Archive for the 'Trade Me' Category

Let’s make it happen

On Tuesday last week I was lucky enough to listen to an interesting range of cool people give 5 minute talks on the topics of their choice. (ok – only one person hit the 5 minute market exactly, and he had a giant clock on his chest) It was Webstock’s 3rd birthday and exit from rehab.

There is a great summary of everyone over on Shadowfoot’s blog.

Unfortunately (for me and for the audience) I was also asked to give a 5 minute talk, and as I was placed last I had to follow in some big footprints. I was filled with confidence after there was a cheer as I was introduced, before I realised that it was because I was introduced as “the last speaker before the drinks”.

I’m re-writing what I spoke about at Webstock from an early version of my notes. Sadly I don’t have the annotated notes from the event, so I am missing some of the extra pieces that I had gleaned from previous speakers.

Choosing your own topic is a peculiar type of torture – so I asked organiser all round good person Natasha for advice, and she informed me, and I quote verbatim, that she was expecting:

“a ballet recital followed by your rendition of Broadway show tunes followed by your 5 min talk on why Tash is awesome”

I’d left my tutu behind, so instead I chose instead to to add a bit of context to the last time I was up in front of a similar audience – when I affirmed with two sturdy comrades in arms at Foo Camp that “The Future of New Zealand is Fucked”. It was a convincing display by our team, but sadly the audience voted with their hearts – indicating that they preferred to believe the opposition.

So I decided to join the crowd, and spoke this time about “Why are we here?”.

Not “why are we here?” in the Dalai Lama, Catholic Church or Douglas Adams sense, but “Why are we here in New Zealand, in Wellington and at the Webstock event (or even reading this blog)”

I believe that we have a choice in all of these matters (except you Mum – you have to read my blog, even if you don’t actually do so)

By definition, anyone that has the get up and go to attend Westock, to read blogs and twitter about what is going on, also has the get up and go to do so – to leave New Zealand and head for the gold paved roads of the UK, USA, Europe and Kathmandu.

Indeed many of us do, including myself. I’ve been offshore several times now, the first time lasting about 10 years, and the last few times a year or two each.

So why do we come back, why do we stay?

After all in New Zealand, and in Wellington in particular there are three compelling reasons not to be here:

The weather sucks. It really does. As I draft this on Saturday morning the rain is lashing against the house, Cook Strait is closed to the Ferrys and the latest flight from Sydney was diverted to Auckland. Meanwhile in Perth it’s sunny and warm, in Europe summer is nigh and we are consigned to short days, rain and cold.

We are miles away from anywhere
- we were the last decent place to be permanently colonized by humans (discarding Pitcairn Island and Antarctica), 4 hours away from Australia and 10 hours way from anywhere interesting (11 from Wellington).

And we have a crappy Internet connection to the rest of the world, a connection seemingly controlled by rent maximising companies (shame on you Telecom) rather than stakeholders determined to open up access to the rest of the world.

It means I’m cold, days and too many dollars away from the great friends I have around the world and my broadband sucks.

And yet, and yet – I am still here – we all are. Why is that?

Again, I believe there are three answers: The weather really sucks, we are miles away from anywhere and we are connected to the rest of the world through a crappy internet line.

In New Zealand, and in Wellington more than anywhere, we expect the unexpected. This Saturday morning the weather forecast was all doom and gales, but some friends and I grabbed and hour of relative stillness to go for a quick bike ride. Meanwhile the day before the Webstock bash, the weather was shake your house from the foundations wash the green off the leaves horrible, and yet canny Wellingtonians knew to put suntan lotion on, for lo and behold it was crisply perfect that afternoon.

It means that when Vaughan Rowsell decided to go for a bike ride back in January, he didn’t wait until next summer, but took off for an April to June journey- knowing it was going to be cold, wet and miserable at times. He’s (almost there) succeeded. It’s the same urge that will guide hundreds of motorcyclists (myself included) to ride to the Brass Monkey this weekend, which is in freezing central Otago and deliberately held at around about the time of the year when the first big dumps of snow come through.

All this adds up to a people that are ready for anything, that accept no excuses and just get stuff done, regardless of what else is going on.

You can see it when we Kiwis land work in London, study in the USA, crew boats in the Med and work in charitable organisations in Africa. Kiwis arrive and depart with a deserved reputation for being able to handle anything and everything with no fuss.

Our society helps create these people with an excellent education system, a great social welfare system that means we are kept healthy, off the streets and trained, and political parties and a system that generally allows logic and fairness to guide decisions rather than a hackneyed partisanship system. Generally.

A word on education. Not only do we have places like Wellington’s Massey Design School, which is a truly great place, but more importantly we have a very high average level of education, and a very high 10th percentile level of education. That is – the least educated amongst us are far better off than their equivalents in other countries.

I’m not trusting comparative statistics for this – I’m trusting the excellent service levels across all sorts of organisations, from airlines to banks, rental car companies to restaurants and lunch bars that we receive relative to other countries. While the systems may sometimes (often) be less than stellar, invariably the people are polite, smart and able to deal with a variety of situations.

And finally that lousy wet weather means that we live in a beautiful place, one that encourages us to get out and enjoy it, and that attracts others from around the world to do the same.

So we are resourceful and smart, a fair people, have a decent corruption free society and we can do anything.

And yet we live miles away from anywhere

Not for us the intense deal making and energy of Wall Street and Silicon Valley, where anything is possible and nothing is too expensive.

However that vast distance also means that we avoid the Wall Street of today, the excesses that crushed an economy and the deal making and loans to business and individuals that abruptly halted.

And while we do leave New Zealand by the thousands to take advantage of London and New York, we gain valuable experience overseas and then we bring it back – either on loan when kiwi stars appear at conferences and on boards, or more permanently when we return home.

We come back because it is home, but also because it is easy to live and do business here. It’s trivially easy to start a business, to open bank accounts and to pay tax here.

We have thriving local competition, even amongst start-ups. We have DonateNZ and Givealittle, Thinksmall, MadefromNZ and Bizchat, Fishpond and Mightyape, Phil & Teds and Mountain Design Buggies, and the Jobs Summit, Foo Camp and Entrepreneurs Summit.

We all want to give it a go, and that competition means that the winners (be they a single winner or, often, a merged entity) combine to be a great, and hopefully, export led company.

To be sure we also have our problems, stuck here at the end of the world, but we are pretty good at identifying them, and we are pretty good at marshaling attention and energy on them until they are fixed. The number of pre-emptive summits for the economic crisis, the reports and government moves on the lousy broadband, the likes of Cactus Kate railing against the NZX governance and the rise of the NZ Institute all give hope.

But it is that crappy internet that is the final advantage we have. Not the lousiness of it, but the fact that it is there. (And yes – please please improve it with urgency)

Decent internet reduces costs, reduces pain and reduces cycle time. It means that we can build businesses in the cloud (basing them offshore to avoid the thin pipe) and address the world.

It lowers the trade barriers between us and our customers and suppliers, and it makes the world our market.

Our Government is helping as well.

