Redisplay Messages: Compact | Brief | All | Full Show Messages: All | Without Replies| Author: | calsbricks  | | Posted: | Nov 25, 2022 11:29 | | Subject: | Re: What to do about 0 feedba\ck buyers who ..... | | Viewed: | 44 times | | Topic: | Problem | |
|
| In Problem, 1001bricks writes:
| | In Problem, calsbricks writes:
| | Disappear after placing their orders. Nearly 13% of all orders from 0 feedback
buyers.
|
It's normal: you don't wish to implement auto checkout and instant payment.
And now another discussion; we already talked about this 2 years ago and you
were like "No I won't do it". Why posting though?
|
Because the problem rate has rocketed.
|
 |
| Author: | calsbricks | | Posted: | Nov 25, 2022 09:20 | | Subject: | Re: What to do about 0 feedba\ck buyers who ..... | | Viewed: | 38 times | | Topic: | Problem | |
|
| In Problem, yorbrick writes:
| | In Problem, calsbricks writes:
| | In Problem, firestar246 writes:
| | In Problem, calsbricks writes:
| | In Problem, yorbrick writes:
| | In Problem, calsbricks writes:
| | In Problem, SylvainLS writes:
| | In Problem, calsbricks writes:
| | […]
| | So you want to exclude buyers without sufficient reviews from your store? Then
others should make sure that the potential buyer gets enough reviews to buy from
you as well.
I can only hope that these buyers mark your store as "least favorite".
|
Not really sure what has offended you but least favourite is a bit on the harsh
side isn't it?
|
Isn’t it exactly what you want: That BL automatically least favourite the 0-feedback
buyers from your store?
| | We are running a business and when we see a drastic increase
in npb's we feel it is something that needs to be looked at by BL.
|
|
The choice wou;ld be the stores if that is what they want. There has to be a
better way to deal with this which is fair and equitable on all sides. - the
current situation is not . At least if they were not allowed to buy from your
store until they established themselves as a genuine buyer they would not be
least favorite but now they get a completed npb and negative feedback and are
stop listed.
|
So you don't want any new buyers at bricklink, unless other sellers deal
with them first until they are proven to be good enough to shop with you?
Maybe it is a good idea. Combined with fee changes. Sellers that allow new buyers
(necessary to keep the site alive in the long term) should get lower fees, offset
by higher fees for those that will only accept orders from established buyers.
|
Not sure I agree with that. Fees are not the issue. Non-serious buyers are. At
present you can choose the countries you sell to you,can set your terms and your
prices all fine but you cannot decide who to sell to within the countries that
you serve other than negative feeback. So expand that a bbd let stores/businesses
choose - but penalise them for making a sensible business decision - not sure
that would go down well at all.
|
I don't see how it's sensible. If it's sensible, then just about
everyone should do it. Yet if everyone blocked new buyers from buying until they're
established, how are they going to get established? Boom, no new buyers can do
anything and you've just killed bricklink.
|
Your logic is correct however it is very unlikely that everyone would block 0
feedback buyers. Ours was just a thought - something needs to be done to deal
with these individuals who place an order and then disappear. We can block negative
feedback buyers and we can stop list who we choose. We can also not ship to certain
countries, make up our own terms and prices but we cannot prevent non-genuine
buyers from creating more work and then walking away from it - more thought needs
to be put into this.
|
You are expecting other sellers to deal with low feedback buyers until they are
good enough to meet your requirements. If low feedback bidders are that bad,
then sellers that deal with them to bring them up to the standard where you would
consider selling to them should be rewarded. And the simplest way to do that
is through a financial reward.
I imagine one of the big turn offs for new buyers is not being able to pay when
they have checked out, and worse still not knowing the total costs of their order.
The tool to solve that issue was already implemented and adopted by many stores.
|
I understand your point but do not agree with your conclusions. Based on what
you say those of us who do not ship to certain countries should also be penalised.
The world is not like that yet- there needs to be a drastic improvement to ic
before we will entertain it and also a re-think on the onsite payment methods
which are associated with it.
