BrickLink Discussion Forum

In Suggestions, wahiggin writes:

In Suggestions, QA_Sheryl writes:

In Suggestions, BricksDirect writes:

Dear BrickLink admins and members,

We see it every day. BrickLink is losing business because it's still not
possible to pay immediately after checkout. We have to cancel our orders because
new members can't find shipping fees. They expect that the shipping fee will
be automically displayed when they put items in their shopping cart. The also
expect that they can pay immediately for their orders. The way it is going now
is way too complicated for new members.

Why is it so hard to create software to let members pay immediately and tell
them the shipping fee. BrickOwl and BrickScout are doing it. They are taking
BrickLink's business over.

What I hear from other sellers is that it's impossible to create it because
not al items have their weight in the BrickLink catalog. Why not solve this with
a standard weight for items that don't have their weight in the BrickLink
catalog? (0.5KG for a set, 0.2KG for a part etc.)

Please, BrickLink do something at this.

Thank you.

Best regards,
Niels Roest
Owner of BricksDirect

Hi Niels,

As has been stated in numerous other forum posts, we are in the process of creating
Instant Checkout. Since BrickLink has been around much longer than the other
sites you mentioned, our sellers have numerous configurations and setting up
the process is much more complex. We do not want to take away anything from how
our sellers are currently using the checkout process. With this in mind, we have
made great progress in instant checkout so far and will continue to do so without
sacrificing quality. We want to make sure this feature is accurate as well as
efficient.

We appreciate your patience and understanding, but want to let you know that
we have definitely heard the cry from our users for this feature and are working
hard to get it done as soon as possible!

Thanks!

Instead of a big bang approach, maybe doing an agile effort would be more impactful.
Start by creating a feature that would work for US shippers. Give sellers an
option to remain on the legacy shipping module or turn on the new Instant Checkout
feature until it is fully implemented. Then add other countries as you go along.
Prioritize it based on sales or complexity. Ebay does it, Brickowl does it,
Amazon does it, I can go out and create a website and add it in with a simple
plug in. This should be possible on a much shorter timeframe than what we have
seen so far.

All that needs to happen is to make the Shipping Cost Estimator face the customer.
That would already work for a majority of sellers, no matter the country.

--
Marc.

Author:

FigBits

Posted:

Mar 22, 2017 10:08

Subject:

Re: price overview when buying a wanted list

Viewed:

57 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, mgiglio writes:

In Suggestions, yorbrick writes:

You are mistaken. Sellers do not have the ability to part out a set and automatically
list the pieces at the 6 month average, using any BrickLink tools. It's possible
to do so with 3rd-party tools (off BrickLink), but those tools are available
to buyers as well. The access to pricing information is identical for buyers
and sellers.

What am I missing here? Is it interpretation of words?

Sellers can use the part out a set tool and set their part prices at the (worldwide)
six month average price, using Bricklink.

this is correct. i did it last night. it's a very useful feature for a seller.
don't know why someone is saying this can't be done right in bricklink.

You're right. I was wrong about that. I was thinking of re-pricing existing
inventory to the 6-month average.

--
Marc.

Author:

FigBits

Posted:

Mar 22, 2017 00:31

Subject:

Re: price overview when buying a wanted list

Viewed:

77 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, mgiglio writes:

of course i am not suggesting that parts be given away for free. i'm saying
maybe part prices are inflated if sellers are actually willing to sell for less.
as a seller, if i think a part is too cool to sell for a nickel, i keep it, cause
i know no one's gonna pay a quarter for it. or if i have a ten dollar minifig
and i dont want to sit on it for a year, i'll list it for 9 and try to move
it out.

For those of us whose BrickLink stores are trying to support us as a full-time
job, that a part being too cool doesn't factor into it. It's a business.
I try to sell for more than I paid.

A few years ago, most sets parted out for 2x the retail price of the set. Today,
that number is maybe 1.3x. I certainly would not say that prices on parts are
inflated. The opposite -- they're depressed.

Those $10 minifigs are only $10 because that's what they've been selling
for. It used to be as you described -- a few sellers would list at $9 to
try to sell them faster, while most listed for $10, and many listed for $11 or
more.

But now, ten stores list them for $8. Then when they see that everyone else is
doing that, they relist them for $6. Then someone lists 300 of them for $2.50.

All of which is fine (more or less). But it becomes a bit of a problem when sellers
who want to list that "$10" minifigure for $10 show up on a BrickLink tool as
being 75% higher than average.

if bricklink has a problem with sellers undercutting each other, i don't
think limiting the buyers information is the smart way to fix it. why not limit
sellers ability to list a part for less than a certain price.

That would be a terrible idea, and possibly illegal.

regarding sellers and buyers having equal access, that's just not true. a
seller can part out a set and list the pieces automatically at the 6 month avg,
but a buyer cannot then shop for those same parts in that same sellers store
without seeing all at once whether they are above or below average price. that's
not equal access. that makes the buyer work much harder than the seller to determine
whether each individual part is listed at fair value or not.

Author:

FigBits

Posted:

Mar 21, 2017 18:34

Subject:

Re: price overview when buying a wanted list

Viewed:

64 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, mgiglio writes:

In Suggestions, tillmanbalazs writes:

few weeks ago when I went to a wanted list, and selected the items which I wanted
to buy, then the shop, it showed what is the price of items in this shop compared
to the average price of the items.
Now this function is not available, can I ask why?
Is it possible to have it back?
Thanks,
Balázs

Voted Yes. Having this comparison helps me to buy hundreds of pieces at a time
and easily know whether the store I've chosen is charging me double what
each piece is worth, without having to check each piece manually. The only ones
to blame for a downward spiral in pricing are sellers listing their parts cheaper
than everyone else. If a part can be sold cheaper, maybe it should be.

But tools like this enourage sellers to continue listing their parts cheaper
than everyone else. That's part of the problem. And I'm not sure what
you mean my that last sentence. Of course a part can be sold cheaper. It can
be given away for free. So it should be?

Providing sellers with this information easily when they list parts, but not
making it easily available to buyers when buying, puts sellers at an unnecessary
advantage in this marketplace. It erodes my confidence when purchasing, or requires
me to spend an inordinate amount of time researching to save what amounts to
pennies per piece. While some would say that I should just suck it up and pay
the pennies if I don't want to do the legwork, I'd say that'd make
sense if the sellers had to do the legwork of looking up each individual part
price and entering it manually, but they don't.

What do you mean? Sellers have EXACTLY the same access to average prices that
buyers do.

I think a nice compromise would be to show the over/under comparison against
current listing prices, instead of 6 month average.

I thought that's what it already was.

--
Marc.

Author:

FigBits

Posted:

Mar 21, 2017 09:42

Subject:

Re: price overview when buying a wanted list

Viewed:

66 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, TokerSays writes:

As a Seller, why don't you want a Buyer to have immediate access to a comparison
of your price against the average price?

All I want is an honest answer. The fact that this tool isn't valuable when
grocery shopping is irrelevant. I'm willing to entertain an alternative
basis of the average price if that is your concern. I'm just unsure of why
you don't want your price compared to another, immediately at the point of
purchase.

What's your honest answer?

Having such a tool encourages sellers to implement deceptive practices.

Imagine two stores: One has average prices, honest shipping costs, and no hidden
fees. The other has lower than average prices, but charges an extra $3 on shipping,
and adds 5% to the final total for Paypal fees.

The price comparison tool will lead buyers to the second store, even if their
order would cost more there.

I agree that it's a good thing for buyers to be able to see where they can
get what they want at a good price. For that to happen transparently, the comparison
tools need to include total final cost, not just the listed cost of the parts.
That is not possible without automated checkout.

--
Marc.

Author:

FigBits

Posted:

Mar 21, 2017 08:30

Subject:

Re: price overview when buying a wanted list

Viewed:

51 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, TokerSays writes:

In Suggestions, Rob_and_Shelagh writes:

Not sure about leader but I'm missing the community overseer role at the
moment.

I'm not sure I understand. You are the community overseer or we are missing
a community overseer?

Community Overseer: Mnementh (19666) - Oct 31, 2005 - Dec 27, 2013
https://www.bricklink.com/memberAdmins.asp

Author:

FigBits

Posted:

Mar 21, 2017 01:03

Subject:

Re: Counterfiet Set Reporting

Viewed:

94 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, rofreder writes:

Upon inspection of parts even noticed "LEGO" on all studs. However edges were
sharper than genuine parts, also in general parts felt lighter, minor differences
in shapes of familiar elements. Amazed at the attention to detail of the fakers.
But, in my heart of hearts I know it's a fake set.

This would be the first that I have heard of clones actually having LEGO on the
studs. Do you have a photo that highlights the differences ("minor differences
in shape") between a genuine brick and one you suspect is counterfeit?

--
Marc.

Author:

FigBits

Posted:

Mar 20, 2017 14:31

Subject:

Re: BrickLink you are losing business

Viewed:

86 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, Bricklord writes:

What part of Canada Post's guidelines are you wilfully ignoring? it is not
just weight that determines a rate, but the volume as well. Or are you only shipping
as parcels? If so, you are costing your customers far more than they should be
paying.

I am not ignoring any of it. Nothing that you have written above addresses what
I wrote below, but I will answer your questions anyway.

I am not only shipping as parcels. The vast majority of orders within Canada
ship as oversized lettermail, and the vast majority of orders outside of Canada
ship as Light Packet. But it doesn't matter what I ship it as, because as
I said below, I charge a FLAT RATE for shipping. Which means, as I said below,
that for orders over 150 grams, buyers pay LESS for shipping. Not more, as you
claim. Less.

If you don't believe me, just go check. That's in my store. Other sellers
can (and do) do it differently. Some charge more, some charge less. Some charge
a lot more, some charge nothing.

The indisputable fact is that automated shipping calculation does not AUTOMATICALLY
cause higher shipping costs for buyers. That is totally up to the sellers.

In Suggestions, FigBits writes:

In Suggestions, Bricklord writes:

I completely concur. The Canada Post rates/tables would make any such automatic
shipping calculation even more overpriced than the exact rate they already charge.
An automatic checkout with the invoice would be an improvement, but for each
order the seller MUST calculate the shipping.

This is 100% false. I don't know why it keeps coming up. We know with absolute
certainty that automato shipping calculation need not result in overcharging
for shipping.

If a seller WANTS to charge more for shipping, they can set up their options
to do so. If they want to charge less for shipping, they can set up the options
to do so. On the other site, I have flat-rate shipping. This means that for orders
over 150 grams, buyers pay LOWER shipping costs in my store on the site that
has auto checkout.

Author:

FigBits

Posted:

Mar 20, 2017 12:41

Subject:

Re: BrickLink you are losing business

Viewed:

77 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, Bricklord writes:

Author:

FigBits

Posted:

Mar 20, 2017 12:34

Subject:

Re: BrickLink you are losing business

Viewed:

72 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, Rob_and_Shelagh writes:

In Suggestions, FigBits writes:

In Suggestions, technoluddite writes:

I don't think BL could concoct a system to account for all the variances
of each postal system in the EU, North America etc. to allow immediate posting
of shipping costs.

BL doesn't need to. The sellers would. The solution ALREADY EXISTS on other
sites, so we know that it is possible.

Yes we know it can be done (reasonably OK) on other sites but we so far don't
know if BL can deliver it here... just because the other guys do it doesn't
mean that is what we will get here as the site has a different structure/programming.
I'm just patiently waiting and will form an opinion on whether here it will
be a good or bad thing, or something in between when I see how it is going
to work here, not on another site.

Robert

Actually, it already exists on BrickLink as well. It just isn't customer-facing.

--
Marc.

Author:

FigBits

Posted:

Mar 20, 2017 11:54

Subject:

Re: BrickLink you are losing business

Viewed:

82 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, technoluddite writes:

I here what you're saying about listing shipping fees but in many places
it's complicated by the local Postal System requirements.

Here in Canada, I can ship anything that fits in an envelope less than 3/4" (2
cm) thick for about $2. However, anything thicker (even some minifigure headgear
and/or accessories) bumps it up to a parcel and the costs at least double!

The weight is relatively unimportant up to about 500 grams, it is all about the
dimensions.

I don't think BL could concoct a system to account for all the variances
of each postal system in the EU, North America etc. to allow immediate posting
of shipping costs.

BL doesn't need to. The sellers would. The solution ALREADY EXISTS on other
sites, so we know that it is possible.

--
Marc.

Author:

FigBits

Posted:

Mar 15, 2017 22:39

Subject:

Re: price overview when buying a wanted list

Viewed:

60 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, TokerSays writes:

In Suggestions, qwertyboy writes:

I don't think anyone has issues with this being discussed. But I for one
would really REALLY like if you stopped campaigning so much by adding the URL
each time.

Again, I don't ask this because I am necessarily against the suggestion,
I just find this is getting incredibly annoying. Everyone on the forum knows
by now where to vote. Please stop. Please.