We have signed Free Trade Agreements with China, Australia, Brunei, Singapore, Chile, Thailand, Indonesia, Malaysia, The Philippines and Vietnam. That’s an astonishing 1.9 billion people – or 25% of the world’s population.

We are also in negotiations with Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar, United Arab Emirates, Oman and South Korea. That moves it to a free trade addressable market of 2 billion people – a market of about 480 people per New Zealander, or 4 million people per reader of this blog today. Who cares about the anti-free trade USA subsidies when we have this market?

That’s plenty enough to share.

Finally, why were people at the Webstock event, and why are you (still) reading this?

When I returned to New Zealand in 2003, I’d realised that my ideal job was to
help find and found start-ups, to help growing businesses grow faster and to help their owners and employees perform better. It’s fun.

I met the then existing VC and private equity firms, but they seemed to be on the slow train, and many were mired in government hand-out bureaucracy. The tiny average investment size, the small size of the funds and the slow velocity of transactions all counted against the industry and their funded companies. I wanted better.

I was lucky enough to land at Trade Me, just before they hit the mainstream, and the energy was there. Now, six years later, and after stints overseas and here in New Zealand, I realise that times have changed across the board.

Trade Me, Xero, Peter Jackson and Richard Taylor, amongst many others, have all demonstrated that you can be good guys and start, run and make money from (the jury is waiting a verdict on Xero) excellent and cool companies.

Meanwhile the internet generation is hitting their stride. The 22 year olds of today have always been online, and they intrinsically get the space.

There are older returnees that are bringing energy, experience and cash back to our shores, and, most of all, there is a sense of opportunity.

The opportunities and energy is real. After landing back here in March, after selling up in Fremantle, it took only two weeks before I had over 20 opportunities of one description or another, and I am now part of two new companies.

Almost at the same time I received a call from Equip Design – who consult as part of the Better By Design program. I’m now on the team, and have visited the first of a series of clients that will build off a rich NZ history of successful transformation into design-led export-driven companies. I’ve toured Formway Design (unbelievable) and looked at from afar at the success of Obo, Phil and Teds and other successful graduates of the program.

We are good at this stuff – product design, anything internet based, branding, lean and flexible manufacturing – indeed the entire product development process.

Our local economy is strong, our addressable economies of the world are in varying degrees of trouble, but our export volumes are trivial to them, and our products are often clever and cheaper solutions to problems that they are just starting to look at.

So we have the people, the experience, economy and education. People are giving start-ups a go, and we have a huge market to address.

There are plenty of roadblocks on the way, but we Kiwis can do anything, regardless of the weather outside.

Let’s make it happen.

Well done Trade Me, but the threat remains

There’s an interesting article over at eBay strategies, which talks about how eBay lost the market for classifieds and mentions that Amazon is taking out the top end. (If you work at Trade Me then you should have eBay Strategies in your RSS reader)

I’ve mentioned it here before, and it bears repeating: Trade Me is different.

Trade Me has captured the Motors market, is well ahead of the incumbent in Property traffic and just behind the incumbent in Jobs. They are also in flats ( and have been for years) and rental property.

Meanwhile Trade Me’s free listings and simple localization meant that they have always been in the local classifieds game – things like sofas and so forth that require a face to face transaction.

The overall effect was a business that left no space for the well executed Zillion and Finda to get traction.

So well done Trade Me, but the threat will always be there – screw up and someone will take big chunks of the business. This will happen, for example, if Trade Me attempts to increase fees too much or if usability is lost in a host of features. If so then Craigslist, Gumtree or say Zillion will be right there to pick up the volume.

Sadly for the competitive threat Trade Me is still following the path to usability, and while I’d like to see lower fees in tough times they are probably at the right level for now.

It’s the same at the top end for eBay with higher quality product sellers moving across to Amazon.

Indeed while a substantial percentage (say 40%) of Trade Me’s listings are new, there does remain a bit of a gap in the market for direct selling of quality new products. It’s the one Ferrit was so hapless at finding, and I’ve mentioned how you can take advantage before. The gap is pretty tiny, but between New Zealand and Australia (where eBay is also screwing up) there is plenty of scope.

I’m saddened at just how eBay have managed to lose the plot, but respect Trade Me and how they are still showing the way after 10 years.

Why are Harcourts not yet on Trade Me?

There’s a fun discussion happening over on the Unconditional Blog – which if you have not found it yet is well worth following. I commend Alister Helm for not only his writing, but also for balancing the real estate industry (and their archaic ways) and the dot com approach to things.

However Alistair write a post on Harcourts that was just a wee bit too fluffy for my sensibilities – so I asked the question “.. are these change leaders <Harcourts> even on Trade Me yet?” (I knew that they are not – and they are missing out on 600,000 browsers each month)

If you go to that post now then stop reading – I’ve just copied and pasted. Indeed join the conversation over on Alistairs blog raher than starting s new one here.

To his credit Alistair gave a comprehensive reply, but it does not fly with me.

1. Realestate.co.nz – the most comprehensive single property portal in NZ – 95% of all listings by real estate agents are featured, the site receives 370,000 unique browsers per month with over 120,000 of these from overseas. This single portal provides the most comprehensive source of real estate – test it on Google which is were the majority of real estate searches start – type in “property in …” on Google NZ.

2. Harcourts.co.nz – the number one company website with over 160,000 unique browsers per month, close to double the web traffic of any other company website.

3. Google adwords – the opportunity to promote property online with pinpoint accuracy and cost effective visitor traffic.

Harcourts have never used Trade me property for all of their listings, they are not alone. At this time realestate.co.nz would have over 20,000 more listings than trade me property. As well there are over 200,000 unique browsers a month who go to realestate.co.nz who do not visit trade me property. (these are all Nielsen Stats)

Harcourts judge that their clients properties would not be presented in the best manner on a website that focuses on second hand goods auctions after all do real estate agents in Australia or US use eBay? – certainly not. Harcourts have adopted this strategy and it has not effected their market share – their share is growing.

I would judge that Trade me is not the sole answer to advertising anything in NZ – just look at jobs, Seek is still the number 1 jobs website – some high value items like jobs and houses may not long term fit the image and profile of trade me – cars, beds, shoes, CD’s and mobile phone – certainly core for Trade me.

My reply was as follows:

Realestate.co.nz had 354,357 UB’s in April, of which 145,000 odd also went to Trade Me. Another 621,080 went to Trade Me and not to Realestate.co.nz.

Harcourts.co.nz had 161,891 UB’s in April, of which 83,500 also went to Trade Me. Another 679,945 went to Trade Me and not to Harcourts.

These are total traffic figures- I should have used domestic, but actually from memory the total numbers make realestate.co.nz look better. I would say though that the impact of those overseas browsers is pretty minimal – after all how many houses are sold each month to overseas buyers?

While UB’s are over-counted (e.g. I have multiple browsers and computers so count many times) this is still a pretty compelling market that Harcourts misses out on. There must be more to it.

And there is – Realestate.co.nz is partially owned by Harcourts, and the Harcourts CEO is the chairman of Realestate.co.nz. Isn’t this a more likely reason for them not to list on Trade Me?

Almost every other real estate agency on Realestate.co.nz is on Trade Me. The last hold outs were/are the shareholders in Realestate.co.nz.