Using your conclusions if a store doesnt offer certain items then they should
be penalised with h igher fees. The stores suffering from the spate of npb for
deadbeat non genuine buyers should not be panalised any more than they are now
with the wasted time and effort.
A genuine bl buyer who is starting out can easily get past the 0 feedback positon
- we did and so do thousands more. Why in heavens name would you want to penalise
a store for a deadbeat buyer.
|
|
| Author: | calsbricks | | Posted: | Nov 25, 2022 08:57 | | Subject: | Re: What to do about 0 feedba\ck buyers who ..... | | Viewed: | 32 times | | Topic: | Problem | |
|
| In Problem, zorbanj writes:
| | Offloading the responsibility of vetting new users to other stores is not the
answer. I would rather have the NPB completion window reduced from the current
12 days as it ties up the inventory. 12 days is too long.
Also, many sellers don't bother completing NPBs, which allows these deadbeats
to continue ordering from other sellers.
In Problem, calsbricks writes:
| | Disappear after placing their orders. Nearly 13% of all orders from 0 feedback
buyers.
Have had a spurt of these over the last couple of months - IC is not the answer
for us we need another tool or option, perhaps where we can set a minimum feedback
level for a buyers first order - an option of course and that would allow stores
to cagreed. hoose rather than Bricklink.
|
|
agreed
|
|
| Author: | calsbricks | | Posted: | Nov 25, 2022 08:56 | | Subject: | Re: What to do about 0 feedba\ck buyers who ..... | | Viewed: | 27 times | | Topic: | Problem | |
|
| In Problem, alexwilcox writes:
| | In Problem, calsbricks writes:
| | Disappear after placing their orders. Nearly 13% of all orders from 0 feedback
buyers.
Have had a spurt of these over the last couple of months - IC is not the answer
for us we need another tool or option, perhaps where we can set a minimum feedback
level for a buyers first order - an option of course and that would allow stores
to choose rather than Bricklink.
|
I really don't understand why you haven't set up instant checkout.
|
14 different boxes and we did set it up when it was first introduced. There are
currently over 4000 of the 11000 stores who do not use it for one reason or another.
If you do and it works well for you great that isn't the case for us. It
currently generates about a 5% error rate on shipping and it doesn't deal
well with large lot orders. The terms and conditions for the onsite payment
methods are also unacceptable to us.
|
|
| Author: | calsbricks | | Posted: | Nov 25, 2022 08:50 | | Subject: | Re: What to do about 0 feedba\ck buyers who ..... | | Viewed: | 33 times | | Topic: | Problem | |
|
| In Problem, firestar246 writes:
| | In Problem, calsbricks writes:
| | In Problem, yorbrick writes:
| | In Problem, calsbricks writes:
| | In Problem, SylvainLS writes:
| | In Problem, calsbricks writes:
| | […]
| | So you want to exclude buyers without sufficient reviews from your store? Then
others should make sure that the potential buyer gets enough reviews to buy from
you as well.
I can only hope that these buyers mark your store as "least favorite".
|
Not really sure what has offended you but least favourite is a bit on the harsh
side isn't it?
|
Isn’t it exactly what you want: That BL automatically least favourite the 0-feedback
buyers from your store?
| | We are running a business and when we see a drastic increase
in npb's we feel it is something that needs to be looked at by BL.
|
|
The choice wou;ld be the stores if that is what they want. There has to be a
better way to deal with this which is fair and equitable on all sides. - the
current situation is not . At least if they were not allowed to buy from your
store until they established themselves as a genuine buyer they would not be
least favorite but now they get a completed npb and negative feedback and are
stop listed.
|
So you don't want any new buyers at bricklink, unless other sellers deal
with them first until they are proven to be good enough to shop with you?
Maybe it is a good idea. Combined with fee changes. Sellers that allow new buyers
(necessary to keep the site alive in the long term) should get lower fees, offset
by higher fees for those that will only accept orders from established buyers.
|
Not sure I agree with that. Fees are not the issue. Non-serious buyers are. At
present you can choose the countries you sell to you,can set your terms and your
prices all fine but you cannot decide who to sell to within the countries that
you serve other than negative feeback. So expand that a bbd let stores/businesses
choose - but penalise them for making a sensible business decision - not sure
that would go down well at all.
|
I don't see how it's sensible. If it's sensible, then just about
everyone should do it. Yet if everyone blocked new buyers from buying until they're
established, how are they going to get established? Boom, no new buyers can do
anything and you've just killed bricklink.
|
Your logic is correct however it is very unlikely that everyone would block 0
feedback buyers. Ours was just a thought - something needs to be done to deal
with these individuals who place an order and then disappear. We can block negative
feedback buyers and we can stop list who we choose. We can also not ship to certain
countries, make up our own terms and prices but we cannot prevent non-genuine
buyers from creating more work and then walking away from it - more thought needs
to be put into this.
|
|
| Author: | calsbricks | | Posted: | Nov 25, 2022 07:30 | | Subject: | Re: What to do about 0 feedba\ck buyers who ..... | | Viewed: | 50 times | | Topic: | Problem | |
|
| In Problem, yorbrick writes:
| | In Problem, calsbricks writes:
| | In Problem, SylvainLS writes:
| | In Problem, calsbricks writes:
| | […]
| | So you want to exclude buyers without sufficient reviews from your store? Then
others should make sure that the potential buyer gets enough reviews to buy from
you as well.
I can only hope that these buyers mark your store as "least favorite".
|
Not really sure what has offended you but least favourite is a bit on the harsh
side isn't it?
|
Isn’t it exactly what you want: That BL automatically least favourite the 0-feedback
buyers from your store?
| | We are running a business and when we see a drastic increase
in npb's we feel it is something that needs to be looked at by BL.
|
|
The choice wou;ld be the stores if that is what they want. There has to be a
better way to deal with this which is fair and equitable on all sides. - the
current situation is not . At least if they were not allowed to buy from your
store until they established themselves as a genuine buyer they would not be
least favorite but now they get a completed npb and negative feedback and are
stop listed.
|
So you don't want any new buyers at bricklink, unless other sellers deal
with them first until they are proven to be good enough to shop with you?
Maybe it is a good idea. Combined with fee changes. Sellers that allow new buyers
(necessary to keep the site alive in the long term) should get lower fees, offset
by higher fees for those that will only accept orders from established buyers.
|
Not sure I agree with that. Fees are not the issue. Non-serious buyers are. At
present you can choose the countries you sell to you,can set your terms and your
prices all fine but you cannot decide who to sell to within the countries that
you serve other than negative feeback. So expand that a bbd let stores/businesses
choose - but penalise them for making a sensible business decision - not sure
that would go down well at all.
|
|
| Author: | calsbricks | | Posted: | Nov 25, 2022 06:58 | | Subject: | Re: What to do about 0 feedba\ck buyers who ..... | | Viewed: | 44 times | | Topic: | Problem | |
|
| In Problem, SylvainLS writes:
| | In Problem, calsbricks writes:
| | […]
| | So you want to exclude buyers without sufficient reviews from your store? Then
others should make sure that the potential buyer gets enough reviews to buy from
you as well.
I can only hope that these buyers mark your store as "least favorite".
|
Not really sure what has offended you but least favourite is a bit on the harsh
side isn't it?
|
Isn’t it exactly what you want: That BL automatically least favourite the 0-feedback
buyers from your store?
| | We are running a business and when we see a drastic increase
in npb's we feel it is something that needs to be looked at by BL.
|
|
The choice wou;ld be the stores if that is what they want. There has to be a
better way to deal with this which is fair and equitable on all sides. - the
current situation is not . At least if they were not allowed to buy from your
store until they established themselves as a genuine buyer they would not be
least favorite but now they get a completed npb and negative feedback and are
stop listed.
|
|
| Author: | calsbricks | | Posted: | Nov 25, 2022 06:34 | | Subject: | Re: What to do about 0 feedba\ck buyers who ..... | | Viewed: | 48 times | | Topic: | Problem | |
|
| In Problem, Dino writes:
| | In Problem, calsbricks writes:
| | Disappear after placing their orders. Nearly 13% of all orders from 0 feedback
buyers.