Niek.

Hi Niek. As I'm sure 'everyone on the forum' has figured out by
now that I'm new here. And in my brief time here I have come to find that
I am one of at least 5 new people that have stumbled upon this forum in search
of the reason why the average pricing tool was removed. And as another member
suggested, this forum could use a little updating as it's not always easy
to follow conversations. So I want to make it real easy for those who are new
to find where they need to go to suggest that tool be brought back.

They can go here: https://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=1031088

Keep human nature in mind. I have mentioned that I am on the fence about this
issue. But your annoying campaigning convinced me to vote No.

--
Marc.

(Also keep in mind that the votes mean nothing.)

Author:

FigBits

Posted:

Mar 15, 2017 22:32

Subject:

Re: Better Forum

Viewed:

50 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, ranarn writes:

Good Question, and of course i should have stated some examples, instead of just
saying that it's bad.

First, the tree approach, it's not a bad thing, and works pretty good when
a discussion is kept relatively small and you read each post.
But when more and more people join, and you get multiple levels of replies, each
tend to go it's own way when it branches out from the main tree. And a tree
structure makes really hard for someone that is coming into the discussion later
to see the latest "talk" or get a overview what has been replied earlier, you
often need to check each branch of the tree. I am more into the "reddit" approach,
where the hot or popular replies is what is showed at the top. Or the "standard"
flat forum approach with pages and not creating branches of replies.

I very much disagree there, at least compared to a flat view. Having a branching
tree is a huge benefit. One improvement would be to be able to collapse a branch
(as on reddit). But if this is your major concern, I think you are way off. The
branching structure is a huge benefit of the current format. It is not a fault
at all.

Second is style, it looks outdated and not very modern. I know that the "CORE"
users of the forum at the moment like it, and is happy with what it is, but to
broaden the usage from new users, it needs to be made more modern and easier,
explainable icons instead of text links maybe, Simplicity is the key.

To me, that's largely irrelevant. I care much more about content than style.
For the site itself, the style is important, because it's a commercial website
that is looking to make money for its sellers (myself among them). But for the
forum? Who cares. The appearance is neither a positive nor a negative. It's
irrelevant.

Some technical features that would be nice is, notification, unread message tracking,
templates, tags, ability mention or reference other people, online status of
users, avatars etc...

Notifications and message tracking, absolutely. Those should be added. Tags already
exist for catalog items. Referencing other users: meh. Online status of users:
meh. Avatars? Please no. There are way too many juvenile forums where 50% of
the "content" is animated gift and signature files. That contributes nothing
to actual discussions, and we are better off without them.

So ... Yes, we could use the ability to track read/unread status, and receive
notifications.
That's about it.

--
Marc.

Author:

FigBits

Posted:

Mar 14, 2017 15:13

Subject:

Re: price overview when buying a wanted list

Viewed:

50 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, TokerSays writes:

Perfect, then we agree! Bricklink is a legal free market and in a legal free
market a Buyer should have easy access to the average price per piece. Any measures
to limit that access would delegitimize the legal free market of Bricklink.

You are really not helping your case with statements like that. It makes it clear
that you have no idea what a free market is. So, people reading this could easily
think that since you don't know what you are talking about, then you are
probably wrong about the benefits of that feature, as well.

--
Marc.

Author:

FigBits

Posted:

Mar 14, 2017 12:56

Subject:

Re: DO AWAY WITH PRICE GUIDE.......

Viewed:

91 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, Heartbricker writes:

In Suggestions, thewolf06 writes:

This site is going in the right direction with taking away important features
like being able to compare price. I think we need to go one step further and
COMPLETELY DELETE the PRICE GUIDE. Lets take it all away, and then there is no
comparison at all.

While they do that- they should close the site altogether too!!! :p

All due respect; when you post non-sense suggestions- BL admins do look as them,
in my experience BL staff has been helpful whenever i needed actual help and
they seem to be understaffed (probably so they won't have to raise our reasonable
seller's fees) so perhaps we can give them a break from non-sense suggestions
that may take their attention away from helping users.

I try to post my non-sense rants away from the suggestions and admin sections
so they can attend to more pressing needs.

I don't think it's a nonsense suggestion. It may not be a good idea,
and it might not even have been serious, but I do think that it is an idea worth
considering.

Deleting the price guide would have some positive impacts for sellers, buyers,
and BrickLink. It would help prevent a slow downward spiraling of prices (and
profits) because there would be no easy way for stores to set their prices at
6-month averages minus 10% (or whatever). For buyers, good deals would come up
more often, as sellers would list items for what they think they can get, instead
of based on previous (possibly misleading) prices.

For BrickLink, it could become a new revenue source if they granted access for
a fee (say, $10 per month for access to the full price guide).

I am not arguing in favor of this. But I am arguing that it is not nonsense.

--
Marc.

Author:

FigBits

Posted:

Mar 13, 2017 14:56

Subject:

Re: price overview when buying a wanted list

Viewed:

60 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, TokerSays writes:

In Suggestions, FigBits writes:

In Suggestions, MrDrem writes:

Voting doesn't matter. What will count is what BrickLink believes is in their
best interest. Before they created that price comparison feature, they believed
that it would be in their interest to add it. Having added it, presumably they
discovered that it was NOT in their interest, so they have deleted it.

To get them to reverse that decision, you would need to convince BrickLink that
it's better for THEM to have the feature. Since we don't have access
to any of the data that they based their decision on, I believe making a convincing
argument is essentially impossible.

I'd argue that there is now a discrepancy between sellers, who have access
to tolls like BrickStock that automates pricing against 6 month averages, and
buyers, who no longer do.

Buyers can use BrickStock. (And I believe that most sellers do not.)

If Bricklink want a reason to bring it back, here's one. Whilst the tool
was there, it made it so much easier for me to sanity check prices on my orders
that I didn't look elsewhere. Its what kept me shopping within Bricklink.
There is now no difference in the buying experience between here and BrickOwl
that I can see so far, except that BrickOwl has a nicer interface.

You want me to keep shopping here, make it easy for me to confirm my deal is
OK.

Even if all you tell me is that my overall order price is below or above the
average price.

I don't think that the sellers arguing here would say that they want to participate
in a economy that is rigged for either side, would they?

I have long argued that BL's policies have favored sellers over buyers, and
that this is mostly a bad thing. In this particular case, I'm on the fence
about how significant it is. I think it pales in comparison to the imbalance
in feedback policies, order cancellation, additional fees, shipping fee transparency,
and other policies.

As to whether you (or anyone else) buys here or on the other site, I'm sure
it matters to BrickLink, but it doesn't matter to me as a seller. I sell
the same inventory for the same price on both sites.

--
Marc.

Hi again Marc - As a Seller if it doesn't matter to you, then could you support
me as a Buyer? Vote yes to bring it back. Makes no difference to you, but it
helps me out.

As I mentioned, the votes don't matter. BrickLink created this feature because
they thought it would be a good thing overall. Lots of people complained about
it when it launched. BrickLink didn't care. They made their decision based
on their own information and analysis.

Now they have deleted that feature. Lots of people are complaining about its
disappearance. BrickLink doesn't care. They made their decision based on
their own information and analysis.

I believe that the only way this feature is coming back is if deleting it was
a mistake. It's perfectly possible this is a bug, and the feature was not
supposed to disappear. If that's the case, it will be back in a few days,
regardless of what discussion happens here. On the other hand, if the change
was deliberate, then it was based on a 9-month trial, and the feature was considered
to be a failure. In that case, it's gone.

--
Marc.

Author:

FigBits

Posted:

Mar 13, 2017 14:51

Subject:

Re: price overview when buying a wanted list

Viewed:

59 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, TokerSays writes:

In Suggestions, FigBits writes:

In Suggestions, TokerSays writes:

Thanks Marc - What I hear is the invisible hand of the marketplace is very visible
on Bricklink, it is the hand of profit. Limit the amount of information provided
to the Buyers and the Sellers will profit.

I'm not really sure what that means.

BrickLink's presumed motive is to be successful. That usually translates
into being profitable (though the owner is a billionaire, and I can't presume
to know what he wants).

Note that BrickLink making a lot of money is different than sellers making a
lot of money. So, your description above does not match what I was describing
at all. BrickLink will do what is in BrickLink's best interest. Sometimes
that is also in the best interest of buyers, sometimes it's in the best interest
of sellers, sometimes both, and sometimes neither.

--
Marc.

Thanks Marc - perhaps we're thinking along two different lines. I think
what I'd really like this thread to consider is; does removing the average
price tool benefit Buyers or Sellers? Take away everything else - profit, loss,
Bricklinks goals, opinions - take away everything and answer. Does removing
the average price tool benefit Buyers or Sellers?

It's complicated.

In the short term, it benefits some sellers and not others. (Sellers who have
been racing to the bottom for prices will likely see fewer orders now, while
sellers with more sustainable prices may see a slight increase.) In the long
term, this probably a benefit to both groups of sellers, as prices should stabilize,
which means that even with fewer orders, profits could stay the same or improve.

In the short term, this is not a benefit the buyers who used this information.
In the long term, it probably is a benefit to all buyers, because it will allow
for a more diverse market. Sellers who stock rare parts are less likely to be
driven out of the market.

--
Marc.

Author:

FigBits

Posted:

Mar 13, 2017 14:36

Subject:

Re: price overview when buying a wanted list

Viewed:

60 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, MrDrem writes:

I'd argue that there is now a discrepancy between sellers, who have access
to tolls like BrickStock that automates pricing against 6 month averages, and
buyers, who no longer do.

Buyers can use BrickStock. (And I believe that most sellers do not.)

Author:

FigBits

Posted:

Mar 13, 2017 14:27

Subject:

Re: price overview when buying a wanted list

Viewed:

66 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, TokerSays writes:

Author:

FigBits

Posted:

Mar 13, 2017 13:26

Subject:

Re: price overview when buying a wanted list

Viewed:

75 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, TokerSays writes:

In Suggestions, qwertyboy writes:

If you allow me to take one sentence out of your reply:

I had a $50 cart and what I thought was a great deal.

This is _exactly_ why others would argue to have that feature removed. And if
you allow me to quote another tidbit from a different thread you posted:

Because I can't imagine the site administrators would knowingly remove the feature and allow the happy wonderful Lego fans through out the world who have gathered together here in the safe and welcoming site that is Bricklink to be knowingly ripped off. Some dude last week tried to charge me $2.00 for a 35 cent piece. It was an odd piece, I needed it. But I didn't '500% make up' need it. I can't keep track of the average price of 1000s of pieces

You have to understand that nobody is trying to rip you off by pricing items
in a certain way. That price is there to see and agree with or not.
I fully understand that automatically comparing prices to the last 6 month average
makes it easier to pick the best deal, but by doing this. BrickLink is actively
helping to push prices down. Shops that have priced items reasonably will see
that over time they will lose out on orders because others will undercut the
prices, and buyers will more and more favor the lower-priced options, thus further
put pressure on the L6MA. Stores that don't constantly adjust their prices
will eventually maybe show 500% above average. That does NOT mean they are ripping
buyers off.

The price comparison feature was introduced some time in the last year. Before
that, people were able to buy their LEGO just fine, but there can't be much
doubt that this feature was helping the downward spiral of item prices. This
is not in the interest of BrickLink, and not in the interest of the sellers.
And if you think about it, in the long run it is also not in the interest of
buyers. Many larger shops are feeling the pressure, and have to think about whether
this is still a market that is worthwhile to pursue. Sure, if they close shop,
others will fill the void, but it will be more and more of the lowest-prices-quick-sale-goodbye
shops. And that is not good for anyone.

Just my $0.02.

Niek.

Thanks Niek, I think I understand where you are coming from. It's like the
big box stores putting the Mom and Pop shops out of business by undercutting
prices. I get it. But I think the inverse is also true. Back to my gold piece
comparison; this piece I'm looking for averages 30 cents, and most stores
carry less than 10 of them. There is one store in North America that has over
50, and charges more than a dollar per piece. With the price tool, I've
been avoiding it. Because Mom and Pop show up every now and then with a price
that is more reasonable and I snatch it up along with the other pieces they have
that are priced reasonably. Without the price tool, I am more likely to purchase
from the guy that has quantity, he has everything I need, I'll overpay but
I'll only pay for shipping once and I won't have to do comparison shopping
at 15 different stores.

From the sounds of your previous post, that's not what would happen. Rather,
you would find the best price for the item you need, and then add some extra
stuff from that store, which you can also use. I very much doubt that you will
buy the ones at $1.48 each.

Even if you buy just 6 of them, it's cheaper to buy them from the store in
Portugal, including shipping, then it would be to buy them from that store in
the US. At quantities higher than 6, it becomes A LOT cheaper to buy them in
Portugal.

Without the pricing tool I have less information to
make an informed purchase. My 2 cents, is that without the pricing tool we enabling
the big box stores. We're letting the big box stores set the price because
they have quantity and quality (rare pieces). I am more likely to make one purchase
from a big box than 10 purchases from Mom and Pop.

Not according to what you have described previously. Also, with the tools that
are still currently available, you can save a lot of money compared to what you
say you would do.

Honestly, I didn't pay attention to the original pricing tool discussion
that went on, but I have a feeling that it was lead by the site's Sellers.
I want to hear more from the Buyers. I don't think I'm the only one
to think this way. I'm happy to hear everyone's point of view - but
I want the votes in. Buyers, Sellers, cast your votes!

Author:

FigBits

Posted:

Feb 3, 2017 14:03

Subject:

Re: Another anti-scam idea

Viewed:

58 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, Jamesf077 writes:

In Suggestions, yorbrick writes:

I prefer the route of buyers should show common sense.

Education of buyers is much better fraud prevention than trying to remove scammers.
For every hurdle there is a way around it.

I've already suggested that Bricklink put a 'safe buying guide' on
the login page but that got shot down and ignored as well. I'm guessing that
the mention of scammers has very negative conitations for the site and off putting
for potential new members.

The people who would need to read it wouldn't read it. We are trying to protect
people who naively jump at the chance to send unsecured payments to strangers
who have listed items online at too-good-to-be-true prices. That is not the type
of person to click on a "safe buying guide" link.

Until BL add instant payment (which should then be required to be Paypal Onsite
for new sellers), the buyer should receive an automated email and BL essage when
a purchase is made, as I described here: http://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=1024951

--
Marc.

Author:

FigBits

Posted:

Feb 2, 2017 12:16

Subject:

Re: This will reduce scammers by 95%

Viewed:

44 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, Proprietor writes:

I thought the implementation of on-site payments was supposed to help in some
way. Was it only by requiring Paypal for new sellers? We know that's no
guarantee.

I'm pretty sure it is, actually. If the purchase qualifies for buyer protection,
the buyer is protected (regardless of whether Paypal can successfully recover
the funds or not). They changed their terms while back.

Wonder if there's a way for BL to work with PP so that new BL
sellers have their funds held at PP for a number of days until buyers confirm
receipt. And maybe it needs to be receipt by buyers who have a minimum of X
feedback or Y years of membership, so it's not sham buyers validating delivery.

Question is whether the burden dissuades more legit new sellers than it thwarts
shams. Considering the surplus of sellers here, I'd think it worth a try.

Having an escrow-type way to hold funds was part of the plan that was rolled
out at the summit in Chicago a year and a half ago. When BL discussed it on the
forum, a lot of people on the forum complained very loudly that it was a terrible
idea, and we haven't heard a lot about it since then. It's too bad, because
I thought (and still think) that it's a fantastic idea. (A side benefit of
it is that BL could LOWER our Paypal fees, as well.)

--
Marc.

Author:

FigBits

Posted:

Feb 2, 2017 12:10

Subject:

Re: This will reduce scammers by 95%

Viewed:

49 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, Heartbricker writes:

The whole point of starting from 10 successful buying transaction is that they
cannot start multiple seller accounts to gain feedback.
Also isn't it better to make a scammer jump through some obstacles before
being able to scam? this suggestion makes the seller do some work to gain access
to selling where NOW he can just scam, if it doesn't work he opens a new
account and starts again- so easy. having to make 10 purchases will make the
person get a paypal account (most scammers don't have PP they ask for wire
transfers)
This idea is good because it is simple to implement- it won't solve the problem
100%- but will over 90%

The risk is that for the scammers who put in that extra work, their account now
looks a lot more trustworthy, so when they move on to the scam, they are a lot
more likely to be successful at it. Ebay had a similar problem (I don't know
if they still do) -- sellers would sell a few dozen items for a penny, take
the loss, and then when their account looked great, with lots of praising feedback,
they'd flip it into a scam.

--
Marc.

Author:

FigBits

Posted:

Feb 2, 2017 10:04

Subject:

Re: Orders Placed page - add horizontal lines

Viewed:

32 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, WhiteVanMan writes:

In Suggestions, Teup writes:

In Suggestions, brisbane_qld writes:

It would be very helpful if you could include some horizontal lines (and possibly
an alternating light background shade) on the "Orders Placed" page between the
listed orders so the eye can easily track from the order number on the left to
the Status & Feedback fields to ensure buyers are changing the Status and adding
feedback to the correct order.

Agree. I still don't understand the new BL's love for contrasting white
with extremely light gray. This applies to set inventories, part-outs, etc. as
well. It's hard to enough to sell Lego just having to figure out Light Gray,
Light Bluish Gray, Pearl Light Gray, Flat Silver...!

This tracking from left to right that you describe has become a kind of bottleneck
in my otherwise smoothly automated selling routine. It's a potential cause
for mistakes, it's tedious and there's no reason for it to be that way.

I can see each order without any issues.

Maybe you could change the contrast on your computer screen?

Paul

I do also see the alternating shades for each line. However, this doesn't
do a lot to avoid the issue of having to scroll horizontally (and potentially
losing track of what line we are looking at).

There are a few ways this could be fixed. I think the first thing would be to
let each order take up 2 lines. Even though this would take up more vertical
space, vertical scrolling is MUCH better than horizontal scrolling on a webpage.

Second, all of the editable fields and button should be grouped together. We
shouldn't need to scroll all the way over to click the feedback button
or add a tracking number. Anything interactive should be on the left, so we know
it all belongs to the same order, and the non-interactive info (the dates, the
payment type, the grand total) can be off to the side a bit. Better yet, let
us arrange the columns however we like.

And third, a lot of this should be editable on the Order Details screen. That
way, we have a single order up, we can see exactly what is in the order, making
it really easy to enter information like shipping cost, tracking number, and
leaving feedback (and knowing for sure that we are entering this on the right
order).

--
Marc.

Author:

FigBits

Posted:

Jan 31, 2017 10:53

Subject:

Re: Date of parts listed within a store

Viewed:

39 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, jenwick writes:

Paul,

I believe that is for your information. I cannot see how long you have had an
item listed.

Jennifer

You can (see screenshot below).

I'm not really sure of the intended use, but I've used it once in a while.
If I notice someone has a bunch of an item that I've been looking for (but
don't recall getting a Wanted List notification for), I will look at this
data out of curiosity.

--
Marc.

Author:

FigBits

Posted:

Jan 31, 2017 10:09

Subject:

Re: Warn about non-vetted new sellers

Viewed:

52 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, SylvainLS writes:

Hi all,

New sellers are supposed to offer only “PayPal with Purchase Protection,”
or to be first vetted by BrickLink administration. ( http://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?helpID=2440
)

I’d suggest that the “not vetted” status of new sellers be made clearly visible,
so that buyers (especially unexperienced ones) would know to only use PayPal
with them (even if the seller has a “my Paypal is borken” excuse).

This idea first came as a “badge” showing vetted/non-vetted status but I don’t
think a tiny logo/link beside their username would do.
Maybe a more prominent information box (splash?) in their store would be more
useful.

That information would be shown until the store has “enough credit history” to
be able to use other payment methods (as the “vetted” sellers).

Thoughts?

It should simply be included in an automated message when someone makes a purchase
from a new store. They immediately get an email that includes something like:

The store you have purchased from is new to BrickLink. All new stores are
required to use Paypal Onsite, so that you can always be confident that your
purchase is safe.

After the seller updates the shipping cost for your order, please be sure to
pay by using the PAY button on the order details page (link). We want all of
your purchases on BrickLink to be safe and worry-free, and this will help ensure
that. If the seller contacts you to arrange an alternate payment method, please
forward their message to admin@bricklink.com or click the link below to alert
us, as this would be against BrickLink's seller terms.

--
Marc.

Author:

FigBits

Posted:

Jan 23, 2017 23:30

Subject:

Re: Stop Wanted List Spamming for Minifigs

Viewed:

41 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, mhortar writes:

In Suggestions, yorbrick writes:

In Suggestions, tEoS writes:

I disagree. There are plenty of instances where someone sold a minifig that
was missing a cape (for example). I've probably bought several figs that
were missing something.

There's a market for these, so why not accommodate it by using complete/incomplete

I agree. There is a market for incomplete figures where a piece is missing, which
is why such a feature is good for both buyers and sellers.

I just wish there was a way to denote instances such as

[M=sw127] 'incomplete, missing jet pack'

is just
[M=sw126]

or

[M=sw109a] 'incomplete, missing pauldron'

is just

[M=sw036b]

Josh

That should be done with the inventories. (Can the inventory of a minifig contain
a minifig?)

--
Marc.

Author:

FigBits

Posted:

Jan 23, 2017 11:27

Subject:

Re: Auto-ban Users That Request Custom Form Fraud

Viewed:

42 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, ToddMyers writes:

To reiterate: This has all be argued before in the forum, and beyond what I've
already
said, I'm not gonna rehash it all in this thread.

Beyond that, I have no interest in debating with you specifically, Marc. Just
not interested in your opinion or your views.

I'm sorry to hear that. It's really too bad when one side of a discussion
has no interest in hearing from the other side. Oh well.

In any case, I voted "No" to the suggestion. I prefer to have MORE potential
customers come to my store, not fewer.

--
Marc.

Author:

FigBits

Posted:

Jan 23, 2017 09:08

Subject:

Re: Auto-ban Users That Request Custom Form Fraud

Viewed:

55 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, ToddMyers writes:

The argument is not to immediately ban a buyer on a first offense. Sure, go
ahead and educate on the first offense. Educate on the second offense. Educate
on the third offense, even. But if a buyer persists in asking sellers to commit
fraud, over and over again, that buyer is not interested in being educated and
you know as well as I do that there will be an unscrupulous seller who takes
them up on it, and that takes a sale away from the honest seller, putting them
at a disadvantage.

They would not be taking away a sale from an honest seller, because that sale
was NEVER going to be placed with the honest seller, according to your own argument.
With the current situation (where buyers are not getting banned for this), not
a single sale is being lost in honest stores. However, if the proposed ban was
implemented, honest stores WOULD lose sales.

On that fact alone, the ban is a bad idea. It would HURT honest stores.

I would prefer that no sale happen for anyone rather than
allowing a buyer to hunt for sellers willing to commit fraud for them.

You would prefer that no sale happen for anyone, INCLUDING honest stores? That
seems silly to me.

--
Marc.

Author:

FigBits

Posted:

Jan 23, 2017 07:52

Subject:

Re: Auto-ban Users That Request Custom Form Fraud

Viewed:

61 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, ToddMyers writes:

In Suggestions, Heartbricker writes:

In Suggestions, ToddMyers writes:

In Suggestions, Heartbricker writes:

In Suggestions, calibrick writes:

Respectfully recommend an auto-ban of any user that requests a seller lie on
customs forms based on a specific criteria [snip]

How has this been a problem for you if your store shows 0 sales?
Not sure it's necessary to bother BL help desk with something you haven't
had a problem with...

I have sales and I agree with OP's suggestion. Feel better now?

SMH

You can't start kicking buyers out of the BL platform left and right, BL
isn't going to do that because these buyers buy from sellers in their respective
countries too and bring revenue to the system - Just state that you're unwilling
to falsify documents. when i'm asked to do it i state that i won't do
it and that if the buyer is unwilling to accept responsibility for customs laws
then they are welcome to cancel the order. 9/10 times they accept responsibility
and buy anyway- never had an issue and i do a lot of overseas business.
If you can't handle dealing with overseas buyers then you can choose not
to sell to them, don't kick them out of BL because they will spend the money
with someone who can gently communicate/reason and have a successful transaction
with them.

So many sellers complain about buyers, treat buyers like they are bothersome
and then complain that no one is buying...
SMH

Interesting how you chose to attack OP because he hasn't made any sales instead
of getting to the substance of your objection. Why was that?

And yes, we should totally not penalize buyers who constantly ask sellers to
commit customs fraud. Totally. Because those buyers will never find a seller
willing to commit that fraud and the seller who refuses to commit that fraud
won't ever lose a sale because they won't participate in customs fraud.

Did I get that right? I simply do not accept your 9/10 example as being the
norm.

Which will result in more lost in a particular store:

1) Banning all buyers who request customs form falsifications, and therefore
can never place any more orders at all.

2) The store simply telling a buyer who requests customs form falsification that
they will not do this.

You recommend the first scenario, and you imply that this is because the second
scenario will result in more lost sales. But how is that even mathematically
possible? Heartbricker said that 9/10 buyers will simply proceed with the order
anyway. You doubt that 9/10, but even if it's only 1/1000, that's still
one more order out of 1000 that would NOT be received in the first proposed solution,
because that buyer would have been banned.

Clearly, the best solution is simply to inform buyers that this isn't allowed.
Doing so results in MORE orders for stores, including any stores that explicitly
don't allow it, and even those who complain about it on the forums.

--
Marc.

