Originally Posted by mccvi
There are a lot more lame bumps that force legit and interesting sales threads to the bottom. Those seem more pressing to me in terms of regulating.
But one man's lame bump is another man's discussion, and it would be a LOT more work for the mods.
Originally Posted by tradernick
There's a lot in this post, here are a few comments. First, love your avatar, Holdfast.
Can you explain a bit further how allowing these bumps discourages single lot threads of used items? Those with single used items are going to be posting them regardless of the policy on 'sold' bumps, right?
I don't quite get how allowing a 'sold' bump (thereby biasing visibility towards that thread) will increase the amount of higher-quality NWT outlet content on SF. I do understand it will change how these items are listed (possibly for the better) but not the amount of it.
OK, what I mean is this:
If you're posting a single item, say a used item, you have much less invested in its sale. The item is already in your wardrobe, and you will tend to be fairly flexible on price, being more interested in shifting it than achieving a certain price. If you're posting a large haul of NWT items from an outlet, or a wholesaler or other contact, you've invested a significant amount of money and so will be more interested in achieving a lot of sales within a narrow timeframe and at a certain "reserve" price. This is all fairly self-explanatory.
Now, on the B&S board, sales partly depend on visibility/presence of your thread. Threads with many NWT items are naturally at a disadvantage in a forum format, being outnumbered by single/low items threads which push them down rapidly. Allowing "sold bumps" brings multi-item threads back to the top at the expense of the single-item threads. This balances out the the numerical advantage of the single-item threads, thus creating what is to my (admittedly biased) mind, a more level playing field.
If one couldn't use "sold bumps", an obvious - and clearly horrid - way to counteract the effect would be to have a single thread for each individual item being sold, and stagger posting each thread by an hour, to maintain high visibility in the board, and link to all the disparate threads in the OP of each separate thread. That would create a vast sales presence on the board. It would also be spammy in the extreme. Clearly, such a blatant abuse would lead to mod notifications, and be shut down, but it's really easy to envisage more subtle forms of this behaviour to game the system that would be much harder to consistently police (cf the practice by some of "pics later" or "measurements later", both of which I personally dislike and do not use currently because of the ability to use "sold bumps").
I firmly believe that the most USEFUL sales format to both buyers and sellers is a single thread per seller (at any given time) with a large number of items in that thread. But to make that format effective relative to a single item thread, you need a way of maintaining visibility and "sold bumps" are a simple, self-regulating way of doing this. I say self-regulating, because you're inherently limited in the amount of bumping you can do, because you can only do it when you sell an item! So if items are not selling at all, you can't bump, and have to price-drop instead. It's actually quite fair.
Definitely, high volume, highly active sellers can find ways to bump their threads and the mods couldn't possibly track them all... and probably don't want to since they drive page views here, right?
True. But I also think us sellers should "play fair". Now, my definition of fair will differ a little from someone purely interested in buying (I should point out that I've bought my share of items from here too!). But I think allowing sold bumps for large multi-item threads is a small concession to sellers, that on balance does more good than harm. From the perspective of sellers, mods and actually buyers too (in terms of encouraging those threads).
So you're saying here that the OP, for example, is interested in driving down prices? Hmmm... I see, so the argument is that if you can't use 'sold' bumps, you're forced to cut price in order to bump.
Really, though, I think the OP's issue is that these bumps allow sellers to keep their threads on the first page. I don't think it has anything to do with wanting to force sellers to lower their prices. I might be wrong, and I'm sure I'll find out soon if I am.
I'm sure there's a strong streak of altruism in you, but on the other hand I'm sure you're a businessman.
The last point also refers back upwards to the buyers too though. Sellers will naturally prefer a system that encourages a higher price for their product, buyers will naturally prefer a system that encourages a lower price for items. This is not wrong; in fact it is the essence of a good marketplace. And most of us are BOTH buyers and sellers, to greater or lesser extents. What we're discussing is how to BALANCE the marketplace since the format inherently imposes certain distorting restrictions to the way the market functions. Some of those distortions are beneficial to sellers, some to buyers, some to both, some to neither. I think allowing "sold bumps" is beneficial to high-value, high-item sellers; moderately beneficial to buyers in terms of encouraging those sellers to post items first here rather than elsewhere; and moderately unhelpful to single-item sellers. Personally, I find that a useful balance.
You'll likely go forward balancing the hassle of eBay with the potentially higher returns you can make there, and price your items accordingly.
Of course. But what we're talking about is where the tipping point is, whether/how much it would move by such a change, and whether moving the tipping point by making this sort of change is a good thing for the board. I would say not.