I have no problem with Harcourts holding out, but the reasons are clear, and they are not based on statistics but on ownership.

There are 365 Harcourts listings on Trade Me right now – placed, I understand, by individual agents. If I were a Harcourts agent I’d be pretty annoyed that 600,000 Kiwis were not able to view my listings, and I can understand why they would do an end-run behind the corporate policy.

Meanwhile Barfoot’s have over 2000 listings on Trade Me. Do we think that Harcourts are looking at Barfoot’s recent success in Auckland and wondering just how much of that relates to their presence on Trade Me? Remember that Trade Me attracts sellers, not just buyers.

Actually I’d love to see a chart of sales by agency versus number of listings that month on each of the sites. It would make interesting reading for the entire industry. I suspect you’d better be on both main sites to maximise your chances of a sale.

I do believe there is a place for both Trade Me and realestate.co.nz, but if Harcourts are really scathingly positioning Trade Me as a 2nd hand goods market then they show a very poor awareness of what exactly Trade Me is to Kiwis.

eBay is a poor cousin to Trade Me – they never figured out how to do Motors or Property, and certainly not Jobs. In Australia the market for cars is pretty fragmented, but is mainly on independent listing sites. Similarly the market for property is all over the place, without one dominant player (it varies by region and realestate.com.au is pretty good).

Not only are 40% odd of Trade Me’s items on sale new, but Trade Me is the marketplace for cars and bikes (due to poor online competition back in the day), getting close to the same for property (where realestate.co.nz is good competition), and still in progress for Jobs (where Seek was a very strong incumbent).

As an aside (and red herring) – what happens to the other 5% of real estate agent listings that are not on realestate.co.nz? Are they listed anywhere?

Disclosures: none – I have not worked for Trade Me for quite a while, and I know both Alistair from Realestate and Brendon from Trade Me Property, and they are both good guys.

Make it easy for me to leave you – unsubscribing

Like Rowan, I’ve been unsubscribing from a lot of list emails recently. Let’s see what we can learn from the process.

The Good

The best email subscriptions are easy to unsubscribe from – requiring a simple click from inside the email, which bounces to a web page with a confirmation message.

This is exemplary – at the bottom of each WSJ news alerts message is a one click “stop this now” link. (There is also another link where you can go to the website and manage all of your emails)

Next best is a return email to unsubscribe – something like this from the OECD.

Less good but still ok-ish are email lists that give you a unsubscribe link, direct you to a page and make you hit a confirm button on that page, sometimes answering a question while you are there. This is painful, but I guess you can spend a few more seconds to help them understand why you are leaving, and you don’t have to remember a login or password.

I had to laugh at this “why did you unsubscribe” pick-list from a sporadic email list that I signed up for some client research.
This drop down list actually made me feel a lot better about the particular organisation, even though I never read their spam. I’m guessing that the information they gather isn’t really  that valuable, but it is clear that the list owners understand the state of mind of people that have resorted to unsubscribing.

This is an important lesson - by the time you want to unsubscribe you are annoyed with the cumulative impact of all the messages, and therefore you don’t really like the senders. You are not happy, and want out.

It also means that email senders don’t want the customers anymore either. The recipients  are not reading, and if they are reading then they are not enjoying – so advertisers will get negative vibes.

Therefore it is important to do three things as an email sender:

  1. Make it really easy to unsubscribe, so messages will never annoy customers again
  2. Try, even, to make customers enjoy the process – so the last taste is a good one, and they will consider signing up again later or for something else now.
  3. Ask for feedback – so you learn and customers feel they have their say. Do make it optional though.

The Bad

The bad unsubscribe links aren’t what they advertise – they send you to the website, make you do something and then send a (one or more) “are you sure?” email, which is doubly annoying as you’ve just told them never to send me messages again.

The worst offenders are links that direct you back to the originating go to their site, require you login and then ‘manage your email options’.

This is simply unacceptable today. I’ll often be on a computer (e.g. the iPhone) where I don’t have my password for that site stored, or maybe I’m simply too lazy to go through the process so I won’t unsubscribe.

While some ‘email marketers’ may want to keep expanding their email lists, I say “NO – you do not want me on your list”, and here’s why:

  1. The cumulative annoyance directed at your company will continue to build up until I am mad when ever I see your contemptable unstoppable spam
  2. I will desperately try to consign your crap to oblivion in my junk mailbox, and thereby never see any of your messages again. Your email list is vapour.
  3. I’ll get really mad and tell people about it, and maybe even blog about it…

So let’s name and shame, and I’ll direct this to a company that actually does know better: Trade Me, and specifically OldFriends.

The Old Friends emails have been getting spammier* and spammier, and I am getting really annoyed*, angry even at the spambot* that keeps sending them* – so I want to remove them.

*refer to above three points for linguistic context

However to remove myself from the OldFriends spambot requires a login:

OldFriends is not a site made for constant hanging out – so chances are that the login screen will draw a blank when it comes time to remember your details:

Of course we know the email address – it was just spammed – and so we can ask for yet another email to send you your password. Umm – no thanks – that is going to take too long.  (and I won’t mention the giant page-long “do you know these people” brick wall after you log in)

It’s the same with FindSomeone**

so I’ll keep getting spam from Findsomeone as well.

**(are you single, cute, smart, ridiculously weathly and have low standards? – get in touch :)

Trade Me can do it right though, as you’d expect.

Here’s how easy it is to unsubscribe from Mod’s Motors. First – click on the unsubscribe link in the email:

and that’s it – done.

Trade Me also make it trivial to sign up again for the email – which I quickly did.***

***I hope I never have to do this for real – Mod is leaving Trade Me but I trust that the appeal of 250,000 righteous readers will keep his classic quotes coming:

The thrill of fettling a neglected beast and turning it into a minter is special. Some people try to do this with the opposite sex and get disappointed when they fail.

Summary

So what have we learned?

  1. Make it easy to unsubscribe
  2. Make it easy to subscribe
  3. Make it fun

To me the best unsubscribe approach is:

  • a link that unsubscribes me instantly
  • lands me on a professional, branded and fun page
  • that thanks me, tells me I’m now unsubscribed and offers me an optional one to three question survey to fill out.

Which is just common sense.

eBay UK stacks it high and watches it fly

eBay have taken a leaf out of 1-day’s playbook and have launched a Daily Deal on their UK website. The idea is simple – offer a compelling deal from the homepage, drive traffic to the site each day and sell the bargains by the thousands.

Meanwhile once you arrive at eBay.co.uk each day, why not check out the rest of the site – this should increase overall sales.

For once this is something that Trade Me could actually copy from eBay.

There are 3 key questions that remain to be resolved though.

  1. How do you select the products? They have to be real bargains from sellers that will deliver fast. It’s also an administrative burden to manually select those products, so it there some sort of auction each day for the space?
  2. How do you compensate Trade Me for the home page slot when  the margins are so tiny? The home page slot could be sold for cash, but Trade Me does clip the ticket on the increase sales of the bargain anyway. Do you offer lower fees to get the prices even lower?
  3. How do you manage the fallout from smaller sellers who compete (poorly) with the products on offer. This is especially bad if the front page sellers get a cut on fees, but bad even if their fees are standard and they pay a home page placement fee. This could even cannibalize entire categories as members wait for the deal rather than shopping.