Author:

FigBits

Posted:

Dec 10, 2016 12:09

Subject:

Re: Pls create a kind of watch list for items

Viewed:

34 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, Brickwilbo writes:

In Suggestions, CrazyChris writes:

Hi,

this one is very basic: I'd like to have a watch lists, that allows to "save"
certain items from certain sellers, to find them easily again.

Favourite the store and add the item to a wanted list.
In the settings you can change it to have favourites shown on top.

Or just add them to a cart.

--
Marc.

Author:

FigBits

Posted:

Nov 26, 2016 12:25

Subject:

Re: ADVANCED Minimal buy ammount override button

Viewed:

43 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, spdif76 writes:

What if there is no Bypassword? Or the shop owner doesn't want to share it
with an unknown client?

For example a customer hunts a rare element, he finds it in a shop, but that
single brick doesn't reach the minimum buy ammount. There is no need for
other parts, the buyer doesn't want to organize a common order with others
to reach it. In this case this button will be wort.

Can't they just add other small but expensive parts to come up to the minimum?

There used to be a few stores that had lots for sale that consisted of nothing.
So, $0.01 for air. Buyers could add these "nothing" parts to come up to the minimum
shipping. It did what you described, but it was clunky.

Really, just add other stuff.

--
Marc.

Author:

FigBits

Posted:

Nov 4, 2016 00:08

Subject:

Re: Median Price with or instead of Avg Price

Viewed:

43 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, sfkookoo writes:

In Suggestions, mikmo writes:

In Suggestions, sfkookoo writes:

Hi there,

When listing items for sale, I am relying heavily on the Avg Price feature. However,
there are enough cases where upon digging deeper I find that one or two people
have over-inflated the price (as in $25 instead $2) or deflated the price ($.01
instead of $.40) and this really skews the resulting average price. With a median
price, I could just see where the middle of the pack is in terms of pricing and
it would give sellers of more rare pieces a shot at quickly determining a fair
price right from the embedded price chart on the Inventory pages. I believe this
would help us with the common pieces too!

Thanks for you consideration!

- sfkookoo

You should use the 6 month average sold price, it is much more realistic.

Mikael / MikMo

Agreed, Mikael. There is value also to knowing both a median value and an average
value. Perhaps if there are any math whizzes out there, you could comment? Perhaps,
it could also be a toggle feature, just as the grams/ounces allows a user to
choose what they prefer?

It would be useful.

It's been suggested before.

--
Marc.

Author:

FigBits

Posted:

Oct 28, 2016 10:32

Subject:

Re: Add feedback link to order detail screen

Viewed:

24 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, JulieK writes:

In Suggestions, Brickwilbo writes:

In Suggestions, calsbricks writes:
With a 'leave feedback'-link on top of the Orderdetailpage it's easier
to leave feedback such as 'please cancel order' or 'is it shipped?'
instead of scrolling down the page to the 'contact seller about this order'-link
and type a short message.

1.Both a contact link and a feedback link should be up top.
2.Feedback link should only appear on orders marked shipped.

If they program the above, it should eliminate your examples of being against
the suggestion.

My suggestion said "Maybe have it appear after the order is marked shipped."
If I could edit the suggestion, I would remove the word "Maybe".
Julie

That wouldn't work well, because it would be exploited by scam sellers --
they would never mark the orders as shipped, so they would not get negative feedback
and could extend their scam. or, for a less extreme example, a seller.who thinks
they might get a negative could avoid it by not marking the order as shipped.

--
Marc.

Author:

FigBits

Posted:

Oct 28, 2016 09:35

Subject:

Re: Add feedback link to order detail screen

Viewed:

21 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, cosmicray writes:

In Suggestions, Brickwilbo writes:

In Suggestions, JulieK writes:

Please add a link to leave feedback to the newly re-designed Order Detail screen.

Maybe have it appear after the order is marked shipped.

Thanks!
Julie

No, feedback will then be used to communicate as it's the first option they
see to contact the seller.

Your point is well taken. It opens up a larger discussion, that being is there
a point in the order evolution before which feedback should not be left at all
?

Ray

There are plenty of simple solutions.

1) Make it so that non-positive feedback cannot be left until the seller has
been contacted about the order.

2) Make the contact section an actual text box instead of a link to a new page.

Regarding the original suggestion, though -- I was thinking it would be
more useful for the seller to leave feedback for the buyer (fewer page loads).
The benefit in the other direction isn't as significant to me.

--
Marc.

Author:

FigBits

Posted:

Oct 28, 2016 00:05

Subject:

Re: Add feedback link to order detail screen

Viewed:

36 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, JulieK writes:

Please add a link to leave feedback to the newly re-designed Order Detail screen.

Maybe have it appear after the order is marked shipped.

Thanks!
Julie

Yes, please. And more.

Right now, when I finish up an order, I click Back from the Order Detail screen,
find that order again on the list, and click the feedback link for that order.
This takes me to a new page, where I click on the text field box to light it
up, then click a second time to get my drop-list of previous entries, click on
the one I want to leave for this buyer, then click on Preview feedback, which
takes me to another page, then I click on Post feedback. This takes me to yet
another page, where I click the button to take me back to the list of orders
again. Then I find the order again, change the Status, and click the Update Changes
button. This refreshes the page, then I click the Drive Thru icon which takes
me to another page, and I submit that, which takes be back to the order list,
and I can start on the next order.

That's 11 clicks and 8 page loads. I should be able to do ALL of that on
the order detail screen.

--
Marc.

Author:

FigBits

Posted:

Sep 17, 2016 17:33

Subject:

Re: Add checkboxes for "no additional fees"

Viewed:

48 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, OOO_Shiny writes:

I would love to have checkboxes for "no additional fees" and "charges actual
postage only" when searching to buy, both individual items and for the wanted
list search. Alternatly, a max additional fee amount would be good.

I don't think we need yet another way-point on the road to auto-checkout.
We just need to skip to the finish line. Once auto-checkout exists, all those
problems are solved.

--
Marc.

And a pipe

dream of "shipping included", since I don't know if any other stores are
offering this.

It would let me (and my customers) know if the store I'm looking at is *really*
offering the lowest price, or if they are going to tack on several dollars worth
of lot fees, handling fees, packaging fees, etc. In which case, the forth, fifth,
or tenth store down the list would be a better deal for me. Yes, I can find
this info in the store terms, but I have to go through each one to do so.

If I had checkboxes for
[] No additional fees
[] Free shipping

I am sure that it would drive many more customers to my store, who never get
to see OOO_Shiny pop up in their search results otherwise.

It would also encourage more stores to have these policies, which I really believe
benefit the customers, and would improve the overall bricklink experience.

Thanks for consideration and feedback.
OOO_Shiny

Author:

FigBits

Posted:

Sep 16, 2016 15:21

Subject:

Re: PLEASE enable Payment at checkout

Viewed:

34 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, ZwarteMagica writes:

In Suggestions, Cob writes:

Please make the site upgrade and enable payment at checkout. ...

First BrickLink needs to do is making it possible to differentiate parts that
do fit into a mailbox shipment and which not. And this will be a challenge. Not
only you need the exact dimensions of parts but also need to know the maximum
size of every country. For example the Netherlands is 3.2 cm what i understand
most countries. But correct me if i`m wrong but Germany is 5 cm and Canada is
1/4" ~0.63 cm.

2cm in Canada.

But BL does not need to provide that information. Nor do they need to wait until
the community has provided it. The sellers can set it for their own store.

--
Marc.

Author:

FigBits

Posted:

Sep 15, 2016 22:04

Subject:

Re: PLEASE enable Payment at checkout

Viewed:

62 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, cosmicray writes:

In Suggestions, Cob writes:

Please make the site upgrade and enable payment at checkout. I have so many
buyers confused on what to do and how to pay. If they had the option to pay
at checkout it would be so much more streamlined and convenient for everyone.

I am fully prepared and ready to handle payment at checkout, I already give my
buyer the maximum they will be charged for shipping in my terms (and yes, I never
charge more than my terms state, even if I would lose money). Therefore, the
buyer already knows the cost of their order at checkout, why can't they pay
at checkout?

Cob

I would be happy, if I could receive the order, determine the shipping/etc, and
then trigger an On-Site payment request. That would meet pretty much 100% of
my needs.

Ray

What do you mean? That's what Paypal Onsite is.

--
Marc.

Author:

FigBits

Posted:

Sep 15, 2016 22:03

Subject:

Re: PLEASE enable Payment at checkout

Viewed:

45 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, qwertyboy writes:

In Suggestions, FigBits writes:

In Suggestions, nectara writes:

In Suggestions, FigBits writes:

In Suggestions, nectara writes:

In Suggestions, Cob writes:

They are tens of thousands of active store each store with different fee each
store from different country with different postage fee
Who will take this huge task to solve?
Regards

It is already solved. ON BRICKLINK! It just isn't implemented yet.

Right now, hundreds of stores already use the Shipping Cost Suggestion tool.
All that needs to be done is make that visible to buyers (it is currently set
up so that only the seller sees it).

--
Marc.

Shipping Cost Suggestion tool didn't work properly everybody know this
Still long way ...
Regards

It works fine for me. (And for many others.)

Yes, there is plenty of room for improvement. But that doesn't change the
fact that auto-checkout tomorrow, using exactly the set-up that already exists
for Shipping Cost Suggestion.

The shipping cost suggestion tool does not use any "real dimensions" to figure
out what the actual volume would be for a given order. It sometimes does a wrong
calculation based on dimensions that are not in cms/inches etc. On the other
site, either proper dimensions are defined for items, or if there are no proper
items, it falls back to a "safe mode". So it either calculates a correct volume,
or it doesn't calculate a volume at all and the seller has to do the calculations
(and hopefully add the missing dimensions data to the catalog).

All of that is true.

Nonetheless, BL could roll out Instant Checkout using its existing system tomorrow,
and I would use it in my store.

If BL had opened up this "dimensions database" for people on BL to start populating
like many had asked for many months ago, BL would now be in better shape to get
a similar, proper calculating tool.

Very true.

--
Marc.

Author:

FigBits

Posted:

Sep 15, 2016 22:01

Subject:

Re: PLEASE enable Payment at checkout

Viewed:

53 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, JustinFournier writes:

In Suggestions, FigBits writes:

In Suggestions, nectara writes:

They are tens of thousands of active store each store with different fee each
store from different country with different postage fee
Who will take this huge task to solve?
Regards

I don't think it works correctly yet as I recently was auto-invoiced and
there was 0 shipping fees. I contacted the seller to let him know his auto invoicing
thing gave me free shipping (he was not aware this happened) which he then corrected
and sent me another invoice.

That is not the Shipping Cost Suggestion tool. (It doesn't auto-invoice).
I don't know what would have caused what you are describing.

I would be all for it, as the shipping rates get completely jacked up by some
sellers. If you do a wanted list purchase where the bot assigns stores, then
get a massive shipping bill, you are kinda stuck with the cost as you might need
2-3 stores to make up that one cancel now based on other stores minimum purchases
etc. So in my case I had a $14 USD charge which was a smaller order than 2 of
3 others ordered that day from the same geographical area. So it was the second
smallest by volume and weight and the other shipping charges were all under $5.
The only reason I didn't cancel was I would need to meet to other stores
large minimum order to replace that order. He also sent me 2 used pieces described
as new. I will never shop there again, but would much rather had instant shipping
quote and checkout and then simply cancelled and redid the bot without his store
in it.

If it becomes an ongoing problem, I will just switch sites or limit my buying
here to a few stores I have good experience with and take my additional orders
somewhere else.

I'm sorry to hear that. Certainly, you would benefit from a system where
you can see the final price before committing.

--
Marc.

Author:

FigBits

Posted:

Sep 15, 2016 18:15

Subject:

Re: PLEASE enable Payment at checkout

Viewed:

57 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, nectara writes:

In Suggestions, FigBits writes:

In Suggestions, nectara writes:

In Suggestions, Cob writes:

They are tens of thousands of active store each store with different fee each
store from different country with different postage fee
Who will take this huge task to solve?
Regards

Shipping Cost Suggestion tool didn't work properly everybody know this
Still long way ...
Regards

Author:

FigBits

Posted:

Sep 15, 2016 17:26

Subject:

Re: PLEASE enable Payment at checkout

Viewed:

69 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, nectara writes:

In Suggestions, Cob writes:

They are tens of thousands of active store each store with different fee each
store from different country with different postage fee
Who will take this huge task to solve?
Regards

Author:

FigBits

Posted:

Sep 10, 2016 20:00

Subject:

Re: Quote improvements

Viewed:

33 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, miskox writes:

I am not saying that this must be forced to everyone. This is an option. So default
setting would be DISABLED then. And if you don't want this feature ENABLED
then you could still vote YES.

Saso

But Quote requests should work the same way across the whole site. Otherwise
it would be too confusing for buyers.

--
Marc.

