|
I would like to thank each of those who took the time to respond
to our question about why we rated so low in the latest FIP Web Site Evaluation.
I thought you might be interested in the responses. The folowing is the announcement
we made in one of our recent emails. The resulting comments follow.
------- From the "Bang Your Own Drum" Department....
People usually brag about their awards, but they never mention when they
don't do so well. In the latest 2001 FIP Philatelic Web Site Evaluation,
StampAuctionNetwork was rated at the bottom of the pile, under "Six sites
that fell below the criteria for a 2-star site". Sites were rated as
follows:
40% - Treatment of contents - Presentation, Clarity, Easy to find,
Navigation,
graphics, user-friendly, usability of the links.
40% - Originality, Significance, depth of research - Content, how useful
is the site philatelically? As a reference? Teaching? Training? Original?
Up to Date? How greatly would it be misssed?
15% - Technical Matters - Easy to identify the webmaster? Who sponsors
the > site? Links up to date? Credit and proper attibution given?
5% - Presentation - Overall esthetic appeal. Excessively bloated? Slow
Loading? Frequent interruptions and "clutter" due to advertising.
Since we fared so poorly. I ask you, Are we doing something wrong?
The Good Feedback
I for one, do not think you are doing so badly. I have used your site on
many occasions during the last six months, and always to my full satisfation.
Just who are the "FIP Philatelic Web Site Evaluators" and what do they
know anyway? I think you guys are doing a creditible job and I, for one,
have no complaints. We'll still do business and I'll still refer to your web
site from time to time for help.
I've always found your site very informative and helpful. Who can ask for anything more? It may not be the most attractive web site, but it
sure relays the desired information. Who was responsible for this rating? Surely, not users like me.
Here's a vote of confidence.... keep up the good work!
In fullest support of StampAuctionNetwork....
Since we fared so poorly. I ask you, Are we doing something wrong?
NO, NO, NO.
1) You provide one of the best philatelic services on the web.
2) Communication and presentation are superb.
3) It is elegant in its' design and use (read: it is simple to use).
3) It is invaluable. I use it every single day.
4) It is the only tool on the web that keeps me in touch with top-tier
philatelic vendors.
I noticed the FIP awards when they came out, and to be honest I was pretty
surprised to see you ranked so low. I think you are doing a great job.....
As a user of your site. I think it works very well and does what is suppose
to very well. I wouldn't change anything. In my opinion those guys are
full of ----.
Hi and how are you doing? I have read your email and I do not think you
are doing anything wrong. I like your site very much and it is very easy
to use. I have bought many items to fill holes in my collection. I will
continue to do so in the future.
I just wanted to tell you to keep up the good work and I am one who does
not believe in those ratings.
I like your site. Have used it often to help expand my stamp collection.
Would suggest you emphasize the "search and bid" feature more for newer
users. You should also encourage stamp dealers to use photographs for
all their lots. SAN is not as easy to use as eBay but if one takes the
time to read the directions SAN is neither hard or difficult to use.
You have a fine site - second only to eBay in the online stamp auction
world. Keep up the good work.
I appreciate very much your "heads up" on new auctions -- it saves customