|
 |
| | | Author: | dagealka  | | Posted: | Jan 24, 2012 11:17 | | Subject: | lot limits/handl. fee in store settings/terms | | Viewed: | 383 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | | Status: | Open | | Vote: | [Yes|No] | |
|
| Hi all!
Among the highlighted and honoured stores, several sellers with a huge selection
have implemented lot limits (e.g. each lot should average $1). I would suggest,
that sellers can choose (in his store settings so that they appear in the store
terms and that they are applied to each order), whether lot limits apply or not
(similar to minimum order). This makes it clearer for the customer than the comments
in the individual store policies.
In his store settings, the seller has the possibility to choose that lot limits
do not apply, or that they apply. When they apply, the seller can choose, what
should be the minimum each lot should average. If this average is not met, the
seller should again have few possibilities. Firstly, not to allow orders meeting
his average, or, secondly, allow them with some charge each extra lot the seller
can specify. (There may by a bypass password such as for the minimum order.)
This implementation of a lot limit would also cover handling fees, when the average
is set to zero and the charge each extra lot is set to the requested value.
The big advantage of an implementation of implementing this into the BrickLink
system is, that the customer sees his extra charges in his shopping cart. (Or
his order is blocked.) This would avoid confusion when e.g. $20 is added to the
invoice and the customer has not read the store policies carefully. With the
implementation of these lot limits BrickLink would make another step towards
a clearer and buyer friendly platform, as Bricklink has done, when avoiding the
fixed exchange rates with implementing VAT.
Daniel
Please vote ‘yes’ for allowing the seller setting up lot limits in his store
terms or ‘no’ for no progress.
|
|
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Author: | Made_In_Bricks | | Posted: | Jan 24, 2012 11:34 | | Subject: | Re: lot limits/handl. fee in store settings/terms | | Viewed: | 82 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| The problem is a yes vote is for your terms you state out and not how I would
like to have lot limits implemented.
In Suggestions, dagealka writes:
| | Hi all!
Among the highlighted and honoured stores, several sellers with a huge selection
have implemented lot limits (e.g. each lot should average $1). I would suggest,
that sellers can choose (in his store settings so that they appear in the store
terms and that they are applied to each order), whether lot limits apply or not
(similar to minimum order). This makes it clearer for the customer than the comments
in the individual store policies.
In his store settings, the seller has the possibility to choose that lot limits
do not apply, or that they apply. When they apply, the seller can choose, what
should be the minimum each lot should average. If this average is not met, the
seller should again have few possibilities. Firstly, not to allow orders meeting
his average, or, secondly, allow them with some charge each extra lot the seller
can specify. (There may by a bypass password such as for the minimum order.)
This implementation of a lot limit would also cover handling fees, when the average
is set to zero and the charge each extra lot is set to the requested value.
The big advantage of an implementation of implementing this into the BrickLink
system is, that the customer sees his extra charges in his shopping cart. (Or
his order is blocked.) This would avoid confusion when e.g. $20 is added to the
invoice and the customer has not read the store policies carefully. With the
implementation of these lot limits BrickLink would make another step towards
a clearer and buyer friendly platform, as Bricklink has done, when avoiding the
fixed exchange rates with implementing VAT.
Daniel
Please vote ‘yes’ for allowing the seller setting up lot limits in his store
terms or ‘no’ for no progress.
|
|
|
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Author: | Rob_and_Shelagh | | Posted: | Jan 24, 2012 11:46 | | Subject: | Re: lot limits/handl. fee in store settings/terms | | Viewed: | 113 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, dagealka writes:
| | Hi all!
Among the highlighted and honoured stores, several sellers with a huge selection
have implemented lot limits (e.g. each lot should average $1). I would suggest,
that sellers can choose (in his store settings so that they appear in the store
terms and that they are applied to each order), whether lot limits apply or not
(similar to minimum order). This makes it clearer for the customer than the comments
in the individual store policies.
In his store settings, the seller has the possibility to choose that lot limits
do not apply, or that they apply. When they apply, the seller can choose, what
should be the minimum each lot should average. If this average is not met, the
seller should again have few possibilities. Firstly, not to allow orders meeting
his average, or, secondly, allow them with some charge each extra lot the seller
can specify. (There may by a bypass password such as for the minimum order.)
This implementation of a lot limit would also cover handling fees, when the average
is set to zero and the charge each extra lot is set to the requested value.
The big advantage of an implementation of implementing this into the BrickLink
system is, that the customer sees his extra charges in his shopping cart. (Or
his order is blocked.) This would avoid confusion when e.g. $20 is added to the
invoice and the customer has not read the store policies carefully. With the
implementation of these lot limits BrickLink would make another step towards
a clearer and buyer friendly platform, as Bricklink has done, when avoiding the
fixed exchange rates with implementing VAT.
Daniel
Please vote ‘yes’ for allowing the seller setting up lot limits in his store
terms or ‘no’ for no progress.
|
I would not have voted no if you had not put in an option for sellers to charge
for exceeding their lot limit. If stores want to limit the number of lots they
sell or make an average price per lot, I have no problem with that and making
that a system setting is, IMO, better than having it without. I do not think
it would be good for BL to promote sellers charging for exceeding their lot limits
and hence making money that is not commissionable to BL. There is I suppose a
case for making all charges commissionable and this proposal might lead to that
so it's a no from me unless the BL fee structure is changed to protect the price
guide. e.g. total invoice is commissionable, fees paid on "actual goods" reflected
in the PG are much less than fees for other charges thus encouraging sellers
to include their charges in their prices, not add them on afterwards. Problem
with this is it would have to include shipping to stop this being used for fee
avoidance and this would hurt small orders so I think this needs some more thought
(...no in short).
Robert
(Yellow Farm Bricks, a store on the highlighted page that does not charge per
lot fees)
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Author: | tomte | | Posted: | Jan 24, 2012 13:01 | | Subject: | Re: lot limits/handl. fee in store settings/terms | | Viewed: | 85 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| Hello,
this is a good idea.
If it gets implemented, it is absolutely necessary to allow all orders and charge
the orders not meeting the limit. As mentioned above it makes sence. It would
translate the store policy into a BL system.
Sellers should be able to charge for not meeting the lot limit within the function.
There are costs associated with running a store and orders with a lot parts for
20 cents each causing more labor cost than the part must be figured.
kind regards,
stefan
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Author: | Rob_and_Shelagh | | Posted: | Jan 25, 2012 04:20 | | Subject: | Re: lot limits/handl. fee in store settings/terms | | Viewed: | 77 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, tomte writes:
| | Hello,
this is a good idea.
If it gets implemented, it is absolutely necessary to allow all orders and charge
the orders not meeting the limit. As mentioned above it makes sence. It would
translate the store policy into a BL system.
Sellers should be able to charge for not meeting the lot limit within the function.
There are costs associated with running a store and orders with a lot parts for
20 cents each causing more labor cost than the part must be figured.
kind regards,
stefan
|
Sorry Stefan but IMO your own store terms are a good example of why this is not
a good idea.
20 lots is a big complex order  What can you build with 20 lots?
a 20 lot order of 20 Euro attracts a picking fee of 5.9 Euro! This is nearly
30% of the order value + then 5% Paypal fees....
So on every order like this you make about 35% extra without paying any BL fees
on it compared to other stores who do not make these charges. This means you
can be 30%+ cheaper in the price guide than another store and still make the
same revenue. For many stores on BL a 20 lot 20 Euro order would be very welcome.
I appreciate that some businesses are less efficient than others but this should
IMO be reflected in their prices, not in off price guide charges.
I am sorry to single you out as there are others but as you replied to the suggestion
it does seems that you are supporting this proposal to justify your own terms.
My problem with this is that where you are leading to with this is to separate
labour charges from the price of the Lego. That would be OK if the site charged
fees on labour charges EXCEPT that the site is based around the price guide and
this approach renders the price guide useless. I could make all my prices cheapest
on BL and then add a labour charge to the invoice so as to make a profit but
this kills the whole concept of BL. The fact that some do this now is not reason
for Admin to systemise the approach, more to systemise some way of stopping it.
Robert
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Author: | Jan_K | | Posted: | Jan 25, 2012 04:55 | | Subject: | Re: lot limits/handl. fee in store settings/terms | | Viewed: | 69 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, Rob_and_Shelagh writes:
| | [...] The fact that some do this now is not reason
for Admin to systemise the approach, more to systemise some way of stopping it.
|
Excellent bottom line, as is your whole posting!
Jan
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Author: | bricksalabim | | Posted: | Jan 25, 2012 05:00 | | Subject: | Re: lot limits/handl. fee in store settings/terms | | Viewed: | 51 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, Rob_and_Shelagh writes:
| | In Suggestions, tomte writes:
| | Hello,
this is a good idea.
If it gets implemented, it is absolutely necessary to allow all orders and charge
the orders not meeting the limit. As mentioned above it makes sence. It would
translate the store policy into a BL system.
Sellers should be able to charge for not meeting the lot limit within the function.
There are costs associated with running a store and orders with a lot parts for
20 cents each causing more labor cost than the part must be figured.
kind regards,
stefan
|
Sorry Stefan but IMO your own store terms are a good example of why this is not
a good idea.
20 lots is a big complex order What can you build with 20 lots?
a 20 lot order of 20 Euro attracts a picking fee of 5.9 Euro! This is nearly
30% of the order value + then 5% Paypal fees....
So on every order like this you make about 35% extra without paying any BL fees
on it compared to other stores who do not make these charges. This means you
can be 30%+ cheaper in the price guide than another store and still make the
same revenue. For many stores on BL a 20 lot 20 Euro order would be very welcome.
|
I agree. I'm just processing a 20 Euro order with 75 lots. In Stefan's store
this would make the buyer pay an additional fee of more than 30 Euro !!! So,
if all the prices for these parts (nearly all are common plates/bricks etc) had
a price of 0.00 Euro, he would pay no BL fees and still get more than I do. Fee
avoidance? Fair competition?
Maybe I should mention that this order has several batches and needed email exchange
and photos of penny parts. But that's ok for me, it's what I call customer service.
Renate
| | I appreciate that some businesses are less efficient than others but this should
IMO be reflected in their prices, not in off price guide charges.
I am sorry to single you out as there are others but as you replied to the suggestion
it does seems that you are supporting this proposal to justify your own terms.
My problem with this is that where you are leading to with this is to separate
labour charges from the price of the Lego. That would be OK if the site charged
fees on labour charges EXCEPT that the site is based around the price guide and
this approach renders the price guide useless. I could make all my prices cheapest
on BL and then add a labour charge to the invoice so as to make a profit but
this kills the whole concept of BL. The fact that some do this now is not reason
for Admin to systemise the approach, more to systemise some way of stopping it.
Robert
|
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Author: | maxx3001 | | Posted: | Jan 25, 2012 05:22 | | Subject: | Re: lot limits/handl. fee in store settings/terms | | Viewed: | 51 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, Rob_and_Shelagh writes:
| | In Suggestions, tomte writes:
The fact that some do this now is not reason
for Admin to systemise the approach, more to systemise some way of stopping it.
Robert
|
100% agree with this and the rest of your post.
Maxx
|
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Author: | dagealka | | Posted: | Jan 24, 2012 14:34 | | Subject: | Re: lot limits/handl. fee in store settings/terms | | Viewed: | 66 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| Hi Robert,
thanks for time and your valuable additions.
I agree with you, that for this charge the seller earns via Bricklink, the seller
should have to pay the BrickLink fees.
I also see, that one might be afraid, that it could be possible, to manipulate
the price guide when listing items at low prices and add a huge handling / additional
lot fee. If in this case the seller would list items in a high quantity the fee
per item, he would earn, would be small. However, if the seller lists the item
in a small quantity, the price guide would not be affected that much and buyers
will not buy at this seller, since the quantity is too low. Additionally such
a practice would not result in statisfied custumers. Since this is, in myopinion,
a minor issue, I would not focus the discussion on this, but if there are still
doubts of a misuse, one could consider the lot limit only in the case that orders
not meeting this limit were not allowed.
Daniel
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Author: | Rob_and_Shelagh | | Posted: | Jan 25, 2012 02:48 | | Subject: | Re: lot limits/handl. fee in store settings/terms | | Viewed: | 67 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, dagealka writes:
| | Hi Robert,
thanks for time and your valuable additions.
I agree with you, that for this charge the seller earns via Bricklink, the seller
should have to pay the BrickLink fees.
I also see, that one might be afraid, that it could be possible, to manipulate
the price guide when listing items at low prices and add a huge handling / additional
lot fee. If in this case the seller would list items in a high quantity the fee
per item, he would earn, would be small. However, if the seller lists the item
in a small quantity, the price guide would not be affected that much and buyers
will not buy at this seller, since the quantity is too low. Additionally such
a practice would not result in statisfied custumers. Since this is, in myopinion,
a minor issue, I would not focus the discussion on this, but if there are still
doubts of a misuse, one could consider the lot limit only in the case that orders
not meeting this limit were not allowed.
Daniel
|
Hi Daniel,
Thanks, your reply makes sense to me from a large bulk store perspective. I agree
that used in the way you intend, such a policy would not have any significant
impact on the price guide and it is good that you see the need to charge BL fees
on any charge made, I would like to see this principle applied to other charges
too. Any remaining concern I have is based on experience of some other stores
who (currently) charge large percentage fees, per lot fees and other surchages
which can easily amount to 30% of the order value or more and not just on small
orders. IMO if BL fees on these charges were significantly higher (say 10% instead
of 3%?) than fees for selling Lego then it would discourage misuse and protect
the price guide. When some stores used fixed exchange rates to cover the VAT
issue, many non-VAT registered stores jumped on the bandwagon charging upto 25%
in phoney exchange fees which made them 25% more competitive in the PG as well
as defrauding the site of 25% in fees. The multi-currency solution combined with
the VAT fix is indeed excellent and has enhanced the site beyond my expectations
so, no I am not against change or your proposal in principle at all, but I would
not like to see it implemented without consideration of how some might abuse
it. There is a huge difference (in intent and effect) between stores charging
maybe a couple of Euros on a 100 Euro order and some other stores who use these
fees to (regularly) charge 5 euros on a 20 Euro order (or more in some cases).
I think the best aspect of your suggestion is getting seller fees "systemised"
into BL so they are clearer to buyers and I would like to see BL develop a policy
of "systemise or disallow" taking into account the best interests of the site
as a business of course as well as the interests of all members (which make it
a successful business) mostly in terms of fair competition.
Robert
|
|
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Author: | brickmover | | Posted: | Jan 24, 2012 14:02 | | Subject: | Re: lot limits/handl. fee in store settings/terms | | Viewed: | 70 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, dagealka writes:
| | Hi all!
Among the highlighted and honoured stores, several sellers with a huge selection
have implemented lot limits (e.g. each lot should average $1). I would suggest,
that sellers can choose (in his store settings so that they appear in the store
terms and that they are applied to each order), whether lot limits apply or not
(similar to minimum order). This makes it clearer for the customer than the comments
in the individual store policies.
In his store settings, the seller has the possibility to choose that lot limits
do not apply, or that they apply. When they apply, the seller can choose, what
should be the minimum each lot should average. If this average is not met, the
seller should again have few possibilities. Firstly, not to allow orders meeting
his average, or, secondly, allow them with some charge each extra lot the seller
can specify. (There may by a bypass password such as for the minimum order.)
This implementation of a lot limit would also cover handling fees, when the average
is set to zero and the charge each extra lot is set to the requested value.
The big advantage of an implementation of implementing this into the BrickLink
system is, that the customer sees his extra charges in his shopping cart. (Or
his order is blocked.) This would avoid confusion when e.g. $20 is added to the
invoice and the customer has not read the store policies carefully. With the
implementation of these lot limits BrickLink would make another step towards
a clearer and buyer friendly platform, as Bricklink has done, when avoiding the
fixed exchange rates with implementing VAT.
Daniel
Please vote ‘yes’ for allowing the seller setting up lot limits in his store
terms or ‘no’ for no progress.
|
Agreed. I vote yes. Many stores use these kinds of limits in a legitimate and
necessary fashion, and many buyers have no problem with them, and if they do,
they shop elsewhere (so it's a good policy even for those who do not use limits
in their store!).
Personally, if I used a lot limit system, I would not use an option to charge
extra for going over a limit or below an average lot value, because it seems
like overly complicated policy. But just because I would not use every option
presented here, it's no reason to vote no.
These policies are already used on BrickLink by various stores. The main issue
here, which benefits everyone, it to finally have a BL-implemented and supported
system to take care of it for those sellers who wish to use such policies. It
avoids problem orders and both buyer and seller dissatisfaction when policies
are not read or clearly described or understood. It avoids much wasted time for
both parties.
Imagine for a moment if BrickLink still did not provide an official, optional
minimum order feature to sellers. Think of the problems, the wasted time, the
upset customers, etc. I wasn't around when it was implemented, but I'm sure this
was why it came to be. When people continually vote no on suggested features
like this, simply because the suggestion is not "perfect", it serves only entrench
the problems, because there will always be people saying it's not perfect. For
one thing, if Admin decides to implement a suggestion, is he bound to implementing
it exactly as suggested? I think to say so would be a cop out. I am sure admin
can take any suggestion, and add to it a little wisdom of his own before implementing
it. A suggestion does not have to be perfect to be a step in the right direction
worth taking.
Suggestions like this seem to have been made a million times. I think if there
is a long, well-established track record of several large stores using such policies,
and a system can be put in place by BrickLink similar to how has been done with
other options such as minimum order, there is no reason to say no. I think too
often people forget that suggestions are not just about them. You don't have
to do it, use it, agree with it, etc., in order to appreciate the utility and
benefit of it to others who already do it the hard way. But I think there are
too many people who will vote no to anything that is not personally a boon to
them, as if something that will benefit others but is not of particular use to
them, gives them a disadvantage. Small thinking. I continue to hope more people
will vote yes to things like this. As a buyer I would love to have something
automatic happen to notify me I am exceeding someone's lot limits or not reaching
an average lot value minimum, or prevent me from checking out, in case I have
failed to read or interpret the fine print properly.
Matt
|
|
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Author: | SimplyBricks | | Posted: | Jan 25, 2012 05:36 | | Subject: | Re: lot limits/handl. fee in store settings/terms | | Viewed: | 70 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
|
I only have one question, why do some sellers want to restrict buyers to what
they can buy, surely all sellers here want to sell as much as possible, so why
restrict sales ? I'm at a loss why! Please don't tell me you don't have the
time, because if this is the reason, then you shouldn't be here selling!
Mike
|
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Author: | Rob_and_Shelagh | | Posted: | Jan 25, 2012 06:05 | | Subject: | Re: lot limits/handl. fee in store settings/terms | | Viewed: | 64 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, SimplyBricks writes:
| |
I only have one question, why do some sellers want to restrict buyers to what
they can buy, surely all sellers here want to sell as much as possible, so why
restrict sales ? I'm at a loss why! Please don't tell me you don't have the
time, because if this is the reason, then you shouldn't be here selling!
Mike
|
Some want to make xxx$ profit per order and have focussed on bulk orders. Their
picking operations have not been optimised for high lot/low value orders. Maybe
they make enough on the big orders. So, OK why not place lot limits and/or average
lot values to disallow the orders they do not want - other stores like yours
and mine can take those orders. There are stores to suit all buyers.
What is unfair is if a store prices items cheaper than yours or mine in the price
guide to attract orders then adds a signifacnt labour charge on afterwards to
make their profit and pay less fees to the site. Not only is it unfair, it renders
the price guide meaningless and if the practice grows, will be a problem to the
site just like the funnymoney stores were.
Robert
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Author: | bricksalabim | | Posted: | Jan 25, 2012 06:41 | | Subject: | Re: lot limits/handl. fee in store settings/terms | | Viewed: | 57 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, Rob_and_Shelagh writes:
| | In Suggestions, SimplyBricks writes:
| |
I only have one question, why do some sellers want to restrict buyers to what
they can buy, surely all sellers here want to sell as much as possible, so why
restrict sales ? I'm at a loss why! Please don't tell me you don't have the
time, because if this is the reason, then you shouldn't be here selling!
Mike
|
Some want to make xxx$ profit per order and have focussed on bulk orders. Their
picking operations have not been optimised for high lot/low value orders. Maybe
they make enough on the big orders. So, OK why not place lot limits and/or average
lot values to disallow the orders they do not want - other stores like yours
and mine can take those orders. There are stores to suit all buyers.
What is unfair is if a store prices items cheaper than yours or mine in the price
guide to attract orders then adds a signifacnt labour charge on afterwards to
make their profit and pay less fees to the site. Not only is it unfair, it renders
the price guide meaningless and if the practice grows, will be a problem to the
site just like the funnymoney stores were.
Robert
|
IMO, setting a minimum buy and a maximum number of lots would be enough to suit
the before mentioned stores. But taking fees for not meeting these requirements
should be forbidden. Easiest way would be to forbid any additional fees other
than packing material. Handling fees should always be included in the prices
(as you can't sell an item without handling).
And I would very much like to have a note in the wanted list by shop, indicating
if the store has additional fees or not (min buy is already noted, it would be
enough to have a "+" added to the min buy amount. And this information should
not be an option but an obligation for every store.
Renate
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Author: | Rob_and_Shelagh | | Posted: | Jan 25, 2012 08:33 | | Subject: | Re: lot limits/handl. fee in store settings/terms | | Viewed: | 41 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, bricksalabim writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rob_and_Shelagh writes:
| | In Suggestions, SimplyBricks writes:
| |
I only have one question, why do some sellers want to restrict buyers to what
they can buy, surely all sellers here want to sell as much as possible, so why
restrict sales ? I'm at a loss why! Please don't tell me you don't have the
time, because if this is the reason, then you shouldn't be here selling!
Mike
|
Some want to make xxx$ profit per order and have focussed on bulk orders. Their
picking operations have not been optimised for high lot/low value orders. Maybe
they make enough on the big orders. So, OK why not place lot limits and/or average
lot values to disallow the orders they do not want - other stores like yours
and mine can take those orders. There are stores to suit all buyers.
What is unfair is if a store prices items cheaper than yours or mine in the price
guide to attract orders then adds a signifacnt labour charge on afterwards to
make their profit and pay less fees to the site. Not only is it unfair, it renders
the price guide meaningless and if the practice grows, will be a problem to the
site just like the funnymoney stores were.
Robert
|
IMO, setting a minimum buy and a maximum number of lots would be enough to suit
the before mentioned stores. But taking fees for not meeting these requirements
should be forbidden. Easiest way would be to forbid any additional fees other
than packing material. Handling fees should always be included in the prices
(as you can't sell an item without handling).
And I would very much like to have a note in the wanted list by shop, indicating
if the store has additional fees or not (min buy is already noted, it would be
enough to have a "+" added to the min buy amount. And this information should
not be an option but an obligation for every store.
Renate
|
I am concluding much the same Renate. Except that for those stores that need/want
it, maybe Daniel's suggestion of having an "average lot value" option as well
as maximum number of lots would be OK (but not charges for exceeding the average).
In fact I really don't see the point of maximum number of lots if unrelated to
order value. e.g. I could set a 100 lot limit and that would mean I could decline
a 101 lot $1000 order but a 99 lot $10 order would be accepted... that's just
nuts!
I would also like the option of having a setting to exclude stores with lot limits
from wanted list results.
Robert
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | bb70466 | | Posted: | Jan 25, 2012 09:06 | | Subject: | Re: lot limits/handl. fee in store settings/terms | | Viewed: | 32 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| That's the part that could be most useful for buyers. I don't sell many parts,
so lot limits in my store are unnecessary, but I'd like to have the option to
avoid stores where there are lot limits if I'm looking to buy a lot of parts.
~Andrew
In Suggestions, Rob_and_Shelagh writes:
| | I would also like the option of having a setting to exclude stores with lot limits
from wanted list results.
Robert
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Author: | FigBits | | Posted: | Jan 25, 2012 07:55 | | Subject: | Re: lot limits/handl. fee in store settings/terms | | Viewed: | 53 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, SimplyBricks writes:
| |
I only have one question, why do some sellers want to restrict buyers to what
they can buy, surely all sellers here want to sell as much as possible, so why
restrict sales ? I'm at a loss why! Please don't tell me you don't have the
time, because if this is the reason, then you shouldn't be here selling!
|
Let's say I pay an employee $10/hour for picking orders, and it takes an average
of 1 minute per lot (I'm just making up these numbers). That means that my labour
cost is $0.17 per lot. If someone places a 100 lot order, it costs me $17 to
pull that order.
Sellers want to restrict sales that don't make them a profit.
The paragraph that you wrote above could just as easily be written to ask why
sellers don't lower all of their prices. Lower prices mean more sales, so therefore
all sellers should lower their prices. The answer is the same. The goal isn't
to maximize sales, but rather to maximize profits.
--
Marc.
|
|
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Author: | bb246156 | | Posted: | Jan 25, 2012 07:32 | | Subject: | Re: lot limits/handl. fee in store settings/terms | | Viewed: | 38 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| I would only vote yes to this if BL also added fields to make clear fees for
things like handling, etc. Many do it anyway, and only indicate that fact in
their Splash page. Now, I agree, these pages should be read and understood,
but I also want to know what fees, if any, a store charges, preferably before
I visit it. This way, when a store shows up in ranking, and the seller has entered
a fee type and amount into the system, there could be a graphical indication
next to the store name or something that you could click on, leading to a small
pop-up that shows the fees the store has.
If that makes sense. I work midnights, and my shift is nearing an end, so the
Tiredness is upon me. Anyway, I like the idea, of only to normalize something
that many people are already doing. If the amounts were kept track of by the
system, then Bricklink itself would be able to make them more visable, rather
than a seller hiding them in lines and lines of Splash Page.
~Syruss
In Suggestions, dagealka writes:
| | Hi all!