Author:

FigBits

Posted:

Sep 10, 2016 12:52

Subject:

Re: Quote improvements

Viewed:

24 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, miskox writes:

I see that Quote function does not reserve or in any other way prevents an item
from the quote to be purchased from other buyer*.

It does not, you are correct.

A simple way for the buyer to reserve the items for themselves is to place an
order for them. (Instead of a quote)

--
Marc.

Author:

FigBits

Posted:

Sep 1, 2016 01:31

Subject:

Re: Please add an Echeck Pending order status

Viewed:

61 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, renhoffman writes:

It is VERY important for sellers to be able to have an order status of "Echeck
Pending". This status should NOT allow for order additions, the same as "Paid"
and "Packed". Trying to keep track of Echecks is daunting without it. I had 3
of them pending just this week. Marking them as "Paid" or "Packed" is not an
option, as I use those for specific things, and other options allow for order
additions, which is NOT an option for me. It needs to be more obvious why the
order hasn't shipped yet, since the current onsite payment system automatically
sets the status to "Paid". I don't mind having to set it to another status,
but it would actually be even better if the system recognized Echecks, and changed
it to "Echeck Pending" automatically.

Thanks,

Darren

Separate the payment status from the order status, and you will have "Clearing"
as an option for payments.

--
Marc.

Author:

FigBits

Posted:

Aug 31, 2016 20:56

Subject:

Re: (Cancelled)

Viewed:

43 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, duhfeet writes:

(Cancelled)

You are suggesting that they roll back the changes, and the suggestion is being
discarded (since there is no intention to do so).

--
Marc.

Author:

FigBits

Posted:

Aug 3, 2016 14:02

Subject:

Re: Replace merge with FB to a negative

Viewed:

55 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, tEoS writes:

As it is now when a seller uses two accounts to create fake sales and fluff their
feedback score the merge completely wipes out any evidence of the poor behavior*.

Is that what happens? I thought that both the feedbacks stayed, and the seller
ended up with 2 positives (from themselves). That is what used to happen. (And,
of course, that's even worse than what you describe.)

In thee case of the person who prompted this suggestion, I think that they removed
both feedbacks themselves after the problem was noted in that thread.

Regardless, I agree with the suggestion.

--
Marc.

This means that potential buyers won't likely know of it to avoid shopping
in that particular store.

My suggestion is that when such a merge includes feedback that it becomes a negative
with a standardized BL comment.

* Sure you can see the merge history though it does not necessarily mean poor
intentions.

P.S. My only concern is that it may be pointless as the member would just create
a different account to sell under. Thoughts?

Author:

FigBits

Posted:

Jul 30, 2016 11:02

Subject:

Re: Best Offer Feature

Viewed:

31 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, BrickItYourself writes:

In Suggestions, FigBits writes:

In Suggestions, BrickItYourself writes:

Of course I know no suggestions are ever implemented,...

They are. Some were added a couple of weeks ago. One was marked as "already implemented"
yesterday.

--
Marc.

Just giving a little hyperbole Marc...

Fair enough. But a lot of people believe it to be true.

--
Marc.

Author:

FigBits

Posted:

Jul 29, 2016 19:51

Subject:

Re: Best Offer Feature

Viewed:

51 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, BrickItYourself writes:

Of course I know no suggestions are ever implemented,...

They are. Some were added a couple of weeks ago. One was marked as "already implemented"
yesterday.

--
Marc.

Author:

FigBits

Posted:

Jul 22, 2016 13:50

Subject:

Re: Add a Coupon Field to Checkout

Viewed:

38 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, Ctbyrne writes:

They you can easily opt out. Only those who have purchased from my store get
added to the list, not everyone on BrickLink. That would definitely be spam.

Never mind what I am doing with my customers' emails. This should be a vote
on if there should be mass coupons or not. I know all of the forum readers here
love to pick things to death. Focus on the actual suggestion.

I voted yes to the suggestion. But that doesn't change the criticisms about
what you are currently doing. This isn't picking things to death, this is
letting you know that what you are doing is potentially against the law, and
against Mailchimp's terms.

--
Marc.

Author:

FigBits

Posted:

Jul 22, 2016 09:43

Subject:

Re: Add a Coupon Field to Checkout

Viewed:

35 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, Ctbyrne writes:

I have a clause in my terms stating that ordering from my store means you consent
to be added to a mailing list.

That may not be in compliance with Mailchimp's terms, nor with Canada's
Anti-Spam Legislation (which you are required to follow if you are sending any
of this emails to Canada).

http://kb.mailchimp.com/accounts/compliance-tips/about-the-canada-anti-spam-law-casl

--
Marc.

Anyone can opt out of this mailing list at any

time. I don't see a problem with trying to bring more sales to BrickLink.
I looked at BrickLink's mailing list function and it is very simplistic.
I would rather take things into my own hands and use a service like MailChimp
where I have 10x the list that I do on BrickLink.

Author:

FigBits

Posted:

Jul 20, 2016 12:41

Subject:

Re: standard deviation on price indices

Viewed:

38 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, bljesprop writes:

In Suggestions, FigBits writes:

In Suggestions, bljesprop writes:

In Suggestions, FigBits writes:

In Suggestions, brick_projects writes:

Please implement standard deviation.

By eliminating the (small number)% cheapest and (small number) % most expensively
priced lots, the average price index would be "more statistically significant"
in scientific terms ( less error margin ).
This is only necessary for items that have at least e.g. 10 distinct lots for
sale.

Why this suggestion ?

Yesterday i noticed one particular seller set all his prices at ( BL avg x 10000
). This caused average price index "lots for sale" to be inflated at least
tenfold.
Someone else suggested he made a mistake in currency.
If this one shopkeeper persists, unwanted "extreme" inflation may occur on several
very common items, and those lots - for sellers not paying attention when adding
to their inventory - might become impossible to sell.

Voted no.

I do not want BL to remove any data. If you want to suggest *adding* information,
I would be fine with that. (Such as adding the median price.)

To any seller who blindly uses the current For Sale Average to set their prices,
I would have a simple suggestion: Don't.

So, for the suggestion: No. Please do not remove information which is useful
to many of us, just because a few sellers might be using that information in
a silly way (that only hurts themselves).

--
Marc.

Back when I took stats, trimming extreme outliers was considered a desirable
practice. This would be particularly true if the outlier was not so much a black
swan as a data recording error or false reporting. Does anyone know if this
advice has changed?

In any case, the notion of "removing" data does not seem to fully apply here.
No one is suggesting it be removed from the price guide. Someone interested
in reviewing every data point is free to look at them where they are reported
in the price guide.

The information that is being suggested to be removed is the mathematical mean.
I don't want that removed. If people want to have additional information
added, such as a trimmed mean, that's fine. But not as a replacement
of what we have now.

Frankly, the only reason I can think of for not making this change is that some
sellers will make fewer and smaller mistakes. That will prevent the rest of
us from enjoying the arbitrage.

Not all prices have normal distribution. Sometimes the outliers are significant.

http://www.bricklink.com/catalogPG.asp?P=62360&colorID=11

For the last several months, the trimmed mean for this part would have shown
around $1. The actual mean (which is what currently gets displayed) was $2. If
I had some last month, I probably would have listed them at $15, which would
likely have been the highest listing at the time. And they probably would have
sold by now.

Now, in that case, the mean isn't a particularly good representation either.
But it's a better number for a seller wondering what price they should ask,
than the trimmed mean.

--
Marc.

As you note, your example really does not prove that one or the other is superior.
However, a measurement of the price trend might have helped to identify the
impact of the part being used in a MOC. Better still, knowing that the demand
for the part was about to change would have tipped a seller not to use the average
price heuristic. T

In the parts of the catalog I typically study, a trimmed mean would be a much
better choice as the first option. It certainly should be easy to provide both.

The problem being addressed how sellers can quickly price a large variety of
inexpensive items without getting it wrong. Price trends would enhance this
information. A warning that the amount of transactions is low (ie that attributes
other than price may have greater impact) would also be helpful (and would have
also flagged your example).

I agree with all that.

As always, more information is better than less information.

--
Marc.

Author:

FigBits

Posted:

Jul 20, 2016 12:36

Subject:

Re: standard deviation on price indices

Viewed:

23 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, yorbrick writes:

For parts like that that are getting rarer due to many people wanting them for
well known MOCs (similar has happened for the Bat-Pod), then having another option
to use a 1-month mean for sold parts may also make sense.

That part is already possible now, using the "Price & Group by month" link on
the PG pages. (It's grouped by calendar month, as opposed to showing the
previous 30 days worth of sales.)

Although this is where a seller that knows his stock and his business makes money.
I bought quite a few of those windshields from people listing them cheap (and
also the dino necks and fezes) because it was fairly obvious they would increase
in value.

Right. There are some other parts where the listings don't follow a normal
distribution, which might have illustrated my point better ... but I didn't
want to draw attention to them because I am currently benefiting from that knowledge!

--
Marc.

Author:

FigBits

Posted:

Jul 20, 2016 12:03

Subject:

Re: standard deviation on price indices

Viewed:

31 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, BrickItYourself writes:

voted no - better suggestion, allow users to program how they want the price
guide displayed via their own settings, if users could define the rules they
want everyone would be satisfied with their concerns over the price guide.

Yes, this.

Changing the way that the current averages are calculated is a terrible idea.

Adding options for users to see the data in whatever way they find useful is
a great idea.

--
Marc.

Author:

FigBits

Posted:

Jul 20, 2016 11:56

Subject:

Re: standard deviation on price indices

Viewed:

32 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, bljesprop writes:

In Suggestions, FigBits writes:

In Suggestions, brick_projects writes:

Frankly, the only reason I can think of for not making this change is that some
sellers will make fewer and smaller mistakes. That will prevent the rest of
us from enjoying the arbitrage.

Author:

FigBits

Posted:

Jul 20, 2016 09:02

Subject:

Re: standard deviation on price indices

Viewed:

37 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, brick_projects writes:

Author:

FigBits

Posted:

Jul 17, 2016 00:16

Subject:

Re: Do away with feedback

Viewed:

55 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, jedvii writes:

In Suggestions, QCBricks writes:

In Suggestions, jedvii writes:

I don't think it's a good idea to get rid of feedback of buyers. It
adds even a small amount of accountability to buyers. One thing I feel BL needs
to do is have all communications done on site. That way if there is a problem,
they can at least look through the messages to get a better idea of the problem.

Why do buyers need "accountability" beyond paying for their orders? When you
walk into your local supermarket, what sort of accountability are they demanding
of you beyond what the local law allows (or disallows)?

I really just don't get this notion at all. Beyond issues surrounding payment
what is there? Take payment (paid, didn't pay, charged back, etc) out of
it and to me, every argument comes down to "I want to make the buyer suffer consequences
just because..." Things like "Buyer claimed parts were missing, but I know I
sent them" or "buyer claims Used sent as New" or "buyer was rude/mean/angry"
or whatever else really are rare enough that I don't see that is a reason
to hold on to the current system.

Scott

fraudulent buyers, buyers who frequently make orders and then never pay, buyers
who are constantly "not getting all their items", buyers who's entire package
doesn't get "delivered", buyers who take weeks to pay.

Let's look at each of those.

Fraudulent buyers. Like what? They filed a chargeback? That's on the list
that QCBricks listed as "take payment out of it". In other words, sure --
that's a legitimate reason for something to be done about the buyer.

Buyers who frequently make orders and then never pay. Again, that's a payment
issue. It can be dealt with through NPB -- feedback is not required.

Buyers who are constantly "not getting all their items". How does the ability
to leave feedback help this? A seller would leave a negative if a buyer claimed
that they didn't get their items? This is more easily dealt with by submitting
a form to Admin stating that they buyer says they didn't get their items.
Admin could track how many such reports a buyer gets.

Buyers whose entire package doesn't arrive. Same as above. There is a MUCH
better solution than feedback, because sellers are unlikely to leave negative
feedback for a buyer who says their order didn't arrive (nor should they!)

Buyers who take weeks to pay. If a seller doesn't want that, they need simply
file an NPB. Again, feedback doesn't fix this. (Also, it's yet again
a payment issue.)

Look, i'm not
saying all, most, or even more than 10% buyers are this way. I'm just saying
that FB shouldn't be removed for buyers. Ebay still does feedback for buyers
and there's not point in it. If anything it's helpful to remind buyers
to leave feedback for sellers.

I'm not sure what you mean there, but Ebay does not allow sellers to leave
negative feedback about buyers. Neither does BrickOwl.

On your list above, every single one has better solutions than leaving negative
feedback for buyers.

The solution isn't *just* to remove the ability to leave feedback for buyers.
It's to remove that and replace it with something else. Sellers should
be able to alert BrickLink when there has been a significant issue. Not "this
buyer is rude", but rather "The buyer says they did not receive their order".

--
Marc.

Author:

FigBits

Posted:

Jul 16, 2016 10:03

Subject:

Re: Auto Finder should ignore "multiples"

Viewed:

47 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, JayBeeOnline writes:

I would suggest that the Auto Finder should ignore "multiples" of items during
his search.