How to twitter if you are a corporation

Twitter, for members of my family and those other 4 people that read blogs and have not yet discovered it, is a microblogging service that has just hit the main stream media. By definition it is therefore passé, but in the meantime we may as well use it well.

Examples: How not to twitter.

@NZStuff (sorry) sends through groups of news, either at 530am or during the day. The 530am news is from when the news is posted to the Stuff.co.nz website in an overnight process. The news sits unreleased until the morning so that the newspapers are not scooped. I don’t agree with this approach as to me news fails to be news when I can read it somewhere else first.
The ones during the day are the ‘most popular’ (I think), and also released by a bot (I think). By definition they are already out of date when they are tweeted, and almost by definition the audience of active twitterers will have already read them.
@nzstuff

Rather than @nzstuff’s automatically redundant articles, instead follow @NZStuffEditor, who is not very prolific but at least sends out news that is timely – and timeliness is a vital component of the definition of “news”.

Examples: How to Twitter
While the Wall Street Journal (@wsj) also twitters articles, it does so very rarely in groups of three, and most often the tweets are through the day. Almost invariably their tweets are before anybody else’s, and are therefore news in the truest sense. @NYTimes is not quite as quick, and will sometimes deliver in clumps, but they tend to beat the local alternatives and like the WSJ also link to longer articles on interesting and topical things.
@wsj

What all so far are missing is the human element.

I’d really like to see @NZStuff reply to people’s twitters, and to give a bit of extra juice that we don’t get from the website. Stuff and others need to remember that their customers are not just people that read the news, but people that evanglise their services and want some inside scoop, people that want to send them news (but need to know it will be looked at) and, most of all in these times, people that are thinking about buying advertising,

Rather surprisingly the best corporations at Twittering in New Zealand are the telcos. I’ve had conversations in public and private with @TelecomNZ, @VodafoneNZ and ISP @orcon. They reach out to customers and help them – often walking down to the customer service folk and asking them to resolve an issue. Indeed they have each helped solve (or at least help me understand) a personal customer service issue, and their corporate reputations with me are all a lot better for it. Here they are earlier today each helping someone out:

@telecomnz
@orcon
Vodafone

I’d like to see them extend this beyond the corporate communication people – especially to Customer Service and also to the real tech-heads.

Air New Zealand’s  @flyairnz does well – sending out specials, but also being a human – replying to questions and making comments – such as welcoming @johnkeypm to Twitter.

Trade Me has  unleashed a few people – with twitter names like  TradeMe_Ross , TradeMe_Jay, TradeMe_Jobs along with Trademe_NZ and Travelbug. The latter has a combination of background tweets and specials. Kudos for this topical tweet:
@travelbug

This stream from TradeMe_Jay is an exemplary example of how Twitter can extend your corporate PR reach well beyond what a PR team can do. In four tweets Jay helps a member (and ex Trade Me employee admittedly), personalizes the continuous development work that Trade Me does and links to an ‘expose’ video that most corporations would cringe to see appear on YouTube.

However Trade Me’s main twitter account is dormant, and we have yet to see Motors, Property or Customer Service make an appearance.

Google allows their staff (it seems) to twitter as they like – here’s Webstock speaker Pamela Fox announcing the release of Google’s new analytics Data Export API – something that I think has tremendous potential to change the advertising scene in NZ and elsewhere.
pamelafox

I’ll point to @powershop and @lingopal as two other examples, but to be fair I am involved as a supplier to the first and shareholder with the second. That shouldn’t stop you following them though :-).

Enough of the examples – what should you do if you are thinking of twittering?

How to take advantage of Twitter

The real power of Twitter is the 1-1 interactions, and yet there are only so many people that sit in corporate relations units. Moreover their job should not be to look after every tech nerd’s customer complaint, nor to understand every bizarre happening on the internet.

To me a great corporation would have three things on Twitter:

  1. A corporate voice – run by the corporate relations unit and staffed by a person. They would tweet press releases, reply to tweets that discuss the bigger picture (investor, employee relations, big stories) and generally have a slower beat but positive and official response.
  2. An active Customer Service voice – this would be staffed 24/7 but owned overall by a single person. That means that while a number of people will answer the tweets, the owner would make sure that there is consistency, speed and humanity behind it. The CS twitterer would continuously search for good and bad experiences from the organisation’s products and give thanks or help accordingly. They are the front line and so would have a very quick response time. They would deal with problems in public, take them to Twitter direct messages and ultimately call the customer directly.
  3. Unleashed individuals. Great companies would unleash everybody inside their organization to tweet about what they are doing, engage in conversations and show a genuine human face (warts and all) to the company’s customers and the public.This last one is scary.

    However if you are concerned that some employees will somehow destroy your company and brand then perhaps instead you need to do some serous internal navel gazing – and ask yourself “why would they do that?”. Even if some employees do tweet negative things, then see it as a fine way to take the pulse of your staff – and also fix the underlying problems.

    While I would put in place simple guidelines, most of those would already be in any employee contract. The main things not to tweet would be things like investor-level commercially sensitive information, competitively sensitive pricing and Apple product development news.

The progress made by the companies above is pleasing – and I hope we will see more of this as the use of Twitter and other tools expands.

Understanding our animal spirits

Prof Shiller (remember him from “Irrational Exuberance) has partnered with George A Akerlof in a strangely titled new book: Animal Spirits. I’m recommending it even before reading it.

It’s basically about why we don’t behave as rational consumers when faced with economic choices.

If you don’t want to wait, then there’s an excerpt from the book – the first chapter, which you can read over at Yale MBA’s Financial Crisis website.

Here are the five animal spirits – emotive things that often dictate our economic behaviour.

  • The cornerstone of our theory is confidence and the feedback mech­anisms between it and the economy that amplify disturbances.
  • The setting of wages and prices depends largely on concerns about fairness.
  • We acknowledge the temptation toward corrupt and antisocial behavior and their role in the economy.
  • Money illusion is another cornerstone of our theory. The public is confused by inflation or deflation and does not reason through its effects.
  • Finally, our sense of reality, of who we are and what we are doing, is intertwined with the story of our lives and of the lives of others. The aggregate of such stories is a national or international story, which itself plays an important role in the economy.

Just those five statements make for interesting pondering – so here is my quick take.

Confidence is everything – it is the difference between buying something (on credit even) and choosing to hunker down and not spend. When a depressed or optimistic feeling rolls out to entire populations then it causes and exacerbates busts and booms.

It’s true that we care most about parity and fairness when setting wages and paying prices. This is particularly evident in New Zealand where we tend to look down at those with unhealthily large incomes and spending habits and where we have a nationally loved TV program called Fair Go that goes after companies that rip people off. Interestingly the feeling of fairness to members was the overriding thing that governed our thinking in the days when I was involved in setting prices at Trade Me.

