I wouldn't take the first deal over the second. HOWEVER, what you are proposing is apples and oranges. You are talking about "giving" money, not sales. Your costs to sell should be fixed, not a percentage. All AW is doing is charging a percentage fee where a flat fee should be.<<
I think you misunderstood me, AW isn't actually charging me a percentage of sales, I pay a flat monthly fee + a flat fee per listing -- what I meant by percentage is that my last bill worked out to roughly a little under 1% of my revenues over the time the bill was incured -- and for the next bill it will probably be about 0.5%. AW isn't actually billing me set percentage of my revenue.
>>>How many B&M stores would stay with their utility companies if the utilites started to charge a percentage of the B&M's total sales? After all, you can't run a store without electricity......<<
1. See Above.
2. If it's a Flat Percentage they'd stay in business just fine, especially when you consider that most B & M (and corporations for that matter) assign fixed % of revenues to things like marketing or research and simply aim to get the most for that money.
posted on September 2, 2002 08:55:40 PM newIn any event, considering that cost of using AW doesn't go UP in porportion to your usage and that's pretty much a Quasi-Fixed cost that either stays constant or goes down, I don't think it's a big issue.
Actually, that is the whole issue. By using AW, you are paying MORE for something that you can get cheaper elsewhere. How the cost could go down is beyond me. They charge 1% of the final value. It doesn't change, no matter if it ends for $1 or $1000.
AW only charges (Me Anyway) a flat rate + a flat charge per listing, the final cost of the item has nothing to do with it. E.g. The more expensive and profitable items I sell, the less AW costs me in terms of % of total revenue and/or profits.
Then this whole argument doesn't apply to you, since it only applies to those who are paying AW 1% of their final value. (BTW, my listing software does everything AW's does, and I paid a one time fee for it, and don't pay anything per listing.....)
1. It's a constant cost; as long as the cost is constant and the convenience allows you to process orders faster, launch products faster and spend more time doing things that grow your business instead of doing administrative duties it IS a good business plan -- since the cost either remains fixed or decreases.
Okay, let's say you want to buy a Cadillac. The dealer down the street will sell it to you for $60,000 - OR, you could do some research, and find that a dealer 200 miles away will sell it to you for $50,000. Where are you going to buy it? Next door (because it is "convenient" ) , or 200 miles away (because it is more cost effective)?????
Let's say you and I sell the exact same product lines, or types of products and I'm always able to ship faster, have more time to source new products, OR simply spend less time to make the same money that you do -- isn't paying for the convenience cost effective?
How can you ship faster, when we have the same types of shipping tools? You are just paying more than I am for them, by purchasing them all in one place. That isn't cost effective, that is just not doing your homework.
That's what I'm getting at, if the cost is more or less a fixed percentage and saves you time, it's a smart business decision.
That is what I am getting at. I have everything that AW offers, but I just found it elsewhere cheaper. I found my own listing software. I found my own image hosting. I found my own seller tools (end of auction emails, bidder tracking, inventory, etc.). I am just paying less than you are for them (even without the 1%).
They may be too busy working on the site's recent computer problems.