Among the highlighted and honoured stores, several sellers with a huge selection
have implemented lot limits (e.g. each lot should average $1). I would suggest,
that sellers can choose (in his store settings so that they appear in the store
terms and that they are applied to each order), whether lot limits apply or not
(similar to minimum order). This makes it clearer for the customer than the comments
in the individual store policies.
In his store settings, the seller has the possibility to choose that lot limits
do not apply, or that they apply. When they apply, the seller can choose, what
should be the minimum each lot should average. If this average is not met, the
seller should again have few possibilities. Firstly, not to allow orders meeting
his average, or, secondly, allow them with some charge each extra lot the seller
can specify. (There may by a bypass password such as for the minimum order.)
This implementation of a lot limit would also cover handling fees, when the average
is set to zero and the charge each extra lot is set to the requested value.
The big advantage of an implementation of implementing this into the BrickLink
system is, that the customer sees his extra charges in his shopping cart. (Or
his order is blocked.) This would avoid confusion when e.g. $20 is added to the
invoice and the customer has not read the store policies carefully. With the
implementation of these lot limits BrickLink would make another step towards
a clearer and buyer friendly platform, as Bricklink has done, when avoiding the
fixed exchange rates with implementing VAT.
Daniel
Please vote ‘yes’ for allowing the seller setting up lot limits in his store
terms or ‘no’ for no progress.
|
|
|
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Author: | Stacey_Love | | Posted: | Jan 25, 2012 08:24 | | Subject: | Re: lot limits/handl. fee in store settings/terms | | Viewed: | 66 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| Many stores have lot limits.
the main reason for such limits is that after having no lot limits and several
100+ orders for less than $10, many sellers feel that there time picking such
orders is a com pleat waist of time and or resources.
yes there are other ways to go, increasing the unit volume is one way, (this
restricts the buyer into buying the quantity that the seller stipulates). and
another is lot limits.
Sellers provide a service.
good service is an on cost.
there are many stores here with different ideas, its called a free market approach.
what suits one seller may not suit another.
Buyers have free access to many many stores all offering different choices in
volume, scope depth of stock, customer service and differing costs.
Sellers have varying costs. cost of acquisition, cost of storage cost of processing,
cost of packaging and cost of delivery. cost of staff.
It is up to each and every store to decide on what suits them.
TLG has differnt prices for each and every set it sells, depending on the geographical
location and volume purchased. these differences in input price are there business
and can be attributed to larger or smaller markets, ease of entry into the market
and competition from other brands. how they chose to conduct business is there
choice. Even there desire for market domination, or market share is up to them.
I can fully understand some sellers wanting lot limits, and others not wanting
them, but it is a free market, and it is the sellers choice to limit the order
in whatever way they chose.
If you have no lot limits, be happy that others are imposing a restriction on
buyers and sending them your way. if you have lot limits be happy that if you
get a 100+ lot for $10 you are not running at a loss.
Profit is not a dirty word, it is a necessity to sustainable business, and if
your orders are costing you money to fulfill, you will not be in business for
long.
just my 2 pence worth, feel free to comment.
Regards stacey
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Author: | Rob_and_Shelagh | | Posted: | Jan 25, 2012 08:41 | | Subject: | Re: lot limits/handl. fee in store settings/terms | | Viewed: | 56 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, stacey_love writes:
| | Many stores have lot limits.
the main reason for such limits is that after having no lot limits and several
100+ orders for less than $10, many sellers feel that there time picking such
orders is a com pleat waist of time and or resources.
yes there are other ways to go, increasing the unit volume is one way, (this
restricts the buyer into buying the quantity that the seller stipulates). and
another is lot limits.
Sellers provide a service.
good service is an on cost.
there are many stores here with different ideas, its called a free market approach.
what suits one seller may not suit another.
Buyers have free access to many many stores all offering different choices in
volume, scope depth of stock, customer service and differing costs.
Sellers have varying costs. cost of acquisition, cost of storage cost of processing,
cost of packaging and cost of delivery. cost of staff.
It is up to each and every store to decide on what suits them.
TLG has differnt prices for each and every set it sells, depending on the geographical
location and volume purchased. these differences in input price are there business
and can be attributed to larger or smaller markets, ease of entry into the market
and competition from other brands. how they chose to conduct business is there
choice. Even there desire for market domination, or market share is up to them.
I can fully understand some sellers wanting lot limits, and others not wanting
them, but it is a free market, and it is the sellers choice to limit the order
in whatever way they chose.
If you have no lot limits, be happy that others are imposing a restriction on
buyers and sending them your way. if you have lot limits be happy that if you
get a 100+ lot for $10 you are not running at a loss.
Profit is not a dirty word, it is a necessity to sustainable business, and if
your orders are costing you money to fulfill, you will not be in business for
long.
just my 2 pence worth, feel free to comment.
Regards stacey
|
I agree with everything you said Stacey but you said "lot limits" not "lot charges"
If you had said lot charges I would not have been in agreement for reasons already
mentioned i.e. this is taking money out of the price guide into non-price guide
revenue.
Of course this is not an issue if it is not abused but we already have examples
of stores creaming off 30%+ on orders of only 20 lots so it is being abused and
systemising it would IMO open the floodgates for more abuse.
Robert
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Author: | SimplyBricks | | Posted: | Jan 25, 2012 08:47 | | Subject: | Re: lot limits/handl. fee in store settings/terms | | Viewed: | 57 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, Rob_and_Shelagh writes:
| | In Suggestions, stacey_love writes:
| | Many stores have lot limits.
the main reason for such limits is that after having no lot limits and several
100+ orders for less than $10, many sellers feel that there time picking such
orders is a com pleat waist of time and or resources.
yes there are other ways to go, increasing the unit volume is one way, (this
restricts the buyer into buying the quantity that the seller stipulates). and
another is lot limits.
Sellers provide a service.
good service is an on cost.
there are many stores here with different ideas, its called a free market approach.
what suits one seller may not suit another.
Buyers have free access to many many stores all offering different choices in
volume, scope depth of stock, customer service and differing costs.
Sellers have varying costs. cost of acquisition, cost of storage cost of processing,
cost of packaging and cost of delivery. cost of staff.
It is up to each and every store to decide on what suits them.
TLG has differnt prices for each and every set it sells, depending on the geographical
location and volume purchased. these differences in input price are there business
and can be attributed to larger or smaller markets, ease of entry into the market
and competition from other brands. how they chose to conduct business is there
choice. Even there desire for market domination, or market share is up to them.
I can fully understand some sellers wanting lot limits, and others not wanting
them, but it is a free market, and it is the sellers choice to limit the order
in whatever way they chose.
If you have no lot limits, be happy that others are imposing a restriction on
buyers and sending them your way. if you have lot limits be happy that if you
get a 100+ lot for $10 you are not running at a loss.
Profit is not a dirty word, it is a necessity to sustainable business, and if
your orders are costing you money to fulfill, you will not be in business for
long.
just my 2 pence worth, feel free to comment.
Regards stacey
|
I agree with everything you said Stacey but you said "lot limits" not "lot charges"
If you had said lot charges I would not have been in agreement for reasons already
mentioned i.e. this is taking money out of the price guide into non-price guide
revenue.
Of course this is not an issue if it is not abused but we already have examples
of stores creaming off 30%+ on orders of only 20 lots so it is being abused and
systemising it would IMO open the floodgates for more abuse.
Robert
|
So Admin should insist ALL invoicing to be done through Bricklink, and the 3%
fees paid on that figure, but excluding the shipping costs!
Mike
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Author: | Rob_and_Shelagh | | Posted: | Jan 25, 2012 08:54 | | Subject: | Re: lot limits/handl. fee in store settings/terms | | Viewed: | 48 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| | |
So Admin should insist ALL invoicing to be done through Bricklink, and the 3%
fees paid on that figure, but excluding the shipping costs!
Mike
|
Mike, that would fix the problem of fee avoidance but it still kills the price
guide. People could still list items for 2 cents and charge 20cents for picking
them (some are doing this now!) which means they sell an item for 22 cents but
only 2 cents shows in the PG. Think if everyone did this....
I was thinking that Admin could charge 3% on Lego and 10% on other charges which
would discourage the practice but then I'm sure some would hide it in shipping..
then we all pay fees on shipping too?
NO, I'm OK with the principle of lot limits but not lot charges even though I
personally have no need for limits.
Robert
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | Tracyd | | Posted: | Jan 25, 2012 09:07 | | Subject: | Re: lot limits/handl. fee in store settings/terms | | Viewed: | 41 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, Rob_and_Shelagh writes:
| | | |
So Admin should insist ALL invoicing to be done through Bricklink, and the 3%
fees paid on that figure, but excluding the shipping costs!
Mike
|
Mike, that would fix the problem of fee avoidance but it still kills the price
guide. People could still list items for 2 cents and charge 20cents for picking
them (some are doing this now!) which means they sell an item for 22 cents but
only 2 cents shows in the PG. Think if everyone did this....
I was thinking that Admin could charge 3% on Lego and 10% on other charges which
would discourage the practice but then I'm sure some would hide it in shipping..
then we all pay fees on shipping too?
NO, I'm OK with the principle of lot limits but not lot charges even though I
personally have no need for limits.
Robert
|
This will probably get me put on some stoplists but here it goes.
No Lot Limits allowed.
No Lot Charges allowed.
All fees must be broken down.
Any charges other than postage would have to be included in item pricing.
Order cancellation allowed without penalty if shipping is excessive, to prevent
these charges being added to shipping.
Or leave everything alone and let the smart buyers do their own price comparisons
and avoid stores with Lot Limits or Lot Charges or buy from them if they don't
have a problem with them.
I have bought from stores with Lot Limits and frm those without. Some stores
with Lot Limits have lost my business because I could meet their Lot Limits terms.
They lost the sale and someone else got it. That was their choice, and no I
don't contact them and ask them to allow me to bypass their terms.
Yes I know that they are skewing the price guide, unless everyone has to play
by the same rules it will happen.
Tracyd
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | CinciBricks | | Posted: | Jan 25, 2012 09:23 | | Subject: | Re: lot limits/handl. fee in store settings/terms | | Viewed: | 46 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, Tracyd writes:
| | No Lot Limits allowed.
No Lot Charges allowed.
All fees must be broken down.
Any charges other than postage would have to be included in item pricing.
Order cancellation allowed without penalty if shipping is excessive, to prevent
Tracyd
|
Heck, why stop here? Why not go ahead and have BrickLink enforce the seller's
maximum allowed profit margin to 3%? After all, we all know those greedy sellers
want to squeeze every last penny out of us! Profits are evil! This way we know
sellers are only making a reasonable profit margin and aren't gouging the little
guy.
-Billy
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | Tracyd | | Posted: | Jan 25, 2012 09:42 | | Subject: | Re: lot limits/handl. fee in store settings/terms | | Viewed: | 32 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, CinciBricks writes:
| | In Suggestions, Tracyd writes:
| | No Lot Limits allowed.
No Lot Charges allowed.
All fees must be broken down.
Any charges other than postage would have to be included in item pricing.
Order cancellation allowed without penalty if shipping is excessive, to prevent
Tracyd
|
Heck, why stop here? Why not go ahead and have BrickLink enforce the seller's
maximum allowed profit margin to 3%? After all, we all know those greedy sellers
want to squeeze every last penny out of us! Profits are evil! This way we know
sellers are only making a reasonable profit margin and aren't gouging the little
guy.
-Billy
|
Not once did I say to limit a seller's profits. Nice way to twist a post around.
Your lot limits don't seem excessive to me. I will stop there.
Tracyd
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Author: | dagealka | | Posted: | Jan 25, 2012 09:16 | | Subject: | Re: lot limits/handl. fee in store settings/terms | | Viewed: | 41 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| Hi Robert,
I suggested the idea with the lot charge, to provide a more complex solution
with more options, a solution for everyone. I see, it figures out that this lot
charge might make everything too complicated (fees, price guide manipulation).
I would like to wait until the discussion goes on, and we get more comments from
different buyers and sellers.
Personally, I introduced this lot charge in my shop only, because buyers were
upset, when I cancelled their orders, if these does not meet my lot limit.
Daniel
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Author: | Rob_and_Shelagh | | Posted: | Jan 25, 2012 09:44 | | Subject: | Re: lot limits/handl. fee in store settings/terms | | Viewed: | 41 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, dagealka writes:
| | Hi Robert,
I suggested the idea with the lot charge, to provide a more complex solution
with more options, a solution for everyone. I see, it figures out that this lot
charge might make everything too complicated (fees, price guide manipulation).
I would like to wait until the discussion goes on, and we get more comments from
different buyers and sellers.
|
| | Personally, I introduced this lot charge in my shop only, because buyers were
upset, when I cancelled their orders, if these does not meet my lot limit.
|
I guess if your suggestion of lot limits (not lot fees) was introduced you would
have no orders to cancel for not meeting limits as they would not be placed,
just like orders today that do not meet minimum order values, so you would not
need the fee 
This I think would be fair to all and maintain the integrity of the system and
most importantly the price guide. I think this IS going to be a complicated thing
to address as many have said before, you close off one loophole and another is
created. IMO these issues only need to be dealt with when a significant number
of sellers start pushing the limits (as with pre-multi currency exchange rate
scams) but as you pointed out in your OP, there does seem to be a trend starting
here and when that happens here there is a history of others jumping on it to
keep their prices artificially low or make a bit of extra, un-commissionable
profit. If 30% fees for picking 20 lots on a 20 Euro order is OK, what next?