We also score pretty well as a country on corrupt and anti-social behaviour – scoring at of near the top of the list in the annual Transparency International surveys as a result. On the other hand we are a little divergent on our strong norms about what is anti-social behaviour – though we tend not to shoot each other and mostly we don’t rip each other off.

It’s true that we all tend to compare our income now to our income years ago, and fail to understand that $1m now is worth a whole lot more than $1m at retirement. This is the money illusion – where we look at the dollar figures and not at the real worth, the nominal not the real. Having grown up through inflationary times it did improve my own approach to this versus, say, my grandparents generation who often didn’t change the dollar value of their Christmas presents to grandkids (mine were a bit different). The trick is to constantly reset the current value of everything.

Finally I am guessing “stories” refers to the formal and informal coverage of things like bubbles and busts. Everyone was talking up dot coms in 2000, real estate in 2007/8 and stocks in 1929.  Fast forward a couple of years and the picture was (and will be) diametrically opposed – the media coming down hard on what were correctly seen in hindsight as speculative investments. I try to be contraian, using taxi drivers and ultimately my mother as the unfailing barometer – if Mum says buy, then I go ahead and sell.

They use these five animal spirits in the rest of the book to answer eight questions – such as why do economies fall into depression and why do real estate markets go through cycles?

Interesting stuff to be sure – I recommend just reading the first chapter and having a ponder – the answers may not be that difficult to work out, and if we can be internally aware of those “animal spirits” then perhaps we will make better decisions.

Now I need to decide where to buy it from. Fishpond don’t have it but Amazon who do. However I am really annoyed with them as most of the things I want (electronics, accessories) are not shipped to New Zealand.

Getting the basics right makes money – Ascent

Yesterday I went shopping for a laser printer. I went to Pricespy and Trade Me, along with Ascent where I have successfully purchased before.

Pricespy sent me to a few stores, including Ascent, but I will pick on Computer Direct who came back  as the cheapest. They have a good url, but they are not a company that I have heard of. Still, they looked professional enough, and so I placed printer into the cart.
computerdirect
All good, if a little dated, but when I clicked on check out I was confronted with this:
computerdirect

Sorry – I don’t know you, and although I’d buy a printer from you I have no wish whatsoever to register on your website. You have also not yet told me how much shipping will cost, and given that I do not trust you I choose to stop. Goodbye.

For a simple lesson on how to do this (and to buy my printer), I headed on over to Ascent. Here is their cart:
ascent

and here is the next screen, which is excellent. I can simply click the center button and buy what I want to buy. I don’t have to register, I don’t have to remember a login and password.
Ascent

Oh – and before you can say lock-in and email spam, you should know that not only did I buy something else from Ascent two days ago, I have also purchased several expensive items from them over the years. Each time I just go through a normal checkout process. What I am trying to say is that it is not being registered that increases loyalty, it’s the site usability and the service. And that’s clearly worth a few extra bucks.

Ascent were first recommended to me by a red headed chap at Trade Me a few years back, and I’ve since recommended Ascent to others over the years, and I also commend them to you.

From Twitter @normnz agrees – “Ascent are worth every extra penny. Their service levels are extra-ordinary” and @vavroom says “Been dealing with Ascent for years. Service is *exceptional*. Would not think about using anyone else.

This sort of word of mouth marks the difference between really successful businesses and lousy businesses.

What are you doing for your business to generate this sort of response? How do you stack up versus your competitors? Do you even know?

eBay should buy Trade Me, but they won’t

Apparently rumours are circulating about Trade Me and eBay – not that I heard about them until just now. Mod has squashed them anyway, but oh what fun. 

The problem is that eBay traditionally purchases auction sites, then brings over the content to their own site and use their own model. They struggle to see the world any other way.

Trade Me outperforms eBay, and so this approach would destroy value. Moving the site over to eBay’s version would sharply reduce listings, lower income and reduce profits  for Trade Me. Listings would drop as members are confronted with eBay’s Byzantine systems, income would drop as sales drop due to the same and gross profit would get eaten as the spend on advertising goes way up.

It gets worse. eBay doesn’t understand the motors and property markets, whereas Trade Me has succeeded, while Jobs is something that they are also nowhere near. Don’t even start me on selling advertising.

So Trade Me was, and is, more valuable to a financial or media purchaser than to eBay.

Fairfax, a media purchaser, kept Trade Me at arms length since purchase – allowing the business to continue to develop along some pretty impressive curves.

The results are obvious – today Trade Me has 1.19m listings in NZ and eBay Australia has just 1.16m items located in Australia. That’s right – there are more items for sale in NZ than Australia, and that’s a country with well over five times NZ’s population.

But wait. If eBay are smart then they would see Trade Me as an opportunity to improve their own businesses around the world. 

While the list of things that I would do if in charge of eBay has been covered before, I have to confess that buying Trade Me was not on the list – and it absolutely should be, and I’d pay a lot for it.

But after the purchase what should eBay do?

They should leave Trade Me alone, and not tell them how to do anything. Instead, I’d help the rest of the eBay organisation learn as much as they can from Trade Me’s success. 

I’d send people from eBay’s senior development team to Trade Me – to work under the direction of Trade Me staff – and to do really entry level stuff. They can learn, and spread the word to the rest of eBay.

I’d send Trade Me senior staff over to the US, to spread their message of simplicity and usability.

Then time for some fun – I’d replace eBay’s Australian site with Trade Me’s platform. This is a massive migration, but the listing numbers alone say that something is seriously sick with eBay Australia. Let’s see how that goes, and it everything goes well, then start hitting other smaller markets.

And so on.

But is eBay smart enough to pay enough for Trade Me?  I think not.

The reasons Ferrit failed

Ferrit’s failure has been tipped enough times in these pages – so to make it easy here are the main posts over the past 2 years.

I believe that Ferrit failed for three main reasons:

  1. Very poor usability, with the site proving far too difficult to use, especially at launch. This turned away customers, and in particular the early adopter web community.
  2. Very high costs – showcased by an expensive advertising campaign, but also due to outsourcing other critical parts of the business and it seems the general lack of a cost culture. The advertising driven growth was unsustainably expensive and seemed (especially at first) to be wonderfully misguided.
  3. Poor business case – the value proposition to customers and suppliers didn’t ever really make sense. Customers could just go directly to retailer’s websites, while retailers were paying Ferrit for a percentage of their sales, when again they could just use their own websites.

All this was done in the context of Trade Me’s vast presence in the online retail space in New Zealand. I’m still not sure that Ferrit understood that Trade Me was a competitor, with new products accounting for about 50% of their listings.

NZHerald’s Adam Bennett quotes me saying the same in Ferrit’s failure tipped by industry. Forsyth Barr telco analyst Guy Hallwright is quoted as saying that Ferrit was so small that it took time for Paul Reynolds to pay attention. I think that is pretty close – though Ferrit was given a chance to shine over the 2008 Christmas shopping period first. In the scheme of things Ferrit is tiny and a distraction for Telecom.

“Telecom yesterday refused to say how much it had sunk into the business overall”

I’d be pretty embarrassed as well.

Here are the litany of posts about Ferrit – it’s been an entertaining ride. They are in reverse chronological order.

[Dec 15, 2008] Organic Torpedo7 beats inept inorganic Ferrit why a great website and slow, steady word of mouth is better than a lousy website and  millions on advertising.

[Nov 3, 2008] Paul Reynolds on Ferrit Paul answers two questions from Geekzone about Ferrit, sidestepping the question about profitability. I also question the quoted foreign online percentage of sales statistics – the share of online sales in the USA, for example, is only 3.3%. Meanwhile Trade Me’s gross merchandise sales are probably being under-estimated in NZ estimates of online sales

[Jul 24, 2008] Ferrit beaten by who? Torpedo7, that’s who Where specialty store Torpedo7 first comes to my attention after matching Telecom’s Ferrit in some Netratings statistics. It was a poor showing for Ferrit.

[Nov 16, 2007] How to manage your company’s online reputation Which praises Ferrit for responding directly to previous critical posts.

[Jun 19, 2007] Ferrit – ‘quality not quantity’ and [Jun 21, 2007] More on Ferrit Quality responding to a “puff piece” on Ferrit which did release some quotes, such as “says the company spends one third of its budget on IT and software development, one third on marketing and the other third on business operations.” That was telling given the huge amount that was obviously being spent on advertising.

[Jun 14, 2007] Ferrit’s Sale discussing the 20% off sale, which I thought was a “pretty good promotion, as it drives people to actually do a transaction, rather than just to visit the website.” However sadly the execution was poor due to poor usability – there are screenshots of how poor Ferrit was versus Trade Me and Apple.co.nz.

The 20% off sale was tipped in [March 17, 2007] Ferrit – 2 unsubstantiated rumours…., which also tipped that Telecom staff had received Christmas shopping period discounts on Ferrit – great for traffic. “It is obviously better to slowly build based on word of mouth and minimal advertising – like Trade Me, or Plan HQ (congrats on the launch chaps). Of course word of mouth only works if your site and business model is actually half decent.”

[Jun 5, 2007] NZ Retail stats: How is Ferrit doing? Not so well – this stats-full post showed that Ferrit’s traffic growth driven by advertising was less than Trade Me’s organic growth – this when Trade Me was pretty mature as well.

[Mar 29, 2007] Random Photos: Ferrit, Sydney, Fairfax, boats has a photo of the outside of Ferrit’s plush office. Not exactly frugal. (This was taken from a Fairfax Media office in Auckland. I was acting Head of Fairfax Digital at the time)

[Mar 2, 2007] Who on earth is designerexposure? well they “beat Ferrit into second biggest retailer spot” back in February 2007.

[Feb 22, 2007] Ferrit as a price comparison engine – not good pointing out that Ferrit wasn’t doing well versus price scanning competitors. I also defend the number of Ferrit posts in this blog, saying “I guess I am just expressing the frustration that those of us in the business and the internet industries are feeling as we watch a partially Government owned company invest and reinvest in a seemingly pointless endeavor.”

[Feb 20, 2007] Ferrit – $36m flushed… Talked about the implications of this quote  “Mr Brayham says Telecom expects to spend about $12 million on Ferrit in the next financial year, matching its contribution for the past two years.” I summed it up as “there simply is no way to make the numbers work.”

[Feb 20, 2007] Ferrit – It’s worse than I thought This post tried to get behind quoted December 2006 sales numbers, which were pretty poor: “Firstly only 1.2% of the visitors in December bought anything, secondly Ferrit makes “between 4% and 8%” of each sale. (Let’s be nice and say an average of 6%).  Thirdly the average order size was “more than $100″. Let’s call it $110.”
Peter Wogan, head of Marketing at Ferrit, responded to this post. “The original business plan was (and still is) to provide an online shopping option for new goods for Kiwis, believing that New Zealand in time won’t be much different to the rest of the world who are spending more and more online. Telecom is committed to the business long term and the payback will be over several years – probably somewhere between three and five. Our costs are right on track. We were a few weeks late launching Phase II but we’re happy with sales progress so far. You bagged us about the revenue we have generated since we started as a business, but we have only been generating revenue for 14 weeks (also in the business plan). If we don’t meet our targets then we work out what we did wrong and do something about it. We’re as accountable as any business.”

[Feb 19, 2007] Online retail: Ferrit sinks Where I pushed the numbers farther: “Ferrit’s Unique Browsers have also dropped away post Christmas [2006]. Given that Ferrit is on record as saying that 2% of visitors buy something, that’s an estimated 1,600 buyers in the first half of Feb (to the 15th), or 108 per day. Call it 3,500 buyers per month, at an average of say $10 revenue per buyer (I made the $10 figure up, but the average sale price is most likely between $80 and $120 from the comments in the blog entry linked above). That’s $35,000 per month in income.
With 40-60(?) people to support and the huge advertising budget this dog still does not hunt.
When will Telecom wake up?

[Dec 18, 2006] Ferrit. Incompetent. #3 Where I tried to work out the value of each customer required given the very high levels of advertising spend. It was not good. “If a customer costs $20,000 to acquire then they would have to spend $400,000 to $660,000 each on Ferrit (@5% take rate) for Ferrit to make their money back. Before discounting for time value.”

[Dec 18, 2006] Ferrit. Incompetent #2 where I am a bit scathing of an NZ Herald article that is pretty soft on Ferrit, and also a bit scathing of Ferrit itself, and (my apologies) Ralph Brayham.
“In another article from the Herald, we see a classic quote from hapless Ferrit boss Ralph Brayham, who says that he “estimates that currently only about 0.3 per cent of spending [in NZ] is done online…”

Actually, as later in the article shows, NZ has about $1.5bn worth of online retail sales each year and as the article also points out, $60bn of total retail sales. That’s 2.5% Ralph – you are out by about an order of magnitude.”

[Dec 18, 2008] Ferrit. Incompetent The post that started it all off. I quite liked the title so I used it two more times. The incompetence was fairly mild – wrong spelling in an online advertisement. I guess getting the basics right is everything.

The top one thing to change at eBay

A while back I posted a list of the top 10 things eBay could do to improve: Top 10 things to change at eBay

I now believe I missed the most important one: 

0: Introduce auto-extend on auctions. 

Auto-extend makes the auction last for, say, 30 seconds longer each time a new bid is received. Trade Me does this. It will kill the practise of sniping and make the auction site a level  playing ground again. Right now the advantage is to those that use sniping tools and the auction experience is lousy.

My current next three are from the previous list. 

1: Sell PayPal (and allow Google Checkout)

–> greater velocity of sales, greater trust, money in the bank

2: Charge for Skype use

–> immediate revenue lift from a captured market

3: Simplify and reduce all marketplace fees

–>increase in Gross Merchandise Volume, particularly from smaller sellers

Trade Me has added at least $3 billion to the NZ economy

A persistent, err, troll over at Bernard Hickey’s blog post on Trade Me and Australia asks an interesting question: 

“How is Trade Me a productive NZ asset?

The answer requires just a little bit of economics, and it is really quite amazing.

First – Trade Me sold for $750m, and the money was paid to New Zealand shareholders. So you can easily say they created $750m of economic value for those shareholders. Many of those shareholders are now investing their time and wealth in new businesses or charities based in New Zealand, and so the economic value creation goes on.  (1)

Second, Trade Me has build a new marketplace, creating value for new buyers and sellers. Let’s look at the (estimated) 50% of goods that sell on Trade Me that are second hand. 

We have 540,000 more Listings each week  

Trade Me has 1.24 million listings right now, implying that they have about 600,000 2nd hand items for sale. (2) The default action period is 7 days, so let’s assume that there are 600,000 second hand items listed each week. 

Before Trade Me the market was found in the free classified listings newspapers – Trade & Exchange. I’m estimating that the free newspaper classifieds had, in their heyday, about 20,000 listings per big regional paper, and they had say 3 equivalent big regional papers.(3) That’s about 60,000 listings each week. 

We have $5m more sales each week

Let’s assume that the Trade Me and old time newspaper listings sell at the same sell through rate of 25%.(4)  Therefore under the newspaper regime we had 25% x 60,000 = 15,000 items sell each week, and with Trade Me we have 150,000 items selling each week.  That means New Zealanders are now buying and selling 135,000 more items between each other than we used to. If the average sale price is $50 (excluding cars etc.) then that’s $6.75m per week of additional 2nd hand trade.

That second hand trade was not happening before, so where was it in the past? I suggest that the items that are now being sold were then sold in garage sales, or given away or thrown away – either immediately, or eventually. Mostly I suspect they were thrown away or sold for almost nothing at a garage sale. Let’s say $1.75m worth was given away or sold far too cheaply in garage sales (5) each week, leaving $5m per week of items that would otherwise have been thrown away.  

That $5m per week is say $250m (6) each year of revenue that is going to the former owners of those items – money that they would not have received before Trade Me existed. 

Moreover that $250m is an increase in recycling of items in New Zealand. That’s pretty impressive.

$250m a year is about $2 to 3.5 billion of net present value to New Zealand, depending on how you value the future flows. Add that to the $750m (7) from the sale and Trade Me has added $2.75-$4.25 billion to the New Zealand economy – let’s call it “at least $3 billion” in net present value. What’s particularly great is that all of this money has gone to household rather than big businesses.

But there is more.

Third – Trade Me lessens deadweight loss

Trade Me offers a much clear marketplace than the old car magazines (auotrader) and newspapers. We dealt with the newspaper market above, but the car market is a different story.

With Trade Me the number of people viewing each car advertisement has risen significantly versus Autotrader’s magazines, and the quality of those advertisement has also improved. Also viewers of that advertisement are able to compare all other listings for that same model of car (including recent historical listings) and can therefore derive a much better market price.

The market price is much more informed (closer to “perfect”), and so buyers are less likely to over pay, and sellers are more likely to receive a fair price. Thus Trade Me is removing distortion in the marketplace, and that distortion was economic loss. I’m not going to attempt to value that economic loss difference (or that for property), but I suspect it would be a figure on par with the $3 billion above.  

We have also not considered the new goods selling without rental and other overheads, the reduction in advertising costs and the ability for small businesses to form and start selling quickly and profitably.

What do you think? What is missing?  

Notes under the fold Continue reading ‘Trade Me has added at least $3 billion to the NZ economy’

Trade Me trounces eBay, and eBay is in real trouble

The evidence mounts against eBay, as they continue to cast away their franchise. It’s really sad to see this happen as they naturally own their space and should be unassailable if they were playing it right.

They are not.

Over the years the site has increased in complexity and decreased in humanity, until the community feels obliterated and the only sellers are the larger professional ones.

In New Zealand Trade Me’s strategy is to keep things simple and focus on the person to person transactions. That is working.

Auction and classified sites make money by attracting visitors, turning those visitors into members, turning thse members into sellers that list items, selling those items and collecting a percentage of the value of thise items listed and sold. eBay is losing visitors and is lagging in items for sale.

Let’s look at two data points to back up the decline of eBay.

1: Pageviews: This disturbing chart came via Auctionbytes, and shows a 30% drop in US page impressions from last October to this October. That’s a massive sign of an unhealthy marketplace.

2: Listings Today eBay Australia has 1,113,647 listings located in Australia, eBay.com has 25.2m listings located in the USA while Trade Me has 1,255,082 listings in NZ. (That’s right, there are more actual listings on Trade Me than on eBay Australia.)

That’s 55 listings per 1000 Australians, 84 per 1000 US citizens and 305 listings per 1000 New Zealanders. That’s astonishing - 5.6 times difference between Nz and Australia, and 3.6 times between NZ and USA.

Now we do need to adjust for the critical difference – eBay charges listing fees while Trade Me does not. We used to say (and observe) that free listings sites attract 2 time the listings of non-free ones. That would still leave Trade Me at 152 listings per person – 2.8 times more than eBay Australia and 1.7 times more than eBay.com USA.

Go Trade Me. What’s going on?

To me the differences are the business versus personal focus, the advertising mentality and usability.

Business versus Personal

eBay’s listings skew strongly to the biggest sellers, who essentially run giant shops on eBay’s site. Over the years eBay has increasingly pandered to these sellers and the result is a giant shopping mall rather than a person to person market.

That has meant they are vulnerable to increasingly competent competition from Amazon & Yahoo stores, and from sellers’ own online stores. Traffic to those stores is increasingly via Google, and so the need for a single marketplace is slowly fading away.

The focus on businesses has also left eBay vulnerable to the economic downturn. This is a travesty as the auction model should weather storms better than almost any other retail. (e.g. beer and flour will do well). In tough times people should increasingly turn to auction sites to sell their unwanted goods and to buy second hand goods rather than new.

As eBay has increasingly disenfranchised the individual sellers in favour of the giant sellers they are being perceived as a store rather than a marketplace. Thus they are treated like all the other stores when ties are tough, and sales suffer.

Meanwhile the giant sellers are finding that other stores, including their own, offer far cheaper alternatives to eBay for selling. eBay has steadily increased fees over the years for both the site and PayPal, creeping up their take rate to unsustainable levels. The big sellers are not that upset to see eBay die as they have other alternatives away from the former dominant marketplace.

Advertising mentality

eBay is desperately trying to capture some of that disappearing traffic with a vast array of Google ads, and traditional media ads. Actually they spend about a third of their gross profit on marketing, while Trade Me spends nothing – relying on organic growth.

As a result people go to eBay via advertisements to buy things from the big sellers, and go to Trade Me because it is the marketplace where they buy and sell things. eBay’s formula is doubly vulnerable as other shops can simply place their own advertisements and steal the customers.

Usability

eBay’s sites are enormous, and they are complicated and difficult to navigate and use. Meanwhile Trade Me has managed to maintain the essential simpleness and usability, with a the cartoon-like nature.

eBay.com’s increasing push for “fraud protection” to the critically flawed Paypal payment system has made it harder to buy, and harder for sellers to guarantee they will get their money. With Trade Me payments are via bank to bank deposit, or, increasingly, direct credit card transaction.

Meanwhile eBay has scores of MBA’s/product managers/marketers that all, it seems, want to expand features. That means the site (feels like it) has no single owner, and the resulting complex mess is a travesty..

Meanwhile eBay has, it seems, wildly over optimised the site for Google, and lost something along the way. e.g. Look at the page title of the eBay.com.au page displaying the results of a search for all items based in Australia:
eBay page header

I have no idea what this mens, but I didn’t come to eBay to buy women or men.

I could go on at some length on the usability differences between the sites, but I will not. There are not too many people that use both sites, but I encourage you to just try listing an item on eBay, and then try listing one on Trade Me. The difference is stark.

LanceWiggs marketing effectiveness is 97.9th percentile

Well apparently that’s an indication of the marketing effectiveness of LanceWiggs.com versus the “hundreds of thousands” of other ranked websites on Hubspot’s website grader. It’s a pretty lousy measure, truth be told, as Trade Me scores lower at 96.3% and Stuff gets just 95.3%.

More interestingly it provides bit more detail about sites’ marketing effectiveness. E.g. apparently there are no meta data description or meta data keywords on this site.

The (front page of this) site scored a readability level of Secondary/High School. That’s good – there’s no need to make complicated things difficult to read, nor to make simple things difficult to read. Trade Me also scores Secondary High school, but to read Stuff apparently you need to have an Advanced / Doctoral Degree. There are a lot of smart educated Kiwis it seems – I need to up the ante.

Also I have no entries in the DMOZ, Yahoo! or Zoominfo directories. Who uses those anyway, but I guess I can have a look. The Yahoo one costs $300 to make a submission – no thanks.

Apparently reading a blog in the top 0.12% of the blogosphere – which doesn’t say much as that’s a Technorati rank of 82,331. I’m yet to be Dugg, barely del.icio.us and bloglines reports no RSS feed subscribers (not close to being true)

I put Rowan’s blog in as a “competing” website, and here’s the result. It seems I’m a better marketer while Rowan gets a lot more traffic – mmm.
RowanSimpson

Far more interesting are the Trade Me versus eBay.co.nz and the Stuff versus NZHerald results. We all know Trade Me is dominant in New Zealand, but this shows how poor eBay is.
websitegrader
Stuff and NZHerald continue to be neck and neck, though Stuff is showing a lot more depth these days.
websitegrader

Try it out on your favorite sites – don’t worry about putting in an email address, you’ll get a report regardless.:

Paul Reynolds on Ferrit

The nationwide embarrassment. The site we love to, err, dislike. Ferrit.

Paul Reynolds answered two questions on Ferrit (they were not mine but from BarnacleBarnes). How did he do?

Ferrit
Q. One word: Ferrit. With an investment north of $30 million dollars and traffic that is less than a deal-a day site and only slightly more than a shop selling parallel imported sports gear how can Telecom keep supporting Ferrit?

Dr Paul Reynolds: Telecom is investing in Ferrit as part of a longer term strategy. The growth and potential revenue opportunities from online retail and for Telecom are significant if New Zealand follows trends in the US and UK. In the UK online retail is in excess of 15% of all retail and is expected to grow an additional 50% this year. By helping to develop New Zealand’s online retail market from around 1% to US/UK levels, Ferrit believes it can establish itself as a valued partner to help bring a large portion of New Zealand retailers online in a trusted one-stop online retail mall for consumers. A key challenge to achieving this goal is educating New Zealand retailers (other than the handful who already do online exceptionally well) about what is needed to succeed online and providing tools to help them do this.

Q. With a charging structure that can hardly bring in much cash at current traffic levels and no sign of any forward momentum it doesn’t seem to add up. I would be really interested to know how you think Telecom can make Ferrit profitable in the medium term.

Dr Paul Reynolds: By helping equip New Zealand retailers to succeed online, Telecom helps open up worldwide retail opportunities for these retailers, as well as helping them effectively compete with overseas sites who have invested millions if not billions of dollars on their online capability and who are quickly growing their share of New Zealand retail spend (at the expense of New Zealand bricks and mortar businesses).

The one thing Dr. Reynolds did not answer was the question of profitability, and probably with good reason. Dr. Reynolds does say three things:

1: Potential retail revenue for NZ & Telecom is strong if NZ follows trends in USA and UK

2: Educating NZ Retailers is the key challenge to getting from 1% to 15% of all retail online

3: Ferrit will help NZ Retailers sell to the world by “equiping NZ retailers to sell online”

I have a different point of view.

Firstly, the potential revenue question. I agree that the online market in NZ is, Trade Me aside, poor.There is no Amazon, no Best Buy, no Yahoo shops and so forth. However Trade Me is a standout – delivering far beyond eBay would be, including elements of Amazon, match.com, along with the  motors, property and jobs sites.

On the number side I find the online share of retail sales in the USA, according to to US Census Bureau, to be just 3.3%. That excludes “Online travel services, financial brokers and dealers, and ticket sales agencies” which are are not classified as retail. Notwithstanding the popularity of sites such as Amazon and eBay this feels about right. It’s just numbers though, and as long as we stay consistent then that’s ok.

Estimated Quarterly U.S. Retail E-commerce Sales as a Percent of Total Quarterly Retail Sales:
4th Quarter 1999–2nd Quarter 2008: Source Census Bureau
4th Quarter 1999–2nd Quarter 2008

Secondly in NZ we are not doing so badly. Trade Me has 1.23 million items for sale right now. If the average time to sell is a week, average sale price is $60 and sell through rate is 20% (all top of head without looking at any real numbers) then Trade Me has about $64m in sales each month, or $770m per year. That’s excluding cars (55,000 cars listed, at say $12000 each and say 3 months to sell that’s $220m per month) and Property (57000 @ say 400,000 and 4 months = $5.7 billion per month).

The last twelve months NZ rolling retail sales were about $66 billion (Stats.govt.nz), or $58 billion excluding motor vehicles. At $770m Trade Me there for would have about 1.3% of NZ’s non motor vehicle retail. At ($770m+$220m*12 = $3.41 billion) Trade Me would have 5.2% of total NZ retail spending including motor vehicles. Both are staggering numbers. How much is Ferrit selling?

Meanwhile my guess is that if we include air travel in the stats then much of it (80%+) will be through online, lifting the overall online sales percentage even higher.

Thirdly, Ferrit is not really equipping NZ Retailers to sell online, nor educating them, nor competing overseas. The retailers should ideally be  putting up their own sites and marketing to the world, but they are trapped behind Ferrit’s branding and technology. Ferrit does not offer shipping outside of New Zealand so there is no international sales potential. It would retailers much more good to not only create their own site, but also to get on eBay, Amazon or Yahoo! shops for international sales and of course Trade Me for domestic sales.

Happily there are plenty of other efforts going on in New Zealand to help eCommerce aside from Trade Me – Torpedo7 shows how it can be done, Silverstripe provides free tools, FishPond is grabbing the Amazon space, there are some great design firms, excellent search and SEO companies and even Telecom has been doing some good things.

We are seeing some interesting stirrings at Telecom. Fixing Ferrit will be a sign that things have really changed.

Next Page »


Kiwis - Get $20 of free Electricity! from FlowerPower at Powershop. Sign up

Tweets

History

 Subscribe in another RSS reader

Disclaimer These opinions are my own, and not that of any of my current or former clients.