or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › General › New Forum Support  › New changes to B&S forum
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

New changes to B&S forum - Page 34  

post #496 of 549
Quote:
Originally Posted by wj2009 View Post

The membership is set in such a way that it discourage mega threads! I thought it would be pay-per-bump, instead it is pay-per-day-for-up-to-15-threads. Isn't the logic driving people to fully utilize the 15 threads quota since the cost is same? If more sellers act in this rational way, doesn't it defeat the purpose of the changes? Did I understand something wrong?

Compare it to the previous system, which absolutely prohibited megathreads.

This new system makes sense for me. While a seller who only sells high end ties may still spread his stuff out, I need a reasonable number of threads in order to categorize my stuff in a logical way. Off the top of my head I think I will use 11 of the threads like this, because if I understand correctly most of these categories will be required to have a thread. Others make logical sense to seperate, first quality and second quality shirts for example.
1. Shoes
2. Pants
3. BB first quality shirts
4. BB second quality shirts
5. Black Fleece and Thom Browne shirts
6. Ties
7. Suits/Blazers/SC's
8. Women's Boots and Shoes
9. Women's Blouses
10. Women's Dresses
11. Accessories (belts, watch bands, other leather goods)

That leaves 4 threads for playing around with: Package deals on shirts when I have duplicates, deluxe hangers, special threads for unusual or hard to categorize items..... Like I said, this new system makes a lot of sense to me.

I congratulate the men in charge for being responsive and making the changes.
post #497 of 549
^ this is exactly the intent.
post #498 of 549
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Smith View Post


Compare it to the previous system, which absolutely prohibited megathreads.

This new system makes sense for me. While a seller who only sells high end ties may still spread his stuff out, I need a reasonable number of threads in order to categorize my stuff in a logical way. Off the top of my head I think I will use 11 of the threads like this, because if I understand correctly most of these categories will be required to have a thread. Others make logical sense to seperate, first quality and second quality shirts for example.
1. Shoes
2. Pants
3. BB first quality shirts
4. BB second quality shirts
5. Black Fleece and Thom Browne shirts
6. Ties
7. Suits/Blazers/SC's
8. Women's Boots and Shoes
9. Women's Blouses
10. Women's Dresses
11. Accessories (belts, watch bands, other leather goods)

That leaves 4 threads for playing around with: Package deals on shirts when I have duplicates, deluxe hangers, special threads for unusual or hard to categorize items..... Like I said, this new system makes a lot of sense to me.

I congratulate the men in charge for being responsive and making the changes.

are you clearing out the BB clearance outlet?
post #499 of 549
Hello Sissy Spacerock here.

Just listed my first items in the "new B&S" and wanted to chime in with a "holy fuck I hate this."

http://www.styleforum.net/forum/thread/259730/pbjs-nudies-j-crew-484-selvage-n-f-weird-guy-egs-left-field-apc-ns-uniqlo-helmut-lang

Glad things are apparently going well for SF (would assume they'd have to be to roll out this new format) but it's really, really bad.

Consider me on entertainment duty strike until there is order in the land.
post #500 of 549
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThinkDerm View Post


are you clearing out the BB clearance outlet?

Isnt that what you are supposed to do at a clearance outlet?
post #501 of 549
Thanks guys. We are continuing to work on sprucing up the visuals and on speed. Yes, there were improvements made to the speed today, but obviously, we are not finished.

Brian, could I ask you a few off topic questions to get to the bottom of your speed problem?
1) What OS are you using?
2) What Browser and version are you using?
3) Do you have any adblocking on?

Cheers,

Fok.
post #502 of 549
Quote:
Originally Posted by LA Guy View Post


The counterargument is that because a megathread will get more views, sellers, under *any* system, would be incentivized to group items so that individual items also get more views.

I will sure search for the megathreads, if they are easy to spot. However if people selling 15 shirts or 15 ties each open 15 threads and keep bumping them with cheap membership, then megathreads will be buried. In the old system, these smart asses would have been disciplined. Not any more in the new system. Megathreads are certainly convenient to manage from sellers' perspective and that is a huge improvement of the newly twisted system. I just think megathreads may be disadvantaged to catch attentions with current setup. Just my 2c. BTW, thanks for all the hard work from SF team.
post #503 of 549
Quote:
Originally Posted by wj2009 View Post


I will sure search for the megathreads, if they are easy to spot. However if people selling 15 shirts or 15 ties each open 15 threads and keep bumping them with cheap membership, then megathreads will be buried. In the old system, these smart asses would have been disciplined. Not any more in the new system. Megathreads are certainly convenient to manage from sellers' perspective and that is a huge improvement of the newly twisted system. I just think megathreads may be disadvantaged to catch attentions with current setup. Just my 2c. BTW, thanks for all the hard work from SF team.

The fees are subject to change. We'll take a look in a few weeks and see how they were used.
post #504 of 549
I suppose there are technical issues here but I suspect a consideration of not forcing people to consolidate threads is to increase the number of listings and to incentavize sellers to buy memberships. If you don't pay for a membership then your listings will be on page 5 in no time. So you have to buy memberships. The irony is if all you sellers buy memberships, none of you is better off or worse off so you pay for no real benefit. But you still have to pay! The Nash equilibrium for all sellers are either nobody-buy-membership or everyone-buy-membership and I bet people naturally lean to the latter. Very smart way to generate revenue for SF!
post #505 of 549
Good point. The new B&S, even with the changes is still an absolute disgrace. Why did you even attempt to change the last one? The old maxim of 'if it isn't broken...' rings a bell here.
post #506 of 549
Quote:
Originally Posted by ql1974 View Post

I suppose there are technical issues here but I suspect a consideration of not forcing people to consolidate threads is to increase the number of listings and to incentavize sellers to buy memberships. If you don't pay for a membership then your listings will be on page 5 in no time. So you have to buy memberships. The irony is if all you sellers buy memberships, none of you is better off or worse off so you pay for no real benefit. But you still have to pay! The Nash equilibrium for all sellers are either nobody-buy-membership or everyone-buy-membership and I bet people naturally lean to the latter. Very smart way to generate revenue for SF!

That is an interesting one, and really, not one I had thought of before. Ultimately, however, it's flawed logic, because Styleforum's revenue model does not depend on B&S transactions, but from traffic to the site. No, ultimately, we are not forcing people to consolidate threads because:
1) We want to allow sellers to make their own marketing choices.
There are a lot of reason to not consolidate all items from one category. For example, we don't feel that a seller should be forced to sell his Santonis alongside his Common Projects alongside his Trickers. Or his throwaway shirts alongside his BNWT Kitons.
2) It increases moderation load.

In any case, there is another, fundamental problem with your argument, which is that the cost/benefit analysis of buying memberships ultimately depends on the price and volume of a seller's inventory.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ich_Dien View Post

Good point. The new B&S, even with the changes is still an absolute disgrace. Why did you even attempt to change the last one? The old maxim of 'if it isn't broken...' rings a bell here.

It was broken. You just didn't see that because we were working non-stop behind the scenes patching it up.
post #507 of 549

What price should be put on a multi-item classified listing, if the individual items at different prices?

 

$0? The price of the lowest? highest? total?

post #508 of 549
People are still posting multiple items in separate threads (eg the 2 RT ties - sorry to the poster - obviously not picking on you!).

I suppose there's no way of enforcing people to list similar items in the same thread so as to give fair page real estate to the other sellers...
post #509 of 549
Quote:
Originally Posted by MalfordOfLondon View Post

People are still posting multiple items in separate threads (eg the 2 RT ties - sorry to the poster - obviously not picking on you!).

I suppose there's no way of enforcing people to list similar items in the same thread so as to give fair page real estate to the other sellers...

There is. Just make people pay per bump! If you have 15 threads, it cost you 15 times more to bump them all than if you consolidate in one thread.
post #510 of 549
Quote:
Originally Posted by Holdfast View Post

What price should be put on a multi-item classified listing, if the individual items at different prices?

 

$0? The price of the lowest? highest? total?


+1
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: New Forum Support
This thread is locked  
Styleforum › Forums › General › New Forum Support  › New changes to B&S forum