Originally Posted by
HelenAndGraham
Hi guys!
Thanks for the fair reception on the RSS post.
I'm not sure everyone read it properly judging by some of the questions asked afterwards but hopefully things will become clearer in time.
BTW, Gothicina, I'm not and was never a Lawyer!! How dare you! LOL
My background is marketing. Although I'm not quite over the hill yet and not drawing any State Pensions, I was Marketing Director for a PLC in the finance industry until I retired in 2002. I guess I'm just a 'net bum' now tho :-)
The key thing about this challenge is to spend this money in a way that will produce ongoing results. Having spent substantial amounts of company money in the past, where my performance was judged on the results, I've learned a few things about value for money and what type of advertising works best in certain circumstances.
For instance, no names for obvious reasons, TV advertising. For eBay it will work. For another UK based auction site that has previously advertised on TV (and says it intends to again shortly) it was and will be a complete waste of time.
Why do I say this? Simple really. If we're honest we will all accept that eBay offers the best browsing experience for buyers. The vast choice and competitive nature of eBay means you can usually pick up a bargain in almost every category of interest within minutes.
Alternative auction sites don't have the luxury of such an enormous and competitive userbase, promoted extensively and visited in huge numbers by potential buyers. The listings on most alternative sites are therefore less appealing to buyers at first sight. A much higher % of 'buy now' listings, which are usually uncompetitive when compared to eBay, can actually make for a laborious and unappealing browsing experience.
If a TV advert made an eBayer visit an alternative site they WILL be comparing what they see to eBay. And, so far, no alternative site I've found comes even close to winning that comparison. Sad to say it, but true.
Now the appeal of an alternative site is 99% down to the active sellers, the range of offerings they list and the competitiveness of their pricing. Auctions are popular with buyers still - don't let anyone kid you otherwise - although sellers on less busy sites naturally fear losing their items to low opening bids. So we have a 'damned if you do, damned if you don't' problem.
Assuming most of you will know the alternative site I mean that spent large amounts of cash on a TV advertising campaign not so long back, then you will probably also know how the site has performed since. They made the classic mistake of looking at their own site through 'rose tinted glasses' rather than judging it side by side with the competition. As a result they advertised something that didn't compare favourably to eBay as a buyer experience and in the process actually helped eBay.
Until a site has something as good as the competition there is no point whatsoever in throwing money down the TV (or radio or national newspaper) drain. They are in fact paying out money to advertise their weakness comapred to the main competition. The result will be a short term spike in visitors but very little transacted business.
That same site says it is likely to spend even more on TV advertising soon. If this happens they are simply making the same stupid mistake. No matter how attractive or fresh the appearance of the site, if the items on offer are relatively weak in depth and competitiveness, then they are paying out their money to advertise eBay yet again.
Like it or not, even the most casual of online auction site buyers WILL be comparing alternatives - more specifically the offerings by the sellers - to eBay. It simply isn't credible for sellers to move away from the big E and pretend it doesn't exist anymore. Buyers know different. You have to move away and then compete with it and the lower fee environment is your tool to do this with.
OK, I guess a few people will be seeing this as a negative post but it isn't. I'm trying to help people see what the challenge really is.
In my opinion eBid has progressed enormously this past year. Although the 'hide and hike' stupidity at eBay created a window of opportunity, a quick look at eBid's Alexa graphs will show you that the positive trend back then is now reversed and - because eBay have behaved reasonably well fee wise since - people are returning to eBay cos that's where the action is.
This is not eBids fault. But it is to a large extent the eBid sellers fault - including me.
What we are listing is, when combined overall, not attractive enough, complete enough or competitive enough to stand the obvious comparison. But the eBid site is an excellent venue, functioning well and offering facilities I believe rank among the best.
But buyers are turned on or off by the items being listed on a venue. They don't care about the same things we sellers care about, 'stores' 'cheap listings' 'friendly forums' etc.
Now I've heard the answer; 'but sellers are buyers too' chipped in all too often at this point. My answer to that is would Tesco, Walmart or eBay be the size and success they are if they limited sales to their own staff? No. In fact as sales begin to drop so would the number of staff causing a very fast downward spiral. Stop thinking about selling to each other on eBid and start thinking that we all have a part to play in getting more and more new buyers coming here.
The items being listed on eBid is in OUR control - the sellers. Not the guys in eBid HQ or anyone else. HQ provide a damn good venue but not the stock, that's our job.
So my main point of posting this saga is to highlight three things to consider when roasting this old advertising chestnut.
1) If your house is in a bit of a state you tend to discourage visitors until you've tidied up. When you know the appearance of your house stands comparison to your friends places then you're more willing to invite people over. So, be honest, spend a bit of time surfing eBid as a buyer. We the sellers need to improve the experience for browsing buyers. Huge piles of money thrown in to expensive media advertising will be wasted - and actually counter productive - until this is recognised.
2) Individual sellers can market themselves, and therfore eBid, at the same time. Courtesy of the Seller+ deal I spend the money saved promoting my eBid store to get potential customers there. I've made a few sales (on a product I reasonably expect to be VERY slow to sell) as a result. I do this by going elsewhere on the internet and leaving signposts to my eBid store. It is pointless waiting for people to stumble across my listings. Two domain names I sold recently meant the buyers had to open eBid accounts to in order to buy. They wanted what was on offer, it wasn't available on eBay, so they had to join eBid to get the name they wanted. Success.
3) The guys upstairs have given you the opportunity to 'spend' £2K. Before you do anything else, imagine that £2K is YOUR money. You HAVE to spend it in such away that you will get it back in a reasonable time frame. Losing that £2K is not an option. You must show results. Once you are genuinely thinking that way, now propose some marketing and advertising ideas....
The challenge is two fold. Spend the £2K to get signposts out elsewhere on the Internet and get new people to visit. But we also have to make sure that, when these visitors come, the buyer browsing experience compares as well as it can to eBay. Listing after listing of uncompetitive 'buy nows' and gaping holes in the product range offered will simply underpin a buyers opinion that eBay is a better place to shop.
I still belive the RSS option is the best way to get the signposts planted far afield on the Internet. But I also believe we should look a little closer to home about what we are doing to welcome the visitors that will be generated. If we don't then the guys upstairs here at eBid should put the £2K in to their Christmas party fund. At least they will have a hangover to show for it afterwards.
Reply With Quote
)
