GROUP BUYS - The time has come to deal with them
18 March 2004, 04:54 PM
#33
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,440
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't know if this would work....
If a NON paying advertiser has a product for sale in a GB could the system search the products available from a paying advertiser and show his matching product against the GB as a banner such as the Google ads? This way the paying advertisers get some exposure of their product.
If a NON paying advertiser has a product for sale in a GB could the system search the products available from a paying advertiser and show his matching product against the GB as a banner such as the Google ads? This way the paying advertisers get some exposure of their product.
18 March 2004, 04:56 PM
#34
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 2,390
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nobody other than SN LTD staff can know the degree to which your statement on advertising revenue is true. We will have to take your word on that. All we 'know' are the references to the recent rate of purchases of SN+ membership, and the associated profits.
Regarding the paid-up advertisers; all their adverts buy them is exposure. It doesn't guarantee sales. If an individual decides that an 'authorised advertiser' represents the best value for their purchase, then they get used. However, if there's better value to be found elsewhere, why shouldn't people go elsewhere? Besides, there's nothing to stop such advertisers bidding for GB business.
I can't condone the GBs set up by a suppliers mate. However, the only way in which they may have "spoilt it for everyone else" is if the buyers consequently failed to get the best price. Did they?
IMHO I don't think "taxing" non-advertising suppliers would work, from a logistical point of view. Too many contracts to maintain, for a start. Too many ways to circumvent it.
Please do create a separate forum for GBs. Please don't try to be too interventionist.
Could you elaborate on that?
Regarding the paid-up advertisers; all their adverts buy them is exposure. It doesn't guarantee sales. If an individual decides that an 'authorised advertiser' represents the best value for their purchase, then they get used. However, if there's better value to be found elsewhere, why shouldn't people go elsewhere? Besides, there's nothing to stop such advertisers bidding for GB business.
I can't condone the GBs set up by a suppliers mate. However, the only way in which they may have "spoilt it for everyone else" is if the buyers consequently failed to get the best price. Did they?
IMHO I don't think "taxing" non-advertising suppliers would work, from a logistical point of view. Too many contracts to maintain, for a start. Too many ways to circumvent it.
Please do create a separate forum for GBs. Please don't try to be too interventionist.
I suggest that the group buy proposer is able to add bids including company details, etc as well??
18 March 2004, 05:10 PM
#35
Fatman
I think you're mis-understanding. I am not saying that non-advertisers could not run group buys. I am merely saying that if a non-advertiser wanted to run a group buy, they could, but would need to pay for it.
This is the only way to make it fair.
As for the comments about only us knowing if my statements are true. Do you have any reason to believe it is not the case? Can you not see the enormous effort we're going to, to discuss all this with everyone rather than simply making decisions that affect everyone on our own regardless. Shaun and I do not earn a penny for anything we do on scoobynet. I would like to think we could earn a few quid one day for all the work we put in, but it's not and never has been the driving force behind keeping it running. The site currently pays for itself and has a bit of spare cash coming in also. This can (as it regularly does) change at any time so we always have to take care to stay ahead of the game.
The group buy thing, is JUST becoming a major headache, so I'd rather we did something about it now, before advertisers start saying "that's it.. I'm off" and we end up having to close everything or pay for it out of my own pocket again.
Hope you consider that to be reasonable.
Regards
Simon
I think you're mis-understanding. I am not saying that non-advertisers could not run group buys. I am merely saying that if a non-advertiser wanted to run a group buy, they could, but would need to pay for it.
This is the only way to make it fair.
As for the comments about only us knowing if my statements are true. Do you have any reason to believe it is not the case? Can you not see the enormous effort we're going to, to discuss all this with everyone rather than simply making decisions that affect everyone on our own regardless. Shaun and I do not earn a penny for anything we do on scoobynet. I would like to think we could earn a few quid one day for all the work we put in, but it's not and never has been the driving force behind keeping it running. The site currently pays for itself and has a bit of spare cash coming in also. This can (as it regularly does) change at any time so we always have to take care to stay ahead of the game.
The group buy thing, is JUST becoming a major headache, so I'd rather we did something about it now, before advertisers start saying "that's it.. I'm off" and we end up having to close everything or pay for it out of my own pocket again.
Hope you consider that to be reasonable.
Regards
Simon
18 March 2004, 05:11 PM
#36
Hi Simon: I understand your wish to make Scoobynet a commercial proposition and I can see that some policing of G.B.s might be necessary as some abuse has taken place in the past. The majority of Scooby Netters will have no quams with puting the block on guys starting a GB on behalf of their mates for instance but well organised GBs should not need any policing IMHO.
