Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
10/02/2019 at 11:45 pm in reply to: Interesting Promoted Listing "Trending Rate" Inconsistency #68539
I don’t think your example is sufficient to prove much. Frankly, I don’t think the TR is just a random generated number. But there’s an algorithm involved, and we don’t know all the details. ebay has indicated they will be adding more “transparency” regarding the TR rate in the future. I had specifically asked whether the TR was based on an overall figure (like the average for everything in the jewelry category) or was it more granular than that? And the answer I got was what I shared above….if ebay has sufficient data to use a more micro level TR they do….they always go with the level that is as micro as they can get it. (They didn’t use the word micro, but hopefully you get what I’m saying)
Now, could item price enter into it? Or condition? I don’t know.
I do think the numbers can be somewhat misleading, and as sellers we need to use common sense. If I have a truly unique painting, I will assume that their TR is based on something too general to be of use to me. If I have a new item with UPC and there are many of them listed, I think it’s a fairly safe bet that the TR is pretty accurate for that item
Also, I note your question: “When I was breaking into a really tough category a year or so ago I ended up trusting the high TR because I assumed it had some logic behind it, but now I wonder if that was at all accurate – could I have halved my rate and remained in the top 10?” Again, I think it’s important to keep in mind that there is no hard and fast rule that says the seller with the higher PL rate always tops the seller with a lower rate. So, the answer to your question is “Yes, maybe.” That’s one reason ebay recommends so much experimentation with PLs and rates. The rate you choose is only one factor in where you show up. If you choose 5% and I choose 3%, and your photos suck, your price is astronomically high, you don’t bother with any Item Specifics….and I have great photos, reasonable price and use all the ISs? Odds are I’ll be above you.
10/02/2019 at 9:23 pm in reply to: Interesting Promoted Listing "Trending Rate" Inconsistency #68535I don’t know if this explains what you are seeing, but the trending rate is based on similar items at the most specific level for which ebay has sufficient data for a particular item. As I understand it, the trending rate for a popular commodity item with a UPC or other PIN will probably be based on items pretty much exactly like it. Whereas, for many typical “scavenger” (long tail, non-commodity) items, the trending rate may be based on a something higher, like a subcategory or even a category average. And the trending rate, like everything to do with search and PL, is dynamic….it could be one thing today, another thing tomorrow.
In your example, I’m a little unclear….you listed the exact same item, exact same categories, etc…BUT priced differently? Is that correct?
I generally use a flat PL rate for my stuff rather than worrying about the trending rate. Sometimes this actually puts me above the TR, sometimes below. But I choose the rate, and it’s one I’m satisfied with so I just don’t worry much about the trending rate. IF I sold a lot of new commodity goods, I would consider the trending rate important, but almost all my stuff is long tail, used / vintage, and I just don’t think the trending rate usually means much for that stuff. (Nor do I think eBay usually has sufficient data to provide a trending rate at a precise level.)
Of course, my whole philosophy of PLs is based on the fact that I don’t care much about search placement on the first page. If a buyer has used a fairly precise search query, my items are unusual enough that they’ll come up on the first page most of the time without PL. I use PLs for the OTHER pages…PLs are shown on a number of pages besides the search page, and I believe (but have no data to support this, since ebay doesn’t provide it) that most of my PL sales are a result of buyers seeing my items on those pages.
I think many non commodity sellers don’t use PLs at all, because they don’t see the need for them. So, for my kind of stuff, even 1% can be a winner if it gets me on those other pages.
If you have a lot of this stuff and you are moving towards higher end mens clothing and your margins are good because of low COGs, I’d probably think in terms of churn and burn on the commodity type stuff, while transitioning to list it and forget it on the higher end mens stuff. Hopefully that will free up storage space and provide more cash flow to acquire more higher end stuff. Just my opinion….