Have had a spurt of these over the last couple of months - IC is not the answer
for us we need another tool or option, perhaps where we can set a minimum feedback
level for a buyers first order - an option of course and that would allow stores
to choose rather than Bricklink.
|
So you want to exclude buyers without sufficient reviews from your store? Then
others should make sure that the potential buyer gets enough reviews to buy from
you as well.
I can only hope that these buyers mark your store as "least favorite".
|
Not really sure what has offended you but least favourite is a bit on the harsh
side isn't it? We are running a business and when we see a drastic increase
in npb's we feel it is something that needs to be looked at by BL.
|
|
| Author: | calsbricks | | Posted: | Nov 25, 2022 06:30 | | Subject: | Re: What to do about 0 feedba\ck buyers who ..... | | Viewed: | 50 times | | Topic: | Problem | |
|
| In Problem, 1P writes:
| | I agree with this, I've had 6 NPB since June, and 2 of those even had 10
- 20 positive feedback!
It's absolutely ridiculous, I have quotes enabled & it's the first thing
you see in my store terms, yet these people just go on ahead and place orders
only to never reply when contacted through Bricklink and to the email listed
in the order
At this point I have no problem issuing NPB, though I wish Bricklink would lower
the wait time for sellers as it takes close to 2 weeks to complete the NPB complaint
- it would be better if they made it 7 days total (3 before filing, 4 before
completing the NPB after it was filed)
If the buyer doesn't reply within the first 3 days, I think it's safe
to say they aren't going to pay
|
Interesting not just us who has seen a rise
|
|
| Author: | calsbricks | | Posted: | Nov 25, 2022 05:53 | | Subject: | What to do about 0 feedba\ck buyers who ..... | | Viewed: | 220 times | | Topic: | Problem | |
|
| Disappear after placing their orders. Nearly 13% of all orders from 0 feedback
buyers.
Have had a spurt of these over the last couple of months - IC is not the answer
for us we need another tool or option, perhaps where we can set a minimum feedback
level for a buyers first order - an option of course and that would allow stores
to choose rather than Bricklink.
|
|
| Author: | calsbricks | | Posted: | Nov 16, 2022 12:26 | | Subject: | Re: New NIckname issue | | Viewed: | 40 times | | Topic: | Problem | |
|
| In Problem, macebobo writes:
| | In Problem, calsbricks writes:
| | Have 2 issues wuth this really. The first is when trying to follow the link in
the eail bl sne I get the below
And the 2nd is I do not wwant my detials at lego.com linked top my Lego id th8ey
are 2 seperate acounts and need to stay that way. One is for personal use and
other is for our store.
They could easily use a lookup table in their code to match the 2 and save all
this Hassle
Sometimes people who believe they are doing something genuinely helpful do not
really take the time to think these things through.
Lookup table BL ID = 1 ;ego id = 2 - Not exactly rocket science.
|
Cal, they are already linked due to fingerprinting of browsers, unless you use
two browsers, one each exclusively for each task. Then, using big data, they
have other ways of linking the two. It is the world we live in, but I don't
have to like it or help make their job easier.
|
George Orwell and 1984 springs to mind as a reality
Everyone seems to want to know everything about everybody . We are supposed to
have GDPR to help prevent this kind of invasive behaviour.
|
|
| Author: | calsbricks | | Posted: | Nov 16, 2022 12:22 | | Subject: | New NIckname issue | | Viewed: | 96 times | | Topic: | Problem | |
|
| Have 2 issues wuth this really. The first is when trying to follow the link in
the eail bl sne I get the below
And the 2nd is I do not wwant my detials at lego.com linked top my Lego id th8ey
are 2 seperate acounts and need to stay that way. One is for personal use and
other is for our store.