Explanation: When I search for (as example) 44 1x2 Bricks in a specific colour
I get results including shops which have "multiples" (x10). This is unusable
because I'm forced to either buy 50 instead of the 44 and end up paying more
than intended or to buy 40 in one shop and another 4 in a second shop which could
result in higher costs.

There should be an option to deselect those stores...

What if 50 of the item in that store is cheaper than 44 in the other?

--
Marc.

Author:

FigBits

Posted:

Jul 15, 2016 21:42

Subject:

Re: Negative Feedback: What if?

Viewed:

108 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, Thea writes:

When the first party in the transaction clicks on the little negative feedback
dot, show a list of reasons for leaving negative feedback, including an Other
with the ability to explain in detail.

The list should include reasons that qualify for NPB, NSS, or NRS. The person
should be advised to use those options first.

Hold the feedback in limbo for a short specified time to give the other party
an opportunity to respond in a way that bricklink can see.

If the first party receives no response during the hold time, the feedback can
be posted. The second party should be able to post their own feedback under
the same method, if they can show a reasonable cause for not responding.

In other words, give the two parties the requirement to communicate through bricklink
first, outside of feedback and the Forum!

Interestingly, at BO, buyers are unable to leave negative feedback if they have
not contacted the seller about the order first.

--
Marc.

Author:

FigBits

Posted:

Jul 2, 2016 00:56

Subject:

Re: Please Check Your Forum Posts (Re: No advertising)

Viewed:

74 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, xLEGOboy13x writes:

I have seen a few replies point out how people are misunderstanding Denka's
post; I would like to expand on those. I think the main reason people are reading
this thread incorrectly is simply because it's WRITTEN incorrectly! I
had to read the message multiple times to figure out what Denka was actually
trying to say.

Now might be a good time to point out situations such as this one. I know English
is not everyone's primary language, but if you're going to start
a whole topic on something, it is important to make sure your ideas come thru
cleanly.

So to anyone reading this, please keep what I have said in mind when starting
a discussion. A few extra minutes of language structure could make a huge
difference in how the community reacts/responds to your questions!

Meh. Is it really a big deal? People misunderstand each other all the time. I
get misunderstood on the forum pretty much every day (including today). I don't
think it's anything to worry about.

--
Marc.

Author:

FigBits

Posted:

Jun 30, 2016 14:26

Subject:

Re: Exclude unpaid orders from PG

Viewed:

27 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, Cyndis_Bricks writes:

In Suggestions, FigBits writes:

In Suggestions, Cyndis_Bricks writes:

In Suggestions, FigBits writes:

In Suggestions, Cyndis_Bricks writes:

In Suggestions, Brettj666 writes:

In Suggestions, Cyndis_Bricks writes:

In Suggestions, paulvdb writes:

In Suggestions, Rob_and_Shelagh writes:

In Suggestions, cosmicray writes:

Please provide the ability to exclude orders which are not indicating payment
(including those in NPB or NSS) from the Price Guide. These orders allow a relatively
simple way to manipulate the PG numbers, and do not reflect real sales.

thanks

I don't know about NSS but if you complete an NPB and in doing so cancel
the order I thought the order is then removed from the sold results in the PG.
I just checked an order we cancelled at a buyer's request a few days ago
and those parts do not show in the sold results.

Robert

But they are shown in the results from the time the order is placed until the
order is cancelled.

What about the 11 orders for

10219-1 (Inv) Maersk Container Train
1218 Parts, 3 Minifigures, 2011
Sets: Train: RC Train

for $25.00

That was deemed a scam, and most if not all cancelled. They still appear on
the PG?

Dave

who cancelled them, the buyer, the seller, or bricklink?

Ours was cancelled by BL:
Order was Cancelled via Order Cancel Request on Jun 6, 2016 18:52.

Reason: Seller did not respond to emails

Does yours show up in the price guide anymore? (Do you have a blue box next to
it)

--
Marc.

Yes,still there.

Can you post a screenshot of the price guide, and also the order page after you
click the blue square?

--
Marc.

Awesome, thanks. So it appears that if BL cancels an order (instead of it completing
an NSS or NPB), these do not get removed. That is a bit odd, though perhaps BL's
reasoning is that they still want the seller to be on the hook for the seller
fees.

Thanks for the screens.

--
Marc.

Author:

FigBits

Posted:

Jun 30, 2016 12:51

Subject:

Re: Exclude unpaid orders from PG

Viewed:

36 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, Cyndis_Bricks writes:

In Suggestions, FigBits writes:

In Suggestions, Cyndis_Bricks writes:

In Suggestions, Brettj666 writes:

In Suggestions, Cyndis_Bricks writes:

In Suggestions, paulvdb writes:

In Suggestions, Rob_and_Shelagh writes:

In Suggestions, cosmicray writes:

But they are shown in the results from the time the order is placed until the
order is cancelled.

What about the 11 orders for

10219-1 (Inv) Maersk Container Train
1218 Parts, 3 Minifigures, 2011
Sets: Train: RC Train

for $25.00

That was deemed a scam, and most if not all cancelled. They still appear on
the PG?

Dave

who cancelled them, the buyer, the seller, or bricklink?

Ours was cancelled by BL:
Order was Cancelled via Order Cancel Request on Jun 6, 2016 18:52.

Reason: Seller did not respond to emails

Does yours show up in the price guide anymore? (Do you have a blue box next to
it)

--
Marc.

Yes,still there.

Can you post a screenshot of the price guide, and also the order page after you
click the blue square?

--
Marc.

Author:

FigBits

Posted:

Jun 30, 2016 12:39

Subject:

Re: Exclude unpaid orders from PG

Viewed:

22 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, Cyndis_Bricks writes:

In Suggestions, yorbrick writes:

In reality, we only want the highest quality transactions in the left columns
on the PG. Orders not paid for and orders not shipped (which get to NSS), do
not meet the litmus test of a legitimate Sale.

At which point should they enter the price guide though? At the time of the order,
at the time of the payment, at the time of the order being marked complete? For
all of those, the seller could wait to manipulate the price guide or even not
mark complete, for example, to avoid them being added to the price guide.

I would say, at the time of the order. BUT, I also think it should be removed,
once the order has been cancelled. Since, for whatever reason, the order is
not final.
Just my thought.

Dave

That is exactly how it already works.

--
Marc.

Author:

FigBits

Posted:

Jun 30, 2016 12:38

Subject:

Re: Exclude unpaid orders from PG

Viewed:

27 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, Teup writes:

In Suggestions, cosmicray writes:

In Suggestions, Rob_and_Shelagh writes:

In Suggestions, cosmicray writes:

Robert says cancelled orders are not included, Ray says they are. I guess that
can't both be accurate. Which is it? I'd like to know now..

They are not. Once an order is cancelled, it is removed from the Price Guide.
If an item removal request is approved, that item sale is removed as well.

I think everyone agrees the priceguide reflects the current asked amount (current
average) and the offered amount (L6MS), anything cancelled has no business in
any of these stats..

--
Marc.

Author:

FigBits

Posted:

Jun 30, 2016 12:36

Subject:

Re: Exclude unpaid orders from PG

Viewed:

28 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, Cyndis_Bricks writes:

In Suggestions, Brettj666 writes:

In Suggestions, Cyndis_Bricks writes:

In Suggestions, paulvdb writes:

In Suggestions, Rob_and_Shelagh writes:

In Suggestions, cosmicray writes:

But they are shown in the results from the time the order is placed until the
order is cancelled.

What about the 11 orders for

10219-1 (Inv) Maersk Container Train
1218 Parts, 3 Minifigures, 2011
Sets: Train: RC Train

for $25.00

That was deemed a scam, and most if not all cancelled. They still appear on
the PG?

Dave

who cancelled them, the buyer, the seller, or bricklink?

Ours was cancelled by BL:
Order was Cancelled via Order Cancel Request on Jun 6, 2016 18:52.

Reason: Seller did not respond to emails

Does yours show up in the price guide anymore? (Do you have a blue box next to
it)

--
Marc.

Author:

FigBits

Posted:

Jun 29, 2016 09:39

Subject:

Re: Problem with onsite PayPal: grand totals

Viewed:

32 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, Teup writes:

In Suggestions, paulvdb writes:

In Suggestions, Teup writes:

In Suggestions, paulvdb writes:

In Suggestions, Teup writes:

Whenever a buyer uses onsite PayPal, I do not receive the amount I instruct in
the invoice, but an up to date conversion of the Bricklink grand total field
in the currency that the buyer chooses. Tax-wise, this is a problem.

Please allow setting a grand total in the actual currency that a buyer chooses
to pay in. This way, the figures of the invoice and the actual payment will match.
I think this is a high priority issue, because technically, it currently forces
us to do something that is technically illegal.

Or is there a way to prevent this that I didn't think of? Retroactively changing
the invoice is the best solution that came to my mind, but that's pretty
tedious.

Is this a recent change? I checked some onsite payments and always received the
amount that I invoiced. Of course most of my buyers pay the same day, but I had
one buyer who was invoiced on June 10 and paid on June 16. For that order the
invoice and onsite payment were both for USD 52.70.

I don't really know, I have been away and not extensively been testing onsite
PayPal.. 6 days and the exact same number, that can't be coincidence.. how
is that even possible, though? Do buyers enter their own amount with onsite payment
or is it generated by Bricklink?

For onsite payment the amount paid is generated by Bricklink. It is the same
as the amount that you see in the order details screen and also the same amount
that you see when you use the DISPGRANDTOTAL tag in your invoice template. Based
on your other posts it seems that you generate your own invoice and don't
use the Bricklink invoice template? I guess that could cause a difference in
grand total.

Yeah, I see.. Yes, so I never really used these fields, but now that there's
onsite payment, I sort of need to.

I use the BL macros to generate a list of all the relevant data, and then feed
that into my software. What I could do is use that DISPGRANDTOTAL tag you mentioned
to triangulate the used exchange rate, by dividing that by the item total in
Euro. However, when someone adds a batch and I invoice again, and there are shipping
costs / additional charges already filled out, it will no longer represent the
item total. Seems there's no DISPITEMTOTAL, or, better yet, a tag for the
exchange rate.. I have requested this in a suggestion in the past, but it was
never accepted.

When a batch is added the cost of all the previous batches is recalculated at
the current exchange rate. (A side effect of this is that a buyer could lower
their total cost in their own currency by adding a small item to an order if
the value of their currency has increased since originally placing the order.)

So, you should always be able to calculate the exchange rate that BL is using
by comparing BASEGRANDTOTAL and DISPGRANDTOTAL.

--
Marc.

Author:

FigBits

Posted:

Jun 29, 2016 07:01

Subject:

Re: Problem with onsite PayPal: grand totals

Viewed:

32 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, Teup writes:

In Suggestions, Rob_and_Shelagh writes:

In Suggestions, Teup writes:

Any invoice MUST ALWAYS show the amount to be paid, period. Whatever currency
the buyer selects, the amount should be fixed at the time of invoice (or before).
If what you are saying is true then is it:

a) buyers are doing their own conversion and sending a different amount?
b) somehow BL is offering them another figure when they come to pay that differs
from the invoiced amount?

either way, this is not acceptable.

Robert

Exactly. Well, I can not be entirely sure. The only thing I am certain about
is that the USD payments I receive with onsite PayPal are slightly off the grand
totals I have in my administration.

The Bricklink grand total only exists in one currency, and that is my own set
currency - not the currency the buyer pays in.

On the Order Summary screen, the total shown is in your store currency. But on
the Order Detail screen, it also shows the total in the currency that the buyer
selected. For you, what does this number match? The amount in your invoice or
the amount they paid?

So whenever the buyer pays in
another currency, it seems to me that it gets converted for them by Bricklink,
at the moment of payment.. it's a few percent off at least.. it's not
because of any fees or anything; the payments in Euro do match my invoices.

After they pay, does the payment status get updated like it does when they use
the Pay button? (And do you have your order status and payment status fields
separated?)

--
Marc.

Author:

FigBits

Posted:

Jun 23, 2016 12:14

Subject:

Re: Z-index of pop-up box

Viewed:

22 times

Topic:

It's a bug. File it with the help desk.

--
Marc.

Author:

FigBits

Posted:

Jun 16, 2016 15:02

Subject:

Re: Shipping cost suggestion: PayPal Fees

Viewed:

39 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, ToriHada writes:

In Suggestions, calsbricks writes:

Marc's stats seem to conflict with the idea that orders are down but at the
moment it is any thing but normal.

Those stats are themselves conflicting and inconclusive. Even the author admitted
in his comments that orders were down (as much as 100 orders per day right after
the upgrade). The only issue in doubt is whether that decline is "significant"
or not. But to the MANY MANY members who have posted complaints about not receiving
ANY orders or much fewer orders after the upgrade or much smaller orders than
usual, I am sure they will tell you that the decline as it affects them is very
"significant".