Mark, Just a thought….if this has a lot of pages, so that eBay’s 12 photos really can’t convey just how much stuff…and how neat it all is…I’d consider doing a video/slideshow , posting it to YouTube, and then linking it within your ebay description. If it’s really a lot of pages, you might not want to show all the pages, just to keep some element of surprise for the buyer….On the plus side, I think there’s a way to include a link in the video to your ebay listing/store…and if you are on Social media, I’d definitely link to the video. I think you might do very well with this.
Hi, Yeah, for our kind of stuff, it’s all about the sourcing. As the saying goes, you make your money when you buy, not when you sell….
How much programming time and effort has eBay invested in telling sellers that the only way to sell is lower prices?
Very little. Process is obviously automated.
I’ve been on ebay for 20 plus years. Stuff like this, I’ve learned to simply ignore it.
I’d probably run an auction, starting at 99.99….
I agree with you both about the need to diversify. It’s always been a good idea, I’ve just never really needed to do it…but this injects too much uncertainty. And yes, almasty, I had seen that article. Truth is, I can see scenarios where the sale of ebay could be good for us…here’s just one example, let’s say WalMart buys ebay, maybe they’d fold the sellers of new stuff onto their 3rd party marketplace, but keep ebay for auctions/used stuff….a way to help them distinguish themselves from Amazon, and at the same time they wouldn’t be cluttering their own marketplace with hard to catalog used/older stuff….So, I’m not all doom and gloom about this, but the Elliot letter injected a lot of uncertainty into the situation, and Wenig’s departure , although not unanticipated, is a clear sign that Elliot holds the winning hand and no matter who is named CEO, ebay’s direction will likely be dictated by Elliot….If I were an eBay employee, I’d be more than a little concerned abou
t my job security….-
This reply was modified 1 year, 11 months ago by
MyCottage.
almasty, I’ve been following the Elliot thing since the letter first surfaced, and that’s why Wenig’s departure was no surprise. My guess is, the Board has made it clear that they want to strip ebay of the last two higher growth businesses it has: Stub Hub and Classifieds…and very possibly they have made clear that they are prepared to oversee the sale of ebay itself once those sales have been completed. I think Wenig made clear that he didn’t want to be the CEO in charge of the dismemberment of ebay. He didn’t have the votes to stop them, but he also didn’t have to be the guy doing their bidding. So, he’s gone.
For Q4, I don’t think this stuff really matters. For 2020 and beyond, I think we will have to confront the very real possibility that ebay as we know it might vanish. I’m not saying that WILL happen, and I’d love to believe that Elliot is sincere when they talk about getting rid of the StubHub and Classifieds distraction so they can concentrate on MEGA (Make eBay Great Again), but as I recall, Icahn told everyone the same thing…once the PayPal distraction was gone, he could focus on MEGA….and of course, Icahn took his money and ran away instead. So, we can hope for a different outcome here, but I wouldn’t want to bet on it. As soon as I wind down from Q4, I’ll be opening an etsy account and probably some others as well. And I expect to be doing some FB selling in Q4, trying to move some larger items while people are in a spending mood….
Just watched the first part of Chris’s video. I don’t really agree with his first point. Some of his points are valid, but I think he heavily exaggerates the impact of the 4% penalty on ebay’s profits, and his hint that it may be illegal is laughable…No, Chris, it isn’t illegal just because you don’t like it…and his criticism of Promoted Listings misses the point that PL isn’t just about the additional PL fees…it’s also about increasing sales velocity on the platform, which means ebay also collects more regular FVFs. The idea that this is just some sort of short term gain for ebay is probably wrong. I think these are two of his pet peeves, he doesn’t like either one…but they have nothing to do with Wenig’s departure. He makes it sound as if Wenig’s job was to boost short term revenue. I think one reason Wenig is now leaving is because he saw his job as to create a sustainable ebay, a company that would continue to be successful for years to come. So, I have kind of the opposite view of what Wenig was initially asked to do, and what he was trying to do. While ultimately Product Pages seem to have been a failure, there was NOTHING short term about the idea behind that….Wenig, far more than Donahoe, was looking at long term profitability, IMO. I’m not sure the current Board is taking a long term view….my concern is, they are taking a short term view: sell off Stub Hub and Classifieds for a quick buck, then sell off ebay itself for another quick buck. I hope I’m wrong. I hope they really do want to ensure ebay’s long term profitability…but we’ll see….