They could easily use a lookup table in their code to match the 2 and save all
this Hassle
Sometimes people who believe they are doing something genuinely helpful do not
really take the time to think these things through.
Lookup table BL ID = 1 ;ego id = 2 - Not exactly rocket science.
|
|
|
| Author: | calsbricks | | Posted: | Nov 16, 2022 11:56 | | Subject: | New NIckname issue | | Viewed: | 114 times | | Topic: | Problem | |
|
| Have 2 issues wuth this really. The first is when trying to follow the link in
the eail bl sne I get the below
And the 2nd is I do not wwant my detials at lego.com linked top my Lego id th8ey
are 2 seperate acounts and need to stay that way. One is for personal use and
other is for our store.
They could easily use a lookup table in their code to match the 2 and save all
this Hassle
Sometimes people who believe they are doing something genuinely helpful do not
really take the time to think these things through.
Lookup table BL ID = 1 ;ego id = 2 - Not exactly rocket science.
|
|
|
| Author: | calsbricks | | Posted: | Oct 26, 2022 12:38 | | Subject: | Re: BL only 3 out of 5 stars @ online review site | | Viewed: | 49 times | | Topic: | General | |
|
| In General, Shiny_Stuff writes:
| | I happened to randomly google BrickLink today.
One of the first things to appear was the question,
"Is BrickLink a trusted site?"
And it took me to sitejobber which has a generally unfavorable view of BrickLink.
https://www.sitejabber.com/reviews/bricklink.com
____
|
To be fair the sample size they are using is totally irrelevant. The site has
over 11k in stores and approaching 1 million in members. To take those review
seriously you need a much larger sample size. .
|
|
| Author: | calsbricks | | Posted: | Oct 6, 2022 10:27 | | Subject: | Re: Latest update to microsoft edge has broken .. | | Viewed: | 26 times | | Topic: | Problem | |
|
| In Problem, peregrinator writes:
| | Have you tried using "Save As PDF" from Chrome? I just tried that (though I'm
running Win 10) and I was able to copy and paste from the PDF produced (I'm
guessing "Print to PDF" produces an image instead of PDF code).
It would at least allow you to rule out the "Save as PDF" driver and place the
blame squarely on Edge
In Problem, calsbricks writes:
| | Windows 7 and everything was working fine until today (Edge updated itself last
noght)
We understood that xps was Microsoft's effort to counter the dominance of
pdf (And it never worked)
Microsoft print to pdf outside of edge works fine we use it all the time within
edge it is a different story
Up until this morning everythig was fine when we saved to pdf then opened the
pdf in adobe combined it with our order cover sheet If we used the edge print
to pdf command the pdf it created was not editable in other words we could not
copy text and paste it., which we can do when we save as pdf.
From this morning it has adjusted the font size to almost unreadable and that
is even with the scale set to maximum. Like almost everything Microsoft do they
very rarely get it right first time. The office suite has detreated significantly
as they continue to push to do everything via the web.
|
|
Just tried that and it seems to work - which confirms it is an edge issue. Thanks
|
|
| Author: | calsbricks | | Posted: | Oct 6, 2022 07:19 | | Subject: | Re: Latest update to microsoft edge has broken .. | | Viewed: | 43 times | | Topic: | Problem | |
|
| In Problem, hpoort writes:
| | In Problem, calsbricks writes:
| | both the save as pdf and print to pdf feature. If you try saving to pdf the text
is minute even scaled up to over 200% and if you print to pdf the text is not
editable as it should be or was.
-
Thank you Microsoft yet again - does anyone there know what they are doing ????
They have never been able to accept they lost the universal document battle to
adopbe and pdf's. XPS is totally useless - Come back BIll - all is forgiven
|
What version of Windows are you on?
XPS is from the Windows Vista era and is not at all relevant in this context.
Microsoft Print to PDF has been a standard print driver for ages.
Microsoft has joint forces with Adobe for developing the font formats.