Thor

Which is why I say so at every opportunity. Any individual store is going to
have trends that differ from the overall trend for the site. This is true now,
and it has been true since the day that BrickLink launched.

So far, June 2016 is very slightly above the trend when comparing the volume
of orders to the previous month (based on the ratios since 2010).

Will some stores have fewer orders? Absolutely. Will some stores have MANY fewer
orders? Absolutely.

Will some stores have more orders? Absolutely.

--
Marc.

Author:

FigBits

Posted:

Jun 16, 2016 14:21

Subject:

Re: Shipping cost suggestion: PayPal Fees

Viewed:

28 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, calsbricks writes:

This update has had an effect on orders (there isn't any doubt on that),

??

There is definitely doubt about it.

but there is some doubt on how much effect is down to the update and how much
is down to June being not such a good month. Only time will tell. Perhaps if
they feel it in their pocket books when the June fees are calculated the message
might come home a bit stronger. A lot of forum comments suggesting the larger
stores are being preferred - somehow I cannot see that unless as on of the UK's
largest stores, we are not one of the larger stores they are referring to.

Marc's stats seem to conflict with the idea that orders are down but at the
moment it is any thing but normal.

The volume of orders is absolutely normal. The distribution of orders, who knows.

--
Marc.

Author:

FigBits

Posted:

Jun 16, 2016 03:01

Subject:

Re: Include shipping cost calculations in Quotes

Viewed:

39 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, BigBBricks writes:

In the "Orders Received" section of the site, we can quickly and accurately provide
shipping costs to buyers. Please add this functionality to the Quotes section

Agreed. Suggested just a couple of weeks ago: https://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=990098

--
Marc.

Author:

FigBits

Posted:

Jun 15, 2016 23:02

Subject:

Re: Shipping cost suggestion: PayPal Fees

Viewed:

29 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, calsbricks writes:

In Suggestions, FigBits writes:

In Suggestions, calsbricks writes:

If all this works so wonderfully well at BO why is it that all the stores who
wanted auto-checkout haven't moved there?

There's no need to "move" there -- we sell on both. And the autocheckout
there is exactly what we need here.

--
Marc.

Morning Marc

Don't agree - it is what some stores want - (not need). Bricklink has operated
for many years with consistent growth in each and all of those without it and
doesn't need it now - it is a nicety not a mandatory requirement.

You may have misunderstood my statement. You asked about the people who want
auto-checkout. When I replied with "we" I was referring to that group (which
I am a part of). The checkout system at BO is what we (the people who want autocheckout
here) need.

I am not saying that everyone on BL wants or needs it. I know there are plenty
who don't.

--
Marc.

Author:

FigBits

Posted:

Jun 15, 2016 22:42

Subject:

Re: Shipping cost suggestion: PayPal Fees

Viewed:

25 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, calsbricks writes:

If all this works so wonderfully well at BO why is it that all the stores who
wanted auto-checkout haven't moved there?

There's no need to "move" there -- we sell on both. And the autocheckout
there is exactly what we need here.

--
Marc.

Author:

FigBits

Posted:

Jun 14, 2016 22:24

Subject:

Seller Tools: stock level alerts

Viewed:

143 times

Topic:

Status:

Open

Vote:

[Yes|No]

Since we've been told that the next big update will be focused on seller
needs, I figured I'd start posting some suggestions of things I'd like
to see added as a seller. Some may already have appeared before.

Please add the ability to set an alert if the stock level of a particular lot
goes below a certain level.

For example, if I have less than 4 Stormtroopers left in my store, I will want
to order some more Battle Packs, so I'd like BrickLink to track the stock
levels for that lot.

The alert could send me an email or text message, but the more important way
for this to be stored would be a page on BrickLink where I could go to see all
the lots that currently have an active alert. Whenever I am placing orders to
restock my store, I would visit this page to see what I need.

The ability to set this alert would appear as an option in the inventory listing
for each lot. It should include a checkbox if the alert should be emailed, and
a text-box to specify the stock level that triggers the alert.

On the page that lists all the lots with active alerts, we should be able to
update whether the alert is emailed, the stock level that triggers it, and we
should also be able to delete the alert altogether from that page.

There are a number of ways that stock levels can be adjusted, so there may be
a few different times that the system needs to check if new lots need to be alerted.
Certainly, when an order is placed. But it would also be useful if the check
is also run when there is an API update, so that sellers who reduce their inventory
through the API can also get the notification of the stock level drop.

If the push notifications would cause too many emails to be sent, I would be
satisfied just with the page that lists all the lots with active alerts.

--
Marc.

Author:

FigBits

Posted:

Jun 14, 2016 09:34

Subject:

Re: Displaying all the colors for one part

Viewed:

20 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, jennnifer writes:

In Suggestions, legojalex writes:

This view on this link is what I am talking about:
http://i112.photobucket.com/albums/n177/randal1208/General%20Toys/Humans/YoJoe/brick_zps1daf838e.png

I found it!

http://www.bricklink.com/browseList.asp?itemType=P&catString=5

Shop, Stores, Browse, Parts, Bricks

Wow. Never saw this page before. I like it!

Jen

Sweet. I agree that is a pretty cool view.

--
Marc.

Author:

FigBits

Posted:

Jun 14, 2016 09:18

Subject:

Re: Displaying all the colors for one part

Viewed:

16 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, legojalex writes:

In Suggestions, FigBits writes:

In Suggestions, legojalex writes:

I think the new design looks great! But I have one suggestion. In the old design
when I browse to a specific category to find the part I want, I could see all
the colours that part was in right away in the part list. Now it seems like I
first have to click on the part link, and then click on Color Images to see what
the colors are, so it is two extra clicks.

For me when I look for a specific part, one of the first thing I look for is
if it exists in that specific color I need it in. So my suggestion is to make
it quicker to find out what the different colors a part is in.

If there is a quicker way to do this that I have missed, please let me know.

I am not clear on what you are saying has changed.

So, for the old design: You would click on a category (let's say Tile) and
then scan through the category to find the part that you want (example: 3069b).
You would click on that link (3069b) and it would show you all of the colors
of that part available in the store.

Is that accurate? Because it still works exactly like that.

--
Marc.

Sorry for confusing description in my message.

The way I used Bricklink before was to click on the Parts link, then click Tile
for example, and then I got a list of all the types of tiles there is, and below
each tile (e.g. 3069) there was a horizontal/vertical small list of what colors
that were available for that part. So I got the list of available colors for
a part quite quickly just after clicking on the Tile-link.

For me as a MOCer and buyer I often search for specific colors for a part and
if it does not exist I change the design and try another part. So getting quick
access to that I personally think is great.

I'm not sure though if there were two types of interfaces before regarding
parts?

I see. I thought you meant while you are in a store, sorry.

Unfortunately, I never browse the catalog using those pages, so I can't really
help with how it is now vs before.

--
Marc.

Author:

FigBits

Posted:

Jun 14, 2016 08:01

Subject:

Re: Displaying all the colors for one part

Viewed:

19 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, legojalex writes:

Author:

FigBits

Posted:

Jun 13, 2016 19:35

Subject:

Re: Estimated shipping costs = "TBD"...

Viewed:

41 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, JayBeeOnline writes:

In Suggestions, Brickwilbo writes:

Tracking isn't always cheap or free. It leads to higher postage.
If I let my buyers pay extra for tracking I wouldn't receive any order.

Surely, but MOST shops here at BL offer insurance. And if I'm not totally
wrong this includes tracking...

No.

I offer "insurance" in the sense that I guarantee your order will arrive. But
there is no tracking. I can send you a package for $6.95 USD if you order from
me. But if you want tracking, shipping would be $36.53.

--
Marc.

Author:

FigBits

Posted:

Jun 13, 2016 19:31

Subject:

Re: Estimated shipping costs = "TBD"...

Viewed:

55 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, JayBeeOnline writes:

Dear admins,

I would highly recommend a message to ALL shops here on BrickLink that they should
fill in the values for shipping costs in their shop settings.

So, reading the replies in the this thread, I understand better.

You want instant checkout. A LOT of us do. But this is not something that the
sellers are preventing. It's something that simply doesn't exist on BrickLink.
So, having BL send a message out to all the shops would accomplish nothing.

We need for BL to simply add it in.

--
Marc.

Author:

FigBits

Posted:

Jun 13, 2016 18:49

Subject:

Re: Estimated shipping costs = "TBD"...

Viewed:

49 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, JayBeeOnline writes:

Dear admins,

I would highly recommend a message to ALL shops here on BrickLink that they should
fill in the values for shipping costs in their shop settings.

It's possible to do this now? Some stores actually show values there before
placing the order?

--
Marc.

Most (All?) shops have a list of shipping costs on their terms / splash page,
but when an order is placed the checkout page shows "TBD" (To Be Determined).

In the "old" BrickLink it was said that BL 2.0 would be able to estimate shipping
costs automatically so that users don't get surprised / annoyed by "additional
costs" and extreme overpriced shipping rates and would have the ability to halt
the shopping procedure BEFORE the final checkout.

But if the shops shop "TBD" at checkout this functionality is useless...

Author:

FigBits

Posted:

Jun 11, 2016 00:00

Subject:

Re: Use my store's inventory to fill Wanted List

Viewed:

38 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, FigBits writes:

... That was fine, except that it turns out I only had 9 of those
50 lots, so I had to select it. This should be easier.

**
... so I had to select "Load More" way too often. This should be easier.

(edit)

--
Marc.

Author:

FigBits

Posted:

Jun 10, 2016 23:57

Subject:

Use my store's inventory to fill Wanted List

Viewed:

123 times

Topic:

Status:

Open

Vote:

[Yes|No]

I was playing around with the new Wanted List functions tonight. Overall, I really
like how it works to part-together a set.

One thing I would like to see improved, though, is an easier way to use my own
store's inventory.

I had a wanted list with about 50 parts, and the auto-buy function was recommending
two stores that I could get everything I wanted. It was a really good price,
but one of the two stores I do not want to buy from, so I decided to fill my
list by manually selecting stores.

This worked great, except that I wanted to be able to select MY OWN store, so
that I could just use parts that I already have on-hand instead of buying them
from someone else. That was fine, except that it turns out I only had 9 of those
50 lots, so I had to select it. This should be easier.

What I would like to see is one of the following:

Show a lot more stores when I click the show more button.

Or

Have an option to automatically include my own store at the top of the list,
regardless of how many lots I have in the list.

Or

Even before going through the selection process, have an option to edit the Wanted
List by subtracting parts from my inventory (and creating a pull-list).

Thanks!

--
Marc.

Author:

FigBits

Posted:

Jun 10, 2016 09:28

Subject:

Re: Agree and continue

Viewed:

41 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, yorbrick writes:

When checking out, there is an "agree and continue" button (see example, I'm
using Marc's store, I'm sure he doesn't mind).

I think this should say something underneath - either:

"Clicking this button places the order" (if it does) or "You can review this
order before it's final" (if it doesn't place the order just yet).

I think that "Agree and Continue" is fine. On the left, you can see that there
are three steps in the process. This first one is to see the store's terms.

What is a bit confusing is that step 2 is called "Payment" but it's really
just selecting which payment method and currency you will use. (It becomes clearer
once you're there, though.) Step 3 is Shipping, where you pick your address
and shipping method. The button there is clear: "Place Order".

I would think that Step 2 and 3 should be reversed, but *shrug*.

Here is my main concern: throughout the process, it says that the shipping cost
is TBD (To Be Determined). At the last step, where you choose the shipping method,
there is text that says "Shipping and handling fees will be updated as you choose
shipping options."

That's not quite true, though. Yes, the seller could invoice differently
based on what is chosen, but the displayed S&H do not update based on the choice.
I find that very misleading, and could cause buyers to wonder if they are doing
something wrong. The implication is that the page should show the S&H on the
tally on the right side of the page, but this doesn't happen (and won't
happen until autocheckout gets added).

--
Marc.

Author:

FigBits

Posted:

Jun 9, 2016 20:06

Subject:

Re: Show prices and stores in Wanted List

Viewed:

40 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, Classicsmiley writes:

Per this exchange, I am formally asking for prices and stores to be shown again
in the Wanted List. Please vote!

My email to bugs@bricklink.com:

I am unable to see prices in my wanted list, and it takes many, many more
clicks to actually be able to find any shops with the parts that I want. I
depend on this feature, and need the old functionality restored as quickly
as possible.

Yesterday this page ( http://www.bricklink.com/wantedView.asp?wantedMoreID=
) allowed me to have access to some of the functionality I needed, but it
now redirects to the new, broken wanted list.

Please fix the wanted list.