I'm sure there are more aspects to this yet to surface.
Robert
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Author: | therobo | | Posted: | Jan 25, 2012 09:57 | | Subject: | Re: lot limits/handl. fee in store settings/terms | | Viewed: | 60 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, dagealka writes:
| | Hi Robert,
I suggested the idea with the lot charge, to provide a more complex solution
with more options, a solution for everyone. I see, it figures out that this lot
charge might make everything too complicated (fees, price guide manipulation).
I would like to wait until the discussion goes on, and we get more comments from
different buyers and sellers.
Personally, I introduced this lot charge in my shop only, because buyers were
upset, when I cancelled their orders, if these does not meet my lot limit.
Daniel
|
Daniel, allow me some questions:
1) Why don't you simply put bulk quantities on your lots to meet your min. lot
value?
2) How to meet your min. lot value when hundreds of your lots are much less then
€1?
Your terms state:
"Buyers, whose orders do not meet this lot limit are charged 0.5€ each additional
lot."
3) What do you mean with "additional lot"?
4) If I order 20 lots, each less than €1, (say 20 lots of €0.9 each), how much
is the fee?
Ronald
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | dagealka | | Posted: | Jan 25, 2012 11:58 | | Subject: | Re: lot limits/handl. fee in store settings/terms | | Viewed: | 50 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| | |
Daniel, allow me some questions:
1) Why don't you simply put bulk quantities on your lots to meet your min. lot
value?
|
I want to give my customers more freedom.
| | 2) How to meet your min. lot value when hundreds of your lots are much less then
€1?
|
Then the buyer should order also parts from lots greater than 1€
| |
Your terms state:
"Buyers, whose orders do not meet this lot limit are charged 0.5€ each additional
lot."
3) What do you mean with "additional lot"?
|
see exemple below
| |
4) If I order 20 lots, each less than €1, (say 20 lots of €0.9 each), how much
is the fee?
|
Then the total would be 18€, hence two extra lots making 2*0.5€=1€.
The main thing is, that I am not looking for a solution for my store only. I
am suggesting a feature, which does not hinder the sellers not using this feature,
but is a great benefit for sellers using it. Additionally it gives more clarity
to customers.
|
|
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Author: | BLUSER_170194 | | Posted: | Jan 25, 2012 13:27 | | Subject: | Re: lot limits/handl. fee in store settings/terms | | Viewed: | 87 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, dagealka writes:
| | Hi all!
Among the highlighted and honoured stores, several sellers with a huge selection
have implemented lot limits (e.g. each lot should average $1). I would suggest,
that sellers can choose (in his store settings so that they appear in the store
terms and that they are applied to each order), whether lot limits apply or not
(similar to minimum order). This makes it clearer for the customer than the comments
in the individual store policies.
In his store settings, the seller has the possibility to choose that lot limits
do not apply, or that they apply. When they apply, the seller can choose, what
should be the minimum each lot should average. If this average is not met, the
seller should again have few possibilities. Firstly, not to allow orders meeting
his average, or, secondly, allow them with some charge each extra lot the seller
can specify. (There may by a bypass password such as for the minimum order.)
This implementation of a lot limit would also cover handling fees, when the average
is set to zero and the charge each extra lot is set to the requested value.
The big advantage of an implementation of implementing this into the BrickLink
system is, that the customer sees his extra charges in his shopping cart. (Or
his order is blocked.) This would avoid confusion when e.g. $20 is added to the
invoice and the customer has not read the store policies carefully. With the
implementation of these lot limits BrickLink would make another step towards
a clearer and buyer friendly platform, as Bricklink has done, when avoiding the
fixed exchange rates with implementing VAT.
Daniel
Please vote ‘yes’ for allowing the seller setting up lot limits in his store
terms or ‘no’ for no progress.
|
I am hesitant to comment on this thread, since as you can tell from my feedback
I am a new buyer and have no experience as a seller. But I am reading every
forum post on selling while preparing to open my own (very little) store, and
I'm hoping my perspective as a new BrickLinker will add some idea of how this
appears to someone who hasn't been pickled in the nuances of these issues for
years.
First off, the integrity of the price guide is of prime importance. Anything
that rewards, encourages, or has the unintended side-effect of skewing the price
guide is going to be bad for the BrickLink community.
Simplicity is good. A new buyer is confused enough just trying to figure out
how to find parts, manage a want list, etc. I've been reading several recent
forum posts about new buyer confusion, and I can recall my own learning curve
since it is so recent. Trying to handle every case for every seller in some
kind of mystery formula will put off new buyers.
Automation is good. I shouldn't be able to check out with a shopping cart that
the seller will reject. Again, expecting new buyers to read and understand the
different policies of different stores on top of all the other juggling to create
their first few orders is going to make them think BrickLink is not worth the
bother. And cancelled orders leads to unhappiness all around.
It seems to me then, that an average lot value, automatically enforced, is where
it should begin and end. No complicated "fee for buying too little of this lot"
formulas. This is simple to state in store terms, and since it is a simple calculation
it is easy to enforce, it doesn't lead to the confusion of multiple different
policies to have to understand. It is also easy to display in store summary
lists. Instead of simply listing "minimum order" it can be "minimum order/minimum
lot average": $10/$0 (no lot minimum), $10/$1, etc.
Does this solve every seller's problem? Certainly not. Is it easy for everyone
to understand? I think so. Can it be automatically enforced? Yes.
Key question: Does this work well enough for enough sellers that the number of
stores with unique store terms related to lot limits goes down because they have
switched over to the automatic system?
-dave
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Author: | dagealka | | Posted: | Jan 26, 2012 07:21 | | Subject: | Re: lot limits/handl. fee in store settings/terms | | Viewed: | 49 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| Thanks for your perspective from a reletively new BrickLinker. You get to the
point completely.
|
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Author: | dagealka | | Posted: | Feb 6, 2012 07:54 | | Subject: | lot limits... Conclusion | | Viewed: | 121 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| I conclude, that a lot limit (similar to minimum order, do not allow orders with
less than e.g. $1 per lot in average), which the seller can customize or not
use at all is a valuable extension, which definitely should be implemented.
Orders not meeting this limit should not be able to check out. An additional
fee per extra lot should NOT be implemented, since this biases the price guide,...
(see discussion above).