So where do you see any resentment?
|
Windows 7 and everything was working fine until today (Edge updated itself last
noght)
We understood that xps was Microsoft's effort to counter the dominance of
pdf (And it never worked)
Microsoft print to pdf outside of edge works fine we use it all the time within
edge it is a different story
Up until this morning everythig was fine when we saved to pdf then opened the
pdf in adobe combined it with our order cover sheet If we used the edge print
to pdf command the pdf it created was not editable in other words we could not
copy text and paste it., which we can do when we save as pdf.
From this morning it has adjusted the font size to almost unreadable and that
is even with the scale set to maximum. Like almost everything Microsoft do they
very rarely get it right first time. The office suite has detreated significantly
as they continue to push to do everything via the web.
|
|
| Author: | calsbricks | | Posted: | Oct 6, 2022 06:44 | | Subject: | Re: Latest update to microsoft edge has broken .. | | Viewed: | 38 times | | Topic: | Problem | |
|
| In Problem, Gaston.La.Brick writes:
| | In Problem, calsbricks writes:
| | both the save as pdf and print to pdf feature. If you try saving to pdf the text
is minute even scaled up to over 200% and if you print to pdf the text is not
editable as it should be or was.
-
Thank you Microsoft yet again - does anyone there know what they are doing ????
They have never been able to accept they lost the universal document battle to
adopbe and pdf's. XPS is totally useless - Come back BIll - all is forgiven
|
I use Edge but never "Save as PDF". I always use "Print to PDF", which is still
there (in my version at least).
|
When we use print to we are not allowed to copy and paste - can you
|
|
| Author: | calsbricks | | Posted: | Oct 6, 2022 06:04 | | Subject: | Latest update to microsoft edge has broken .. | | Viewed: | 121 times | | Topic: | Problem | |
|
| both the save as pdf and print to pdf feature. If you try saving to pdf the text
is minute even scaled up to over 200% and if you print to pdf the text is not
editable as it should be or was.
-
Thank you Microsoft yet again - does anyone there know what they are doing ????
They have never been able to accept they lost the universal document battle to
adopbe and pdf's. XPS is totally useless - Come back BIll - all is forgiven
|
|
| Author: | calsbricks | | Posted: | Oct 5, 2022 12:30 | | Subject: | Re: Brickstore latest version warning | | Viewed: | 24 times | | Topic: | Related Software | |
|
| In Related Software, wildchicken13 writes:
| | In Related Software, calsbricks writes:
| | Yeah all 100+ million of us. Poor decision especially as Microsoft are still
supporting Windows 7 (Those that have paid extra to maintain that support). Sounds
fair doesn't it.
|
It does, considering that there are 1+ billion people using Windows 10.
|
Yes some of my employees use it but not w11 - I have a special application running
on my machine which will not work on windows 10 so I will stay with 7 as long
as possible (Along with the other part of the 100 million plus.
|
|
| Author: | calsbricks | | Posted: | Oct 5, 2022 12:26 | | Subject: | Re: 11 Years worth of data now | | Viewed: | 30 times | | Topic: | General | |
|
| In General, wildchicken13 writes:
| | In General, calsbricks writes:
| | Gone through the figures with a fine tooth comb and they are 100% correct. Ours
are actual -
yours are hypothetical and the correlation is somewhat vague.
Remember chart 1 is based on no of total units broken down into those families
whilst chart 2 is based on total value again, broken down by family. There really
is no correlation between the two only to show that bricks are selling more and
bringing in more money than any of the other families.
|
But Sylvain is talking about averages rather than totals.
Let's put it this way: Bricks make up a greater proportion of your sales
by value than they do by quantity. However, sets make up a smaller proportion
of your sales by value than they do by quantity. Therefore, the average sale
value of a single brick is greater than the average sale value of a single set.
Let's do the maths: At the time of writing, you've 183,047 bricks for
sale, for a total value of £12,465.97. That's an average price of approximately
£0.07 per brick. Meanwhile, you've 150 sets for sale, for a total value of
£1,639.99. That's an average price of approximately £10.93 per set.
Even when lots are considered instead of quantity, sets are still worth more.
Now, I realize there may be a bit of a survivorship bias here: The items for
sale in your store, are items that have not sold, not items that have. But I'm
skeptical that a single brick is worth more than a single set, unless you've
sold several hundred of these:
And even then, this item is technically categorized as a gear, not a brick.
|
We are not really interested in averages only totals. As for sets - ours are
almost all polybags which are classed as sets by Bricklink but are not really
sets. We sell 10's of thousands of bricks every month, when we can get our
hands on them and maybe one or 2 polybags every 6 months so I know where our
emphasis should be.
So for sure there are numerous ways to look at stats. Ours were presented in
our way which hopefully were understood. The averages have no real meaning to
us.
|
|
| Author: | calsbricks | | Posted: | Oct 5, 2022 03:19 | | Subject: | Re: 11 Years worth of data now | | Viewed: | 44 times | | Topic: | General | |
|
| In General, SylvainLS writes:
| | I tried making stats on my store… but my computer is broken, it only says ”NaN”
over and over 
I fear it’s shorthand for “Sorry, ̶D̶a̶v̶e̶ Sylvain, I can’t do that.”
|
Gone through the figures with a fine tooth comb and they are 100% correct. Ours
are actual -
yours are hypothetical and the correlation is somewhat vague.
Remember chart 1 is based on no of total units broken down into those families
whilst chart 2 is based on total value again, broken down by family. There really
is no correlation between the two only to show that bricks are selling more and
bringing in more money than any of the other families.
|
|
| Author: | calsbricks | | Posted: | Oct 4, 2022 10:04 | | Subject: | Re: 11 Years worth of data now | | Viewed: | 47 times | | Topic: | General | |
|
| In General, SylvainLS writes:
| | In General, calsbricks writes:
| | […]
Not really sure I agree with your analysis/interpretation. The first chart, to
us, shows the percentage of each family's sales against total sales. In other
words of all the items sold over 11 years Bricks makes up 45% of that total -using
your figures of 1,000,000 tptal items sold 0 bricks woul represent 450,000 of
those and so on. The 2nd chart says that if the total value of sakes is £2,000,000
the bricks would have been £980,000
|
That’s exactly how I interpret your charts 
But, using your numbers: 450,000 bricks for £980,000 means one brick is £2.27
on average.
Same reasoning with sets and it means you sold 10,000 sets and they represent
less than 1% of £2,000,000, so less than £20,000, so less than £2 per set on
average.
Same reasoning with minifigures and it means you sold 80,000 minifigures and
they represent 4% of £2,000,00, so £80,000, so £1 per minifigure on average.
Doesn’t make sense.
| | Hope that is clearer. Makes perfect sense to us and the figures are quite accurate.
|
|
Understand what you are sayibg - will relook at actuals figures - hypothetical
figures do not make sense.
|
|
| Author: | calsbricks | | Posted: | Oct 4, 2022 09:39 | | Subject: | Re: 11 Years worth of data now | | Viewed: | 39 times | | Topic: | General | |
|
| In General, peregrinator writes:
| | In General, SylvainLS writes:
| | So the average price for a brick is way more than the average price for a set.
Doesn’t make sense.
|
Maybe the average price of a lot of bricks (e.g. 500 red 3001s) is more
than that for a set.
|
The average price of our sets is under £10 (Small polybags - nothing more really).
We get an odd one worth more than that but in the main we do not sell sets. We
are a oarts store - we leave sets to those who are into sets.
|
|
| Author: | calsbricks | | Posted: | Oct 4, 2022 09:30 | | Subject: | Re: 11 Years worth of data now | | Viewed: | 34 times | | Topic: | General | |
|
| In General, calsbricks writes:
| | In General, SylvainLS writes:
| | In General, calsbricks writes:
| | […]
| | Something is weird indeed. Are you sure the titles are correct?
Because, as I read the charts, your bricks have more value than your sets: the
average value (value / qty) of your sets is 0.? / 1 (below 1) while the average
value of your bricks is 49.67 / 45 (greater than 1).
|
We do not sell sets - only the odd polybag so our bricks, which are in the 100's
of thousands always have much greater value in sales than our sets.
IN other word the 2nd chart shows the % of sales value represented by each product
family. Bricks and plates are 1st and 2bd and so ob,
|
Here’s my reasoning in more details:
The first chart says you’re selling 1% in sets in qty. If you sell 1,000,000
items, that means 10,000 sets sold.
|
Not really sure I agree with your analysis/interpretation. The first chart, to
us, shows the percentage of each family's sales against total sales. In other
words of all the items sold over 11 years Bricks makes up 45% of that total -using
your figures of 1,000,000 tptal items sold bricks would represent 450,000 of
those and so on. The 2nd chart says that if the total value of sales is £2,000,000
the bricks would have been £980,000
Hope that is clearer. Makes perfect sense to us and the figures are quite accurate.
| |
The second chart says the sets account for less than 1% in value (not visible
on the chart, so say 0.s%). If the total value is 1,000,000 × X (where X is
the average value of one item), then the total value for sets is around s,000
× X.
That means that the average value of a set is s,000 x X / 10,000 = 0.s × X.
Same reasonning for bricks means the average value of a brick is 49.67/45 = 1.1
× X.
So the average price for a brick is way more than the average price for a set.
Doesn’t make sense.
The only way it makes sense is if by ‘value,’ you mean ‘profits’ or if the charts
are swapped .
If the charts are swapped, the average values would respectively be X / 0.s and
X / 1.1, making the average set more expensive than the average brick.
And the same applies to minifigs (8% qty, 4.04% value).
|
|
|
|
| Author: | calsbricks | | Posted: | Oct 4, 2022 09:27 | | Subject: | Re: 11 Years worth of data now | | Viewed: | 40 times | | Topic: | General | |
|
| In General, SylvainLS writes:
| | In General, calsbricks writes:
| | […]
| | Something is weird indeed. Are you sure the titles are correct?
Because, as I read the charts, your bricks have more value than your sets: the
average value (value / qty) of your sets is 0.? / 1 (below 1) while the average
value of your bricks is 49.67 / 45 (greater than 1).
|
We do not sell sets - only the odd polybag so our bricks, which are in the 100's
of thousands always have much greater value in sales than our sets.
IN other word the 2nd chart shows the % of sales value represented by each product
family. Bricks and plates are 1st and 2bd and so ob,
|
Here’s my reasoning in more details:
The first chart says you’re selling 1% in sets in qty. If you sell 1,000,000
items, that means 10,000 sets sold.
|
Not really sure I agree with your analysis/interpretation. The first chart, to
us, shows the percentage of each family's sales against total sales. In other
words of all the items sold over 11 years Bricks makes up 45% of that total -using
your figures of 1,000,000 tptal items sold 0 bricks woul represent 450,000 of
those and so on. The 2nd chart says that if the total value of sakes is £2,000,000
the bricks would have been £980,000
Hope that is clearer. Makes perfect sense to us and the figures are quite accurate.
| |
The second chart says the sets account for less than 1% in value (not visible
on the chart, so say 0.s%). If the total value is 1,000,000 × X (where X is
the average value of one item), then the total value for sets is around s,000
× X.
That means that the average value of a set is s,000 x X / 10,000 = 0.s × X.
Same reasonning for bricks means the average value of a brick is 49.67/45 = 1.1
× X.
So the average price for a brick is way more than the average price for a set.
Doesn’t make sense.
The only way it makes sense is if by ‘value,’ you mean ‘profits’ or if the charts
are swapped .
If the charts are swapped, the average values would respectively be X / 0.s and
X / 1.1, making the average set more expensive than the average brick.
And the same applies to minifigs (8% qty, 4.04% value).
|
|
|
Next Page: 5 More | 10 More | 25 More | 50 More | 100 More
|
United Kingdom, England