Puting GBs in their own section would also be a good move and reduce clutter from Drivetrain, General etc. Your Fight Club has not had any traffic yet so you could save space there for a start.
Most GBs result in positive benefits to the participants and as well as sharing knowledge with fellow owners it is one of the benefits of Scooby Net. To restrict GBs "Only authorised advertisers can start group buys" would greatly detract from S/Net membership. The Scooby environment is already fairly close knit with traditional suppliers for particular products or services and S/netters need to be aware of different products and services not just those from a restricted supplier list.
If you need to generate income I would have thought it was preferable to charge a nominal flat rate per annum, say £5 or £10, to be able to post on S/net but access to read was free. This would greatly reduce the clutter and ensure that posters had a genuine interest. In turn S/net would have a harder core of genuinely interested people which should be of more interest to switched on advertisers. Cut the numbers, cut the clutter, improve the quality.
Most guys that start GBs do so out of a genuine interest to help their fellow members and the majority of GBs are run satisfactorily by those that start them. The mechanism you propose is restrictive and detracts from the cameraderie that some GBs help to build. Personally, I think your proposals will be counter productive and detract from membership but within tighter guidelines the existing GB framework can continue to the benefit of members.
Some GBs are for products from the other side of the world where the vendor will never be a S/net advertiser Surely the members deserve to know about and have access to the best products at good rates regardless of whether the manufacturer pays to be on S/net. If that were not the case I think you would find an alternative forum or means of communication would spring up quite quickly and that would greatly detract from S/Net.
You posted at 14:12 looking for feed back and at 14:55 posted that with no replies to that time you might as well implement the changes. Not everybody sits reading S/net general and even less guys see the policy headers at the top of the page. What about the dedicated members who do not even read General?
I hope the policy change in respect of Group Buys is not a foregone conclusion and this response is viewed as constructive.
Regards,
Harvey.
Guess some GB (s) has upset some supplier(s).
Puting GBs in their own section would also be a good move and reduce clutter from Drivetrain, General etc. Your Fight Club has not had any traffic yet so you could save space there for a start.
Most GBs result in positive benefits to the participants and as well as sharing knowledge with fellow owners it is one of the benefits of Scooby Net. To restrict GBs "Only authorised advertisers can start group buys" would greatly detract from S/Net membership. The Scooby environment is already fairly close knit with traditional suppliers for particular products or services and S/netters need to be aware of different products and services not just those from a restricted supplier list.
If you need to generate income I would have thought it was preferable to charge a nominal flat rate per annum, say £5 or £10, to be able to post on S/net but access to read was free. This would greatly reduce the clutter and ensure that posters had a genuine interest. In turn S/net would have a harder core of genuinely interested people which should be of more interest to switched on advertisers. Cut the numbers, cut the clutter, improve the quality.
Most guys that start GBs do so out of a genuine interest to help their fellow members and the majority of GBs are run satisfactorily by those that start them. The mechanism you propose is restrictive and detracts from the cameraderie that some GBs help to build. Personally, I think your proposals will be counter productive and detract from membership but within tighter guidelines the existing GB framework can continue to the benefit of members.
Some GBs are for products from the other side of the world where the vendor will never be a S/net advertiser Surely the members deserve to know about and have access to the best products at good rates regardless of whether the manufacturer pays to be on S/net. If that were not the case I think you would find an alternative forum or means of communication would spring up quite quickly and that would greatly detract from S/Net.
You posted at 14:12 looking for feed back and at 14:55 posted that with no replies to that time you might as well implement the changes. Not everybody sits reading S/net general and even less guys see the policy headers at the top of the page. What about the dedicated members who do not even read General?
I hope the policy change in respect of Group Buys is not a foregone conclusion and this response is viewed as constructive.
Regards,
Harvey.
Guess some GB (s) has upset some supplier(s).
18 March 2004, 05:13 PM
#37
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Swilling coffee at my lab bench
Posts: 9,096
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why would you want to pay to advertise?
I think we have to remember what Internet forums are for - why they exist at all and why people visit them. It's to share information and experiences freely. That's why I feel that policing and censoring group buys is such a dangerous step onto a slippery slope, the next step of which is to censor any post promoting a product or service that competes with an advertiser's business. If that were to happen then SN would be lost anyway.
Clearly the problem is a conflict of interests between paying advertisers and community members wanting unbiased advice and the best deals possible. I doubt there is an easy answer either.
It's worth asking advertisers what their reasonable expectations are when they pay for an ad. Do they expect a little web page space, or do they expect (are they offered?) more in the form of exclusivity? Do they expect competitors to never gain any exposure? How far do you want to go in censoring positive comments about competitors, or negative comments about advertisers?