Daniel
|
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Author: | Rob_and_Shelagh | | Posted: | Feb 6, 2012 08:15 | | Subject: | Re: lot limits... Conclusion | | Viewed: | 77 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, dagealka writes:
| | I conclude, that a lot limit (similar to minimum order, do not allow orders with
less than e.g. $1 per lot in average), which the seller can customize or not
use at all is a valuable extension, which definitely should be implemented.
Orders not meeting this limit should not be able to check out. An additional
fee per extra lot should NOT be implemented, since this biases the price guide,...
(see discussion above).
Daniel
|
Agreed 100%.
I would then add that something should be done to clamp down on the excessive
lot fees some have already implemented outside of the system which does indeed
bias the price guide, avoids payment of BL fees and creates unfair competition
in the market. Some perhaps quite innocently did this to discourage very high
lot/low value orders in their stores but others have taken the principle to excess
to the extent of adding 30% fees to quite small lot orders of reasonable value.
Funny money exchange rates were eliminated, this is starting to spread to the
same extent.
Robert
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Author: | D.Rae.McCormick | | Posted: | Feb 6, 2012 08:54 | | Subject: | Re: lot limits... Conclusion | | Viewed: | 54 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, Rob_and_Shelagh writes:
| | In Suggestions, dagealka writes:
| | I conclude, that a lot limit (similar to minimum order, do not allow orders with
less than e.g. $1 per lot in average), which the seller can customize or not
use at all is a valuable extension, which definitely should be implemented.
Orders not meeting this limit should not be able to check out. An additional
fee per extra lot should NOT be implemented, since this biases the price guide,...
(see discussion above).
Daniel
|
Agreed 100%.
I would then add that something should be done to clamp down on the excessive
lot fees some have already implemented outside of the system which does indeed
bias the price guide, avoids payment of BL fees and creates unfair competition
in the market. Some perhaps quite innocently did this to discourage very high
lot/low value orders in their stores but others have taken the principle to excess
to the extent of adding 30% fees to quite small lot orders of reasonable value.
Funny money exchange rates were eliminated, this is starting to spread to the
same extent.
Robert
|
Nice discussion. I voted "yes" to this suggestion.
I'm all for anything that will make it simpler and easier
for the buyers, protects the integrity of the BrickLink system,
and still allows the sellers flexibility to set reasonable limits
and charges that work for them.
~Rae
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Author: | bagelboybugle | | Posted: | Feb 6, 2012 09:44 | | Subject: | Re: lot limits... Conclusion | | Viewed: | 77 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, RA3 writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rob_and_Shelagh writes:
| | In Suggestions, dagealka writes:
| | I conclude, that a lot limit (similar to minimum order, do not allow orders with
less than e.g. $1 per lot in average), which the seller can customize or not
use at all is a valuable extension, which definitely should be implemented.
Orders not meeting this limit should not be able to check out. An additional
fee per extra lot should NOT be implemented, since this biases the price guide,...
(see discussion above).
Daniel
|
Agreed 100%.
I would then add that something should be done to clamp down on the excessive
lot fees some have already implemented outside of the system which does indeed
bias the price guide, avoids payment of BL fees and creates unfair competition
in the market. Some perhaps quite innocently did this to discourage very high
lot/low value orders in their stores but others have taken the principle to excess
to the extent of adding 30% fees to quite small lot orders of reasonable value.
Funny money exchange rates were eliminated, this is starting to spread to the
same extent.
Robert
|
Nice discussion. I voted "yes" to this suggestion.
I'm all for anything that will make it simpler and easier
for the buyers, protects the integrity of the BrickLink system,
and still allows the sellers flexibility to set reasonable limits
and charges that work for them.
~Rae
|
After reading the thread, I must say that Im not voting because Im still undecided.
There are already tools in place for a seller to manage order sizes. Minimum
order, bulk amount etc. I dont think there is a real need for average lot based
fees at all, its just another method for sellers to milk the buyer.
I have spent just short of $300 in the last week, none of which has gone to stores
that have terms rambling on about how they cant be bothered to pick an order
unless they can make enough to buy a new pair of designer shades for 20 minutes
work. Frankly, if a seller cant be bothered to pick my order, how can I be sure
theyl be bothered to correct problems if they make a little error? because if
it aint profitable to spend afew seconds picking an order with an average lot
value of $0.75, it sure aint profitable to spend 30 minutes looking for a part
that they miscounted is it?
So actually, I could support this suggestion if it came with the condition that
all `lot related fees` are outright banned and I can choose to exclude such stores
from search results.
Gareth
*further rant*
I also emptied a $90 cart in one store because they charge a $6 minimum shipping
fee even if buyer wants just one minifig head... oh puhlease, why do we even
allow this extortion?
*rant over*
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Author: | ToyBurg | | Posted: | Feb 7, 2012 20:32 | | Subject: | Re: lot limits... Conclusion | | Viewed: | 103 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| | |
Nice discussion. I voted "yes" to this suggestion.
I'm all for anything that will make it simpler and easier
for the buyers, protects the integrity of the BrickLink system,
and still allows the sellers flexibility to set reasonable limits
and charges that work for them.
~Rae
|
We agree. As one of the larger highlighted stores that has a lot limit policy
in place, we would be in favor or implementing such features into the BrickLink
system. We are in business to make a profit and take care of our employees, and,
therefore, did find it necessary to set boundaries with lot limits. It was something
that we thought long and hard about, but could see no way around.
We strive to keep our prices competitive, and feel that it would be unfair to
the vast majority of buyers to raise our prices across-the-board when it is a
small percentage of orders that incur any lot limit fees.
We always communicate with those buyers who do incur lot limit fees and are always
willing to work with those buyers to resolve any issues that they may have. We
have never penalized any buyer for asking to cancel an order due to lot limit
fees.
Also, to be clear, we have absolutely no objection to paying BrickLink fees on
any lot limit fees that are collected and are in no way trying to circumvent
the system.
Cheryle @ ToyBurg
|
|
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Author: | Timothy_Smith | | Posted: | Feb 7, 2012 20:58 | | Subject: | Re: lot limits/handl. fee in store settings/terms | | Viewed: | 59 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, dagealka writes:
As long as I can have the search engine not show these stores in searches.
I buy in bulk, I frequently buy out a lot of a particular part.
It's not my fault you only have two 2x10 bricks, I'd buy 100 if you had them.
And it's not my fault your storage system is poorly organized- I can find any
of my lots in seconds.
So if you want to charge me for your ineptness, that's fine.
I'll take my business elsewhere.
|
|
|
|
|
Germany, Sachsen
USA, Idaho
United Kingdom, England
Netherlands, Utrecht
Canada, Ontario
France, Occitanie