His second point , about seller’s focusing on one thing, loses focus. LOL He goes off on a couple more of his pet peeves (and I agree with him on these….ebay could do a better job of marketing/advertising, and I would love if eBay negotiated better shipping rates for us (although I don’t think that is as easy as he seems to think…) Also, while he seems to be agreeing with the spin off of Stub Hub and the Classifieds, as far as I know, he has long been an advocate of multiple income streams…which, of course, is what ebay has with those two things….so it’s bad for ebay, good for sellers?
His third point? I agree with his improvement ideas, which he has talked about before. They are all good ideas. I don’t entirely share his optimism that Elliot Management wants to bring in someone to really improve ebay. That’s what they say, of course, but that’s also what Icahn said when he split off PayPal and left ebay hanging blowing in the wind. But, I do hope he’s right…that Elliot really does want to improve the marketplace long term and is committed to doing that. If they do want to do that, they could start by implementing some of his suggestions.
At this point, I’m not overly concerned about Q4…..I don’t think Wenig’s departure is as abrupt as it may seem, and much of Q4 has already been planned out and will just proceed as planned…marketing campaigns, any new seller tools etc. In fact, in ebay’s press release about the departure, they state that they are not changing their Q4 forecast, which suggests a certain confidence in their planning. So, I’m just going to keep on keeping on for Q4. But next year? It’s anybody’s guess.
Just as Q4 begins? The timing is not really very good.
To me, this just throws us into a period of uncertainty. I suspect the Stub Hub and Classifieds business will be sold off, but what then? When Elliot came into the picture, there were hints that, with those two components sold off, they might just sell ebay to the highest bidder as well. Just no way to know where this is headed. Could be good for us, could e terrible…we could end up with an ebay that finally does what so many small sellers have claimed ebay is doing….new management might ax the used side of the business entirely. I’m not expecting that, but I don’t think we can rule it out either.
Just gonna keep my nose to the grindstone and keep plugging away for now….Q4: list, list, list.
almasty, You’ve lost me…what is spam?
Vintage Treasures, I saw people talking about the double exposure a few weeks ago and told the better half: People don’t get it. It’s NOT the double exposure that matters. And it will likely go away. Which, of course, it now has.
You say (as do many other people): “That means if you use promoted listings on all your listings basically none of your items have any chance sell without you paying the promotion fee – simply because your organic listings no longer show in search.”
Let me be blunt: Wrong. Wrong. Wrong. ebay will EITHER show the PL OR the organic. There are a lot of factors in play as to which will be shown. Remember, this is NOT being done in a vacuum. ebay only wants to show so many PLs on the search results page. So, if, let’s say, ebay wants to show 3 PLs in the first 10 slots , but all 10 listings have been put into PLs by their sellers, it’s simple math: 3 will show as PLs, 7 as organic. Also, PL , as is search generally, is dynamic. So, exactly the same search terms could show my item as PL for this buyer at this time, and as organic at another time. And that isn’t because ebay is “rotating” through sellers….it’s because EACH search can have a different result.
Frankly, the reason doesn’t matter very much. I do know there were complaints on the ebay Community Boards, Facebook Groups and elsewhere about the duplicate listings. In some cases, buyers were even upset because they tried to buy two items and could only buy one, and couldn’t understand why. Some people (buyers and sellers) ASKED for the change.
I think the change is actually relatively minor, a housecleaning sort of thing….less clutter and confusion in search results, but no big deal. It’s always a good idea to keep track of sale trends and cost, but this change will likely have a negligible impact. The real key to improving PL sales is 1. sellers create better listings and 2. ebay’s PL algorithm continues to improve.
-
This reply was modified 1 year, 11 months ago by
-
AuthorPosts