18 March 2004, 05:31 PM
#39
harvey, you're reading way too much into all of this, and I read (I hope wrongly) your post as an attack based on the conclusions you've drawn as to motives rather than the true background to all of this, and trying to provide a solution.
Andy
Aren't we getting a little ahead of ourselves here? Who said anything about that? That would not happen, and has never even been suggested.
---
Guys, this is a simple reality. In order to continue to recieve advertising revenue, we need to offer a good service. In order to have scoobynet running, we need the revenue, we need the membership, we need the admins (who are willing to do it for nothing - or are willing to agressively commercialise everything - which we simply are not).. so this all has to work as a synergy.
Once one part of the community tries to take too much, the rest suffer.
If the advertisers wanted exclusivity, the members would suffer as they would not be able to talk about any other products. They would dissapear and scoobynet would close.
If the members want completely sponsorship free service, the site will not be able to afford to run, and will close.
If the group buys are allowed to continue as they are, the advertisers will eventually forget any reason why they are paying for advertising that they could get FOC, will stop paying, and scoobynet will close.
Simon and Shaun decide they want to earn a fat salary from it, so scoobynet runs out of money, and closes.
Simon and Shaun want a fat salary, and decide to charge all members to post, the members get fed up and go away, scoobynet closes.
We put the banner advert prices up, vendors pull out, run out money, scoobynet closes.
---
There is no "I WANT I WANT" in all of this, we just need to make it work as best as we can for the WHOLE community, not just the members, not just the admins, not just the moderators, not just the advertisers, but everybody.
If that means give and take, then so-be-it.
regards
Simon
Andy
the next step of which is to censor any post promoting a product or service that competes with an advertiser's business. If that were to happen then SN would be lost anyway.
---
Guys, this is a simple reality. In order to continue to recieve advertising revenue, we need to offer a good service. In order to have scoobynet running, we need the revenue, we need the membership, we need the admins (who are willing to do it for nothing - or are willing to agressively commercialise everything - which we simply are not).. so this all has to work as a synergy.
Once one part of the community tries to take too much, the rest suffer.
If the advertisers wanted exclusivity, the members would suffer as they would not be able to talk about any other products. They would dissapear and scoobynet would close.
If the members want completely sponsorship free service, the site will not be able to afford to run, and will close.
If the group buys are allowed to continue as they are, the advertisers will eventually forget any reason why they are paying for advertising that they could get FOC, will stop paying, and scoobynet will close.
Simon and Shaun decide they want to earn a fat salary from it, so scoobynet runs out of money, and closes.
Simon and Shaun want a fat salary, and decide to charge all members to post, the members get fed up and go away, scoobynet closes.
We put the banner advert prices up, vendors pull out, run out money, scoobynet closes.
---
There is no "I WANT I WANT" in all of this, we just need to make it work as best as we can for the WHOLE community, not just the members, not just the admins, not just the moderators, not just the advertisers, but everybody.
If that means give and take, then so-be-it.
regards
Simon
18 March 2004, 05:33 PM
#40
"It cannot continue how it is currently, as it has (as all things like this do) escalated out of control. We have had a number of cases of people abusing this freedom, which has spoilt it for everyone else."
I doubt that S/net members think it is out of control but it is not difficult to see why some advertisers might not be happy and hence put pressure on you.
Turn the situation round and get a small contribution from everybody that wants to use the facility so we are not at the advertisers behest but do not substantially alter GBs which have been a useful benefit since long before i joined S/net (in 1970)
I doubt that S/net members think it is out of control but it is not difficult to see why some advertisers might not be happy and hence put pressure on you.
Turn the situation round and get a small contribution from everybody that wants to use the facility so we are not at the advertisers behest but do not substantially alter GBs which have been a useful benefit since long before i joined S/net (in 1970)
18 March 2004, 05:38 PM
#41
Hey Simon: Absolutely no "attack" and I do not see how you can say that. I have the greatest respect for you, providing this forum as you do and I have tried to be constructive, providing an easily implemented and managed solution. There may be other olutions but IMHO not your initial proposal which will detract from S/net membership and may be unworkable.
Last edited by harvey; 18 March 2004 at 05:42 PM.
18 March 2004, 05:38 PM
#42
harvey
It is really important you don't think I'm being insulting here..
You are being selfish. By selfish I do not mean this as an insult, I am merely saying that you are only thinking of one party, not the entire community - which consists of everybody that makes scoobynet work (that includes the advertisers).
It's not just all about the members. We have to have these commercial elements in order to provide something for people to be a member of.
We're going round in circles, so I'll try not to comment on whether we need to do anything about it, and would ask you to do the same.
We DO need to do something about it. WHAT we do about it, is what this thread is about.
Everyone, please only post now if you have a solution or part of a solution based on the initial post in this thread.
Regards
Simon
It is really important you don't think I'm being insulting here..
You are being selfish. By selfish I do not mean this as an insult, I am merely saying that you are only thinking of one party, not the entire community - which consists of everybody that makes scoobynet work (that includes the advertisers).
It's not just all about the members. We have to have these commercial elements in order to provide something for people to be a member of.
We're going round in circles, so I'll try not to comment on whether we need to do anything about it, and would ask you to do the same.
We DO need to do something about it. WHAT we do about it, is what this thread is about.
Everyone, please only post now if you have a solution or part of a solution based on the initial post in this thread.
Regards
Simon
18 March 2004, 05:41 PM
#43
Hi Harvey
I apologise if you say it was not an attack.
Your solution is unfortunately not workable however...
How do you define a "genuine group buy" differently to one set up by a company's mate?
The charging of a fee to post on scoobynet will not happen for the reasons already discussed many times.
If there is a company on the other side of the world... they are still able to use paypal, or make a bank transfer. It makes no difference where they are, so all products will still be open for discussion.
All the best
Simon
I apologise if you say it was not an attack.
Your solution is unfortunately not workable however...
How do you define a "genuine group buy" differently to one set up by a company's mate?
The charging of a fee to post on scoobynet will not happen for the reasons already discussed many times.
If there is a company on the other side of the world... they are still able to use paypal, or make a bank transfer. It makes no difference where they are, so all products will still be open for discussion.
All the best
Simon
18 March 2004, 05:59 PM
#44
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: From 208BHP to 311BHP and 12.8sec 1/4mile
Posts: 2,509
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Hi All
I have successfully ran 2 groupbuys (PE TEK2 remap and the Tracker and Blackjax GB) and taken part in a few others. A huge amount of work goes into running these and I feel having 2 areas for a GB is a great idea to help the organiser.
How about this to allow the SN vendors a look in
In the GB start up area a request for a GB on a product can be made by a SN member. The advertising vendors are then given 1 week to bid their best price for a min number. The GB goes to the vendor who offers the best deal as long as they can supply the exact product and quantities required.
If a no SN vendors replies to the GB then it should be open to a vendor of the GB owners choice.
This allows the SN vendors to get involved and none SN vendors!
Just my 12.5pence worth
Cheers
Neal
I have successfully ran 2 groupbuys (PE TEK2 remap and the Tracker and Blackjax GB) and taken part in a few others. A huge amount of work goes into running these and I feel having 2 areas for a GB is a great idea to help the organiser.
How about this to allow the SN vendors a look in
In the GB start up area a request for a GB on a product can be made by a SN member. The advertising vendors are then given 1 week to bid their best price for a min number. The GB goes to the vendor who offers the best deal as long as they can supply the exact product and quantities required.
If a no SN vendors replies to the GB then it should be open to a vendor of the GB owners choice.
This allows the SN vendors to get involved and none SN vendors!
Just my 12.5pence worth
Cheers
Neal
18 March 2004, 06:02 PM
#45
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Aberdeenshire.
Posts: 873
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Webmaster
I suspect you have already decided which way you want this to go. I sense this because I feel you are asking for people’s opinion and then want to debate their opinion with them.
If I paid you to advertise on SN I’m sure I would be unhappy with the GB that go on, as for sure there is a conflict of interest here. But just because SN gets bigger and starts making money to support the obvious infrastructure required for it to be the excellent service it is, doesn’t mean that the tail should start wagging the dog. We are the dog, so to speak, the end users. Without us there is no SN and to control SN to this end is, as already mentioned, is a huge disservice in my opinion.
For example; I have just posted an opinion on alloy wheel cleaners under general. Does that mean that someone who advertises wonder wheels or P21S on SN will object as a result. Hope you follow my thought process and note I have supported SN. I paid my 25 quid because I think SN deserved that from me for all the advice and help I have had from fellow enthusiasts. But don’t forget in this scenario the advertisers are the tail
Wish I had more time to write more, but I’m offshore right now and busier than a one legged man in an a$$ kicking competition. Hope you read this as intended.
Jools
I suspect you have already decided which way you want this to go. I sense this because I feel you are asking for people’s opinion and then want to debate their opinion with them.
If I paid you to advertise on SN I’m sure I would be unhappy with the GB that go on, as for sure there is a conflict of interest here. But just because SN gets bigger and starts making money to support the obvious infrastructure required for it to be the excellent service it is, doesn’t mean that the tail should start wagging the dog. We are the dog, so to speak, the end users. Without us there is no SN and to control SN to this end is, as already mentioned, is a huge disservice in my opinion.
For example; I have just posted an opinion on alloy wheel cleaners under general. Does that mean that someone who advertises wonder wheels or P21S on SN will object as a result. Hope you follow my thought process and note I have supported SN. I paid my 25 quid because I think SN deserved that from me for all the advice and help I have had from fellow enthusiasts. But don’t forget in this scenario the advertisers are the tail
Wish I had more time to write more, but I’m offshore right now and busier than a one legged man in an a$$ kicking competition. Hope you read this as intended.
Jools
18 March 2004, 06:15 PM
#46
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Mid-Kent
Posts: 1,039
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
'Fraid i found this heavy going, Webby. As a generalisation, I take similar views as AndyC, so I went back to your "reasons why".
1. Clutter Forums: Not really IMHO. The threads run to many pages, true, but I don't find myself oppressed by their number.
2. Take Business Away from Advertisers and Devalue the advertising (two side of the same coin IMHO). I side with those who say that being an advertiser guarantees neither sales for the advertiser, nor best Value for Money for the Scoobynetter - and I haven't seen (but may have missed) an answer to the question "has anyone complained?"
3. Tension from 'mates posting a GB'. I don't understand this: who is 'prevented' from running and advertising a GB on SN, since it already isn't the exclusive preserve of advertisers?
4. Dodgy organisers..... admin nightmare to police: the social pressure of "ill reputation" seems as good and pragmatic control as any.
While I'd be entirely relaxed about a specific forum for GBs, and possibly limitation to SN+ Members or Advertisers, I have to say that for me you haven't made your case.
As a general point not leading to any particular conclusion I'd say it's a tricky issue to know where a GB ends, and the offer of a discount for quantity by an advertiser begins.......
Sorry it's not specifically 'constructive'......
Phil
- Clutter up the Forums
- Devalue the advertising on scoobynet
- Create tension as non-advertisers have been known to ask their mate to post a group buy as they cannot do it themselves
- Take Business away from the supportive paying advertisers that help fund the continuation of scoobynet
- Create major grief when people don't come through with their promises (either the organiser, or the participants)
- Devalue the advertising on scoobynet
- Create tension as non-advertisers have been known to ask their mate to post a group buy as they cannot do it themselves
- Take Business away from the supportive paying advertisers that help fund the continuation of scoobynet
- Create major grief when people don't come through with their promises (either the organiser, or the participants)
2. Take Business Away from Advertisers and Devalue the advertising (two side of the same coin IMHO). I side with those who say that being an advertiser guarantees neither sales for the advertiser, nor best Value for Money for the Scoobynetter - and I haven't seen (but may have missed) an answer to the question "has anyone complained?"
3. Tension from 'mates posting a GB'. I don't understand this: who is 'prevented' from running and advertising a GB on SN, since it already isn't the exclusive preserve of advertisers?
4. Dodgy organisers..... admin nightmare to police: the social pressure of "ill reputation" seems as good and pragmatic control as any.
While I'd be entirely relaxed about a specific forum for GBs, and possibly limitation to SN+ Members or Advertisers, I have to say that for me you haven't made your case.
As a general point not leading to any particular conclusion I'd say it's a tricky issue to know where a GB ends, and the offer of a discount for quantity by an advertiser begins.......
Sorry it's not specifically 'constructive'......
Phil
18 March 2004, 06:23 PM
#47
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Swilling coffee at my lab bench
Posts: 9,096
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If there has to be some intervention - and for me that case is far from proven - then I'm inclined to favour NM's suggestion above, with one slight alteration. Namely, that organisers and participants are permitted to buy from any supplier they choose, whether that supplier is an advertiser or not.
Advertisers still get the major advantage that they are permitted to post bids directly in the GB forum - so, if they genuinely are competitive, they have a much better chance of actually getting the business. Other companies would have to hope that they were approached directly - but nevertheless members are not actually prevented in any way from using them.
Advertisers still get the major advantage that they are permitted to post bids directly in the GB forum - so, if they genuinely are competitive, they have a much better chance of actually getting the business. Other companies would have to hope that they were approached directly - but nevertheless members are not actually prevented in any way from using them.
18 March 2004, 06:50 PM
#49
I don't agree with limiting group buys to paying advertisers. No form of advertising is in itself a guarantee of business, nor should it be expected that advertisers gain exclusive access to a particular market. Any advertiser expecting this is being unrealistic.
If I take out an add in a local directory I don't expect all the people who use that directory to be limited to doing business only with advertisers. The fact that they can go elsewhere doesn't devalue my add. If I felt the add didn't generate any business then I would pull it. Simple as.
When it comes to which companies deserve the business, my choice will be the company that offers the best combination of service and price. As most of us have experienced, some companies try harder in this respect than others and I think they should be rewarded for their efforts.
Out of interest, does anyone know of any other car forums that limit group buys to advertisers? Or is it the case that such group buys are far less common on other boards?
If I take out an add in a local directory I don't expect all the people who use that directory to be limited to doing business only with advertisers. The fact that they can go elsewhere doesn't devalue my add. If I felt the add didn't generate any business then I would pull it. Simple as.
When it comes to which companies deserve the business, my choice will be the company that offers the best combination of service and price. As most of us have experienced, some companies try harder in this respect than others and I think they should be rewarded for their efforts.
Out of interest, does anyone know of any other car forums that limit group buys to advertisers? Or is it the case that such group buys are far less common on other boards?
18 March 2004, 06:51 PM
#50
Scooby Regular
Has this come about because the advertisers have complained ?
Agree with others the Group Buys do NOT clutter up General, the same repeated questions do tho
Cant we just have a dedicated forum for Group Buys ( a very simple solution, to a very simple problem IMHO)
You must have generated quite a bit of revenue from the recent SN+ Membership from the launch of SN3 ( I for one, am in that bunch)
I do agree you need to keep the advertising revenue coming in, and it is all a balancing act, as far as I am aware NO-ONE has publicy claimed Group Buys are bad, so it must be the Paid Up Advertisers, so why arent they offering us great deals on Group Buys
On a final note, can I just say, Thanks for taking the time to look at GB's, finally after countless requests by the community for a GB Forum
Edited to add : Simon/Shaun can we still continue to start GB's until a defintive answer/policy has been implemented ?
Steve
Agree with others the Group Buys do NOT clutter up General, the same repeated questions do tho
Cant we just have a dedicated forum for Group Buys ( a very simple solution, to a very simple problem IMHO)
You must have generated quite a bit of revenue from the recent SN+ Membership from the launch of SN3 ( I for one, am in that bunch)
I do agree you need to keep the advertising revenue coming in, and it is all a balancing act, as far as I am aware NO-ONE has publicy claimed Group Buys are bad, so it must be the Paid Up Advertisers, so why arent they offering us great deals on Group Buys
On a final note, can I just say, Thanks for taking the time to look at GB's, finally after countless requests by the community for a GB Forum
Edited to add : Simon/Shaun can we still continue to start GB's until a defintive answer/policy has been implemented ?
Steve
Last edited by *Sonic*; 18 March 2004 at 06:54 PM.
18 March 2004, 06:56 PM
#51
Scooby Regular
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 1,645
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: NM proposal
This seems quite a fair way to do it.
It would get the best price for the members, the advertisers would have a chance to promote there goods, (possibly at a lower price than their normal selling price, by the virtue of having a set number of sales in one go), they wouldn't be any extra admin work for Webmaster.
Just my thoughts
Paul
This seems quite a fair way to do it.
It would get the best price for the members, the advertisers would have a chance to promote there goods, (possibly at a lower price than their normal selling price, by the virtue of having a set number of sales in one go), they wouldn't be any extra admin work for Webmaster.
Just my thoughts
Paul
18 March 2004, 07:13 PM
#52
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: From 208BHP to 311BHP and 12.8sec 1/4mile
Posts: 2,509
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
I am not here to bitch just to give some ideas !!!!
Start off with a GB area which should declutter the sections they reside on then hit on the remaining issues. I think eveyone is of the same agreement and have been requesting a GB section for ages. I for one would not of considered some of the mods I have done to my car if it wasnt for the GB. The PE remap I organised bought the price down to an affordable level, my remaing funds were spent with the like of Lateral Performance, TSL, APIengines (all SN vendors) and the like to supply fuel regulators/pumps/injectors.
In the GB section list all the SN vendors on the top page with their contact details so we can talk to them first b4 chasing other vendors.
I for one havent a clue which companies pay SN to advertise other than the banners at the top of the pages and then I havent got all day to try and find them all b4 i arrange a GB.
SN should start the ball rolling.
At the end of the day its not hard to arrange a GB somewhere else like the P1 or 22B forum and run a link from SN direct to it !!!!!!!
Another 12.5 pence worth
Neal
In the GB section list all the SN vendors on the top page with their contact details so we can talk to them first b4 chasing other vendors.
I for one havent a clue which companies pay SN to advertise other than the banners at the top of the pages and then I havent got all day to try and find them all b4 i arrange a GB.
SN should start the ball rolling.
At the end of the day its not hard to arrange a GB somewhere else like the P1 or 22B forum and run a link from SN direct to it !!!!!!!
Another 12.5 pence worth
Neal
18 March 2004, 07:45 PM
#53
Hi Guys
It appears that most of you haven't read the replies so far. I know it's long, but to stop us going round in circles I won't reply. Apologies if this offends.
OK.. I've been speaking with shaun and we've gone over this for the last hour and have come up with the following idea.
How about this..
Please read this carefully before responding
New Forum for group buys.
Any member can propose a group buy. By doing this they fill out a form with the following information..
Product Name
Minimum People
Maximum Price (based on minimum people)
Closing Date
This is then posted as a new Group Buy Proposal, but the username of the proposer is kept private. They also enter the company and a contact name, phone number, email address.. which is also at this stage kept private.
Any member can then register for the group buy. This again remains anonymous.
Any authorised advertiser can then bid for this group buy with a maximum price and delivery time - whether that be a better or worse price / delivery / minimum qty than any other bids / the original price.
Everyone can see these bids, but does not know which company is offering them.
--
Once the closing date arrives. The group buy organiser can opt to set it live. Once live, all vendor bids become visible.
Members have 2 days (or whatever we decide) to vote which vendor offer they would want to go with.
Any vendors who have received enough votes to make their minimum are obliged to supply to those people. Any vendors who do not, have 2 days (or whatever) to accept or not.
Once this 2 day period is up, and all acceptance / declines have been made. All information becomes visible and the everyone can make their payments, and make it all happen.
-----
This is the fairest way I can think to make it work. The logic sounds complex, but it would be pretty slick and easy to use.
It would mean the authorised advertisers get the chance of the business. The members get to run group buys from any company in the world, and can chose the vendor and price they want to pay at the end of it.
Bascially everyone wins.
--
And here's the shocking part to the odd couple of people who smell a rat. ScoobyNet doesn't earn a penny out of it, and will have to pay to have the software developed.
All the best
Simon
It appears that most of you haven't read the replies so far. I know it's long, but to stop us going round in circles I won't reply. Apologies if this offends.
OK.. I've been speaking with shaun and we've gone over this for the last hour and have come up with the following idea.
How about this..
Please read this carefully before responding
New Forum for group buys.
Any member can propose a group buy. By doing this they fill out a form with the following information..
Product Name
Minimum People
Maximum Price (based on minimum people)
Closing Date
This is then posted as a new Group Buy Proposal, but the username of the proposer is kept private. They also enter the company and a contact name, phone number, email address.. which is also at this stage kept private.
Any member can then register for the group buy. This again remains anonymous.
Any authorised advertiser can then bid for this group buy with a maximum price and delivery time - whether that be a better or worse price / delivery / minimum qty than any other bids / the original price.
Everyone can see these bids, but does not know which company is offering them.
--
Once the closing date arrives. The group buy organiser can opt to set it live. Once live, all vendor bids become visible.
Members have 2 days (or whatever we decide) to vote which vendor offer they would want to go with.
Any vendors who have received enough votes to make their minimum are obliged to supply to those people. Any vendors who do not, have 2 days (or whatever) to accept or not.
Once this 2 day period is up, and all acceptance / declines have been made. All information becomes visible and the everyone can make their payments, and make it all happen.
-----
This is the fairest way I can think to make it work. The logic sounds complex, but it would be pretty slick and easy to use.
It would mean the authorised advertisers get the chance of the business. The members get to run group buys from any company in the world, and can chose the vendor and price they want to pay at the end of it.
Bascially everyone wins.
--
And here's the shocking part to the odd couple of people who smell a rat. ScoobyNet doesn't earn a penny out of it, and will have to pay to have the software developed.
All the best
Simon
18 March 2004, 07:51 PM
#54
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 745
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have to defend Harvey who I don't know from Adam! His comments are realistic, contructive and as far as I can see in absolute good faith. Ditto "NM", "Jools" & "Phil Harrison". Simon, you should heed these comments as you did ask for them, if I may be excused being so direct.
Scoobynet has grown from the casual free-for-all camaraderie of old to a commericial and regulated entity today and seems to be moving inexorably towards an even stricter regime which will compromise the whole ethos of the Scoobynet community if we are not careful.
I believe that you deserve remuneration for the service provided whatever form that may take but, as Harvey said, surely £5 per head to post on the BBS is reasonable. Personally, I believe £25 is good value when all is considered. A subscription of some sort reflects commitment on the part of the subscriber which should distill the 35000 odd members down to the more serious participants which in turn should improve the quality overall.
Expecting all members to deal with authorised, paid up advertises is "selfish" even if it is seen as ultimately benefitting the Scoobynet BBS as a whole. It is unrealistic to expect/insist the member pays a higher price than he would otherwise have to on the open market. However, providing a facility for authorised advertisers to have the first shot at pitching for a potential group buy is fine and should be no more than that advertiser could expect but, if the deal can be done elsewhere at a discount of greater than say 5%, the Group Buy organiser should be allowed to deal elsewhere.
I hope you will consider these comments from a subscriber constructive and receive them in the spirit they are intended.
Thank you for your efforts.
Jerome
p.s. posted before your latest proposal which gets my vote - well done!
Scoobynet has grown from the casual free-for-all camaraderie of old to a commericial and regulated entity today and seems to be moving inexorably towards an even stricter regime which will compromise the whole ethos of the Scoobynet community if we are not careful.
I believe that you deserve remuneration for the service provided whatever form that may take but, as Harvey said, surely £5 per head to post on the BBS is reasonable. Personally, I believe £25 is good value when all is considered. A subscription of some sort reflects commitment on the part of the subscriber which should distill the 35000 odd members down to the more serious participants which in turn should improve the quality overall.
Expecting all members to deal with authorised, paid up advertises is "selfish" even if it is seen as ultimately benefitting the Scoobynet BBS as a whole. It is unrealistic to expect/insist the member pays a higher price than he would otherwise have to on the open market. However, providing a facility for authorised advertisers to have the first shot at pitching for a potential group buy is fine and should be no more than that advertiser could expect but, if the deal can be done elsewhere at a discount of greater than say 5%, the Group Buy organiser should be allowed to deal elsewhere.
I hope you will consider these comments from a subscriber constructive and receive them in the spirit they are intended.
Thank you for your efforts.
Jerome
p.s. posted before your latest proposal which gets my vote - well done!
Last edited by JFB; 18 March 2004 at 07:56 PM.
Simon
18 March 2004, 07:59 PM
#56
JFB
Please read above, and also the rest of the comments. I appreciate your comments, but again, they are not based on what I have already posted in this thread, so it would be pointless me responding to the same questions again.
All the best
Simon
PS. Regarding the Ethos of scoobynet, there was an enlightening thread about this a couple of days ago. You might be surprised what the majority who posted seem to think about the ethos of scoobynet.
PPS. We just want to make it work chaps. We don't want to spoil anyone's fun, or benefits, we just want to make it as equal and fair as we can for all those who make a contribution to scoobynet. Nothing more, nothing less.
Please read above, and also the rest of the comments. I appreciate your comments, but again, they are not based on what I have already posted in this thread, so it would be pointless me responding to the same questions again.
All the best
Simon
PS. Regarding the Ethos of scoobynet, there was an enlightening thread about this a couple of days ago. You might be surprised what the majority who posted seem to think about the ethos of scoobynet.
PPS. We just want to make it work chaps. We don't want to spoil anyone's fun, or benefits, we just want to make it as equal and fair as we can for all those who make a contribution to scoobynet. Nothing more, nothing less.
18 March 2004, 08:08 PM
#57
Scooby Regular
No Offence taken, and none meant by this but did you read my reply Simon ?
Regards
Steve
PS above idea sounds good, thanks for taking the time to look into this
Regards
Steve
PS above idea sounds good, thanks for taking the time to look into this
18 March 2004, 08:11 PM
#58
Hi Sonic
I did read your answer, apologies for not responding, it was merely because all of your questions had already been answered / discussed in this thread.
Apart from "can you still start group buys until sorted". Of course you can, thank you very much for asking though, I appreciate the sentiment.
All the best
Simon
I did read your answer, apologies for not responding, it was merely because all of your questions had already been answered / discussed in this thread.
Apart from "can you still start group buys until sorted". Of course you can, thank you very much for asking though, I appreciate the sentiment.
All the best
Simon
18 March 2004, 08:17 PM
#60
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 2,390
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That solution sounds pretty good, Simon. Much more realistic than trying to get non-advertisers to pay, and it still gives your paying advertisers a shot at the business. It'll be interesting (assuming this comes to pass) to see how many advertisers actually participate in GB auctions.
Regarding your reply/questions on p3: no, I've got no information so I can't know whether it's true or untrue. Yes, I appreciate that you're consulting the users/customers. I think this 'consultation' has (so far) gone much more smoothly than the whole Google Ads 'consultation. For that you're to be applauded.
Much more realistic than trying to get non-advertisers to pay, and it still gives your paying advertisers a shot at the business. It'll be interesting (assuming this comes to pass) to see how many advertisers actually participate in GB auctions.Regarding your reply/questions on p3: no, I've got no information so I can't know whether it's true or untrue. Yes, I appreciate that you're consulting the users/customers. I think this 'consultation' has (so far) gone much more smoothly than the whole Google Ads 'consultation. For that you're to be applauded.