eBid opening page.

[tony41]

On eBid's opening page, there ia a choice between Popular, Closing, New, Buddy and Sold listings. Sometimes the listings "chosen" do not have thumbnail pictures of the item. When there is no thumbnail I think this creates a bad impression of the site to anyone coming new to it. This evening the New Listings contained one item with a thumbnail and NINE without. Surely it is now time for management to bar any listing with no thumbnail for the opening page.

[astral276]

Surely it is now time for management to bar any listing with no thumbnail for the opening page.

I agree with you (it must be Christmas ) and it has been suggested several times. Also that in search and browse results Free/Standard listings without thumbnails should show after Gallery/Platinum listings with thumbnails to prevent reams of image less results being shown.

Sellers pay extra to have the thumbnail so that is a justification for being given prominence in results; just as FrontPage/Featured listings have prominence over others. That is in addition to the case, as you present, of making the site more appealing.

As admin have never shown any interest in the previous suggestions you may be administering punishment on a recently deceased equine.

[FirstGreenIsGold]

Tony, I agree with you. The opening page would look so much better if only listings with pictures were scrolling. Mel, you make a good point too.

[theElench]

I agree with you (it must be Christmas ) and it has been suggested several times. Also that in search and browse results Free/Standard listings without thumbnails should show after Gallery/Platinum listings with thumbnails to prevent reams of image less results being shown.

Sellers pay extra to have the thumbnail so that is a justification for being given prominence in results; just as FrontPage/Featured listings have prominence over others. That is in addition to the case, as you present, of making the site more appealing.

As admin have never shown any interest in the previous suggestions you may be administering punishment on a recently deceased equine.

In the Art Deco Glass category that I usually use there are only a few listings in total and only a handful without pictures. But "No thumbnail" underpins the "Free To List" inducement to list at all. I pay extra (a modest 5p)to create Platinum Listings.

As I haven't yet come across a search that yielded "reams of imageless results" I didn't realise it was a problem in some other areas. But if the numbers of imageless listings is becoming a problem and to the point where their visibility is making the site look unattractive doesn't this point to something deeper?

That less sellers are willing to pay for Seller+ or even 5p for a Platinum Listing? I don't mind paying because I list small numbers of items and despite modest numbers of sales am still showing an overall "profit". But the advice given to new sellers is "List as many items as possible -- it's free". Evidently for increasing numbers of sellers it isn't free at all and hundreds or thousands of 5ps or the £50 up-front fee is a cost to be weighed against the likely number of sales. Aren't we again coming back to Ebids reputation for few or zero sales for many sellers?

I don't think excluding imageless listings from the opening page is the answer. The sellers of those items are already at a disadvantage because Seller+ listings already dominate the first pages of search results. Even with Platinum Listings and paying 10p, 5p to list as an auction to break into the top of the search results and then again to list as RUS my listings are at a disadvantage. That cost is even more prohibitive for someone trying to list large numbers of items.

I'm not sure what the answer is, apart from a very unlikely radical rethink of the fee structure. But heaping further disadvantage onto free listings isn't going to help IMO. Making someone's listing even less visible isn't going to make them inclined to list more (isn't another site finding that constant visibility issues causes them problems?) Perhaps a better way forward would be for the management to look for some way to break the permanent hold of the Seller+ listings at the top of search results. In my category the top half of page one is mostly a wall of non-selling listings that have been constantly re-listed for years, to me that is infinitely more unattractive, it gives the impression of little activity or sales. When in reality most activity is going on in the RUS section down at the bottom on page three.

[astral276]

Perhaps a better way forward would be for the management to look for some way to break the permanent hold of the Seller+ listings at the top of search results.

I don't understand what you are referring to there. Seller+ listings have no priority over Seller listings on eBid. The default search/browse result is based on 'time remaining low > high'; the account type has no bearing on any search/browse results. The only priority is if a seller pays handsomely for FrontPage or Featured listings and all sellers can choose to avail themselves of those options (though I don't consider them as value for money).

After the above two exceptions the default results order is:

1. Fixed time listings ordered on time left to run.
2. Run Until Sold listings.
3. On First Bid listings.

In some areas eBid have rather painted themselves into a corner as to what fee changes they can make due to the conditions 'lifetime' accounts were sold under. It would be better if eBid could find a way financially to provide thumbnails for free on all listings but I appreciate that they have to make money somewhere.

Given those self-imposed restrictions I still feel the best solution would be to display Gallery/Platinum listings before Free/Standard listings.

[JanetB]

I have to agree with Mel on this one, it really makes a lot of sense to me.
I too have seen many search listings and shops with those ugly non images.
I mean, c'mon folks, 2% or 3% FVF is a measly fee to pay when your item sells that had a thumbnail in search, whether your a lifetime seller or not. Where else can you expect to pay such low fees?
If you don't want to pay then you don't get the same privileges as those that do pay.
Mel is correct when he says paid listings (for thumbnail) should have preference over those that don't. It sure will make the site a lot more pleasing and give eBid the finances they need to keep this site running.
Nothing is free in this world.

[theElench]

It would be nice if free listings could include a thumbnail, but I do appreciate that ebid has to raise revenue in some way. The 5p charge to use Platinum Listings is, I think, good value for the additional features they provide.

But my point was that I see very few imageless listings in the glass category I use and did not appreciate that there were so many of that some might well find it unattractive to have so many on the opening page. But shouldn't we ask why so many new listings are imageless?


That there are so many indicates to me that there is a rather large proportion of listings being made where the seller is unwilling to pay for either Seller+ or even a modest 5p for a Platinum Listing.


Did anyone envisage what has happened in the glass category and probably quite a few others. That the first page(s) of search results are log-jammed by Seller+ listings re-listed for years for free but which never sell. To break through into the top of the results means paying fees repeatedly or buying Seller+. The result is equally unattractive, an apparently never changing set of opening page search results. Most of the new listings and sales are being made below the opening pages, in the Platinum and free RUS listings.

I think that excluding free listings from the opening page is only going to reduce their chances of selling by further reducing their already limited visibility.

[johnwash1]

This thread is meandering off. Tony's original post was recommending the opening page only show listings that have photos. I agree strongly with Tony, Mel, and others who also agreed.

If this stimulates other thoughts about search results, free to list, and other topics, fine, no problem, that's what the button "Start New Thread" is for! But please don't dilute the value of a good suggestion by making it harder for Gazza to review the thread and act on it.

[theElench]

But from what I've read I'm not persuaded that it is such a good suggestion and have added some reasons why I think that. Is Gazza meant only to review the pros on this thread and then another to read what I consider, rightly or wrongly, the cons?

Perhaps I shouldn't have added any reasons for disagreeing and contented myself by simply saying "I don't like this idea and perhaps others should consider why it is that so many do not feel inclined to pay even a very modest fee for a thumbnail." But then wouldn't I have been shot down for not giving any reasons to back up my view?