Response from Bricklink:

Unfortunately this is not currently a function of the new wanted list feature. I am very sorry that you are not satisfied with the new wanted list feature. We provided users with the opportunity to provide feedback during our preview launch and have since applied much of that feedback. The redirect link was a bug and should not have ever led to the old pages. I understand that learning an entirely new feature can be a bit daunting and would be more than happy to help you with specific tasks if I am able. However, if you have any specific suggestions you would like to provide about how we can improve the wanted list please feel free to post them on the Suggestions topic of the Discussion Forum. This way other users that feel similarly can vote on these changes. This will be the most efficient way to get them addressed. Thank you!

Sincerely,
BrickLink Quality Assurance

That is very unfortunate. I had thought that adding the prices and list of stores
for each part would be relatively simple, and a good way to get power-users on
board.

Although I do not really use Want Lists in the way that the power users do, so
this suggestion would not benefit me as a buyer, I have voted yes.

--
Marc.

Author:

FigBits

Posted:

Jun 9, 2016 15:30

Subject:

Re: My 2 cents on the new website

Viewed:

48 times

Topic:

In General, Mistress_Lisa writes:

...
I miss the page that had 'My orders' and on the left was orders placed,
on the right was orders received. Now each under a separate place: one under
My BL, the other under My Store. No....I still want to have both together, and
then I can choose when I have the page showing them both. The way it is now,
it is too many steps to go from one to the other.

Am I making any sense with both of these?

It makes sense that those pages might feel like they are farther apart, but in
fact they are not. They are both just a single click away from each other. And
they are both just a single click away from *any* BrickLink page, whereas they
used to be two or three clicks away from a random page.

--
Marc.

Author:

FigBits

Posted:

Jun 3, 2016 18:33

Subject:

Re: File option on Order placed

Viewed:

27 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, yorbrick writes:

I guess one problem with this is that if a buyer files it before it is marked
complete then it may never get changed to complete by the buyer

That's not really a problem, though, is it?

--
Marc.

Author:

FigBits

Posted:

Jun 3, 2016 18:07

Subject:

Re: File option on Order placed

Viewed:

31 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, ToriHada writes:

Sorry, but I voted no. I don't think buyers should be able to change order
status to completed and file it away before the seller has marked it as paid
or shipped.

Filing it does not affect the other party. (A buyer can file an order and it
will not be filed for the seller.)

While I understand (and share) your frustration with sellers who

are lazy about changing the order status, allowing buyers to change the status
prematurely would open it up to much confusion, gaming and abuse.

In what way?

--
Marc.

Author:

FigBits

Posted:

Jun 2, 2016 09:35

Subject:

Make Shipping Cost Suggestion work on Quotes

Viewed:

101 times

Topic:

Status:

Open

Vote:

[Yes|No]

I hadn't suggested this before, as I thought that Quotes and Shipping Cost
Suggestion would transition to Automated Checkout at any time, but I might as
well put it out there:

Right now the Shipping Cost Suggestion pop-up only works on the My Orders Received
page. It should also work exactly the same way on the My Quotes Received page,
but it currently does not.

--
Marc.

Author:

FigBits

Posted:

May 27, 2016 10:56

Subject:

Re: Add Element ID's to DUPLO minifigs

Viewed:

30 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, StormChaser writes:

In Suggestions, Turribrick writes:

Since DUPLO minifigs are single piece items I see no reason why they can't
have an Element ID / PCC code.

I am inventorying a Duplo set and I completely agree. The two figures in the
set I'm inventorying have PCCs and now I must attempt to find them by title
in the catalog.

It's been over six months since you made this very helpful (and, it seems
to me, easy-to-implement) suggestion, but I see that we're about to get BrickLink
Studio instead.

While waiting for the system limitations to be changed (so that PCC codes can
be added to items in the Minifig category), is there anything stopping us from
simply adding this number to each minifig's name?

--
Marc.

Author:

FigBits

Posted:

May 26, 2016 08:58

Subject:

Re: Open Bids and Purchase Requests

Viewed:

29 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, yorbrick writes:

I prefer the view point that this site is for people to connect and share Lego
for the pleasure of it. So I ask myself would this feature assist in this.
And YES it would.

It isn't for that though, is it? It is for selling and buying LEGO. And for
money, not for pleasure.

It's for both.

There are plenty of ways to make money. I enjoy doing this (buying and selling)
more than I enjoyed any previous job I've had. So, while making money is
what allows me to do this full time, I do it because I enjoy it.

With BL ownership, it's a bit more complicated. But they have been losing
money, not making it, for the last few years.

--
Marc.

Author:

FigBits

Posted:

May 24, 2016 23:47

Subject:

Re: on site payment and e-check

Viewed:

44 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, therobo writes:

In Suggestions, FigBits writes:

In Suggestions, Mistress_Lisa writes:

In Suggestions, BrickItYourself writes:

In Suggestions, My_Precious writes:

In Suggestions, BrickItYourself writes:

Please do not allow an order to auto-update to "paid" when a member pays via
on-site payment with an e-check. The order is not paid for yet, the buyer has
only initiated payment.

This particular case lifted a NPB, but the buyer has not paid. Now, if the e-check
bounces, I will have to start the NPB all over again.

Again, when people pay via an e-check, via paypal, using on-site payment, the
system automatically marks the order as paid.

Please fix this bug.

Thanks,

Ken
Brick It Yourself

If someone has no credit and no debit/credit card linked to their account only
a bank account, then there is basically a delay whilst paypal waits for the money
from the bank, they won't give you it until it clears so it can take a while.

I've only had it on one small order before and someone else said paypal onsite
was trying to send an e cheque until they noticed and stopped it.

I'm not sure if you can setup a paypal account to not accept e cheque at
all?

I don't mind accepting e-checks, nothing against this form of payment.

The problem is Bricklink saying an order is paid and removing a NPB when that
is not the case.

I agree with Ken. The order is not actually paid until the funds are in my account.
Also, Paypal does not provide you with the customer's address until the funds
are cleared. And if you print labels through Paypal, then you must wait. So perhaps
there needs to be another status in the drop down menu. Perhaps 'Payment
on hold' is too long....maybe "Escrow"?

If you separate the payment status from the order status (which I recommend),
there is already one for that -- Payment "pending".

Payment status "pending" does not exist.

Sorry -- "clearing".

--
Marc.

Author:

FigBits

Posted:

May 24, 2016 13:52

Subject:

Re: on site payment and e-check

Viewed:

45 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, Mistress_Lisa writes:

In Suggestions, BrickItYourself writes:

In Suggestions, My_Precious writes:

In Suggestions, BrickItYourself writes:

I don't mind accepting e-checks, nothing against this form of payment.

The problem is Bricklink saying an order is paid and removing a NPB when that
is not the case.

If you separate the payment status from the order status (which I recommend),
there is already one for that -- Payment "pending".

But BL does not use this status automatically when an echeck is sent, which (I
agree) it should.

--
Marc.

Along with the other suggestion I made to Admin of this in the drop down: "Leave
Order Open". I get annoyed when it says I have orders pending on my "My BrickLink"
page, when the customer has asked me to leave the order open. I don't want
to set it to "Processing" so the only other option is to leave it at "Pending".
But that makes it look as if I have not acknowledged the customer or order at
all, and that isn't the case.

Admin: please add these two options to Order Status!

Thank you,

Lisa at Brick Dungeon

Author:

FigBits

Posted:

May 14, 2016 23:28

Subject:

Re: Insure/Noninsure Checkboxes when Submit Order

Viewed:

51 times

Topic:

I'm not seeing a change. I see the same checkbox in other stores, and I don't
see a new option in the store settings. What changed?

Meanwhile, it looks like about 65 suggestions were discarded in three or four
days last month! A bit disappointing that we can't see what the suggestions
were.

http://www.bricklink.com/messageList.asp?ID=8&status=2&v=c&viewSort=Y&max=100

--
Marc.

Author:

FigBits

Posted:

May 14, 2016 23:03

Subject:

Re: Insure/Noninsure Checkboxes when Submit Order

Viewed:

51 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, ToriHada writes:

Wow! This nearly six year old suggestion of mine was implemented. Yay! Thanks
Admin.

Thor

I'm not seeing a change. I see the same checkbox in other stores, and I don't
see a new option in the store settings. What changed?

--
Marc.

In Suggestions, ToriHada writes:

Please give sellers the OPTION to require buyers to select insure or not insure
when submitting an order in their shop. Currently, BrickLink only offers a single
checkbox for insurance only, which need not be checked for the order to go through.
As mentioned here:

http://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=435576

having the buyer make a deliberate affirmative choice to insure or not insure
is better than the buyer making a passive choice which may not be a conscious
choice at all.

This could work similar to the "I Will Pay By" choices given by sellers who accept
multiple forms of payment, the "I Will Pay In" choices given by sellers who accept
payments in multiple currencies, and the "I would like my order to be shipped
by" choices given by sellers who offer multiple shipping options. See therobo's
checkout page for an example of these choices. If a choice is not made by the
buyer, BrickLink will not allow the order to be submitted. The order can only
be submitted if the buyer makes a choice. As with the shipping choices, each
seller could add a sentence or two explaining the insurance and no insurance
choices. I think allowing this OPTION could help eliminate or resolve some of
the problems that arise with orders that are lost or damaged during shipment.
Again, this is an OPTION for those sellers who want it. If anyone does not want
to use it, they don't have to.

Foster

Author:

FigBits

Posted:

May 14, 2016 15:39

Subject:

Re: disable automated invoice after quote

Viewed:

34 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, otrwalter writes:

In Suggestions, niemand writes:

Hello everybody,

It seems that when a quote is accepted, the buyer is automatically invoiced...
I would appreciate the option to disable this function.
Indeed, the problem is, there is no information about payment detail (how to
proceed) in this mail. But on the order received page the order is mark as invoiced....
hence each party could wait a long time before the payment is really done.

Furthermore, a default layout wouldn't do the job. I invoice my French buyer
in French, and other in English (and some English/English speaker people living
in France). So I have to choose on each case and depending of the payment method,
and the most efficient is this case is to do it manually. And actual quote function
wouldn't be able to do it. Hence the need to disable the automated invoicing.

WHen I was a new buyer I found this confusing.

I got he auto-invoice, paid it, than got a second invoice with shipping added
and I paid the difference.

This was after requesting a quote? If so, then the seller did it wrong. (The
quote should include all costs, including shipping.)

From the sound of your feedback, what happened was that you placed an order (not
a quote request) and then paid before getting an invoice.

--
Marc.

And the seller gave me a neutral FB for paying twice

and he paying 2 paypal charges.

Maybe a change in language... "Order confirmation - do not pay until you receive
actual invoice form seller" - or something.

Author:

FigBits

Posted:

Apr 28, 2016 09:37

Subject:

Re: Price guide and average pricing

Viewed:

43 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, sonofagunk writes:

In Suggestions, FigBits writes:

In Suggestions, sonofagunk writes:

They should just throw out the top 10% and bottom 10% for a quick fix

No, they really shouldn't. That would significantly degrade the value of
the data in my opinion.

--
Marc.

It does the opposite

Hiding data doesn't improve it. By removing 20% of all data, you would be
removing a huge amount of valid information, with the goal of ignoring a tiny
fraction of suspect data.

--
Marc.

Author:

FigBits

Posted:

Apr 27, 2016 10:23

Subject:

Re: Price guide and average pricing

Viewed:

38 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, sonofagunk writes:

They should just throw out the top 10% and bottom 10% for a quick fix

No, they really shouldn't. That would significantly degrade the value of
the data in my opinion.

--
Marc.

Author:

FigBits

Posted:

Apr 26, 2016 16:29

Subject:

Re: Price guide and average pricing

Viewed:

42 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, calsbricks writes:

In Suggestions, FigBits writes:

In Suggestions, calsbricks writes:

In Suggestions, axaday writes:

In Suggestions, calsbricks writes:

In Suggestions, axaday writes:

Bricklink tracks the average price of pieces sold. That's a much better
guide than what is basically the average price of pieces NOT sold.

Sorry Bricklink tracks both prices that is why you see two columns one for sold
and one for current inventory. Our suggestion is to also show the total value
so we can eliminate the prices which are not what they should be.

Which set of figures yo9u use is up to you and your store policy/philosophy.
We don't use either,

I don't understand what the total value is.

In order to work out the average value what Bricklink does is take the sum of
the value of those items and divides by the number of items - this give the
system an average value so if there were 10000 of an item and the total value
on Bricklink was £20,000 then the average value would be £2.00 They give us a
total no of items but not the value. In order to determine that you have to manually
add all those up.

Just multiply the average value by the total number of items.

--or they could add 2 lines of code and do it for us

They could, but the benefit would be minimal and the Price Guide pages are already
jam-packed with data.

Also, your method already involves subtracting the items that you want to remove,
and then dividing the new sum by the number of listings. With that amount of
math already invested, it should be nearly nothing more to add in one multiplication.

--
Marc.

Author:

FigBits

Posted:

Apr 26, 2016 14:18

Subject:

Re: Price guide and average pricing

Viewed:

45 times

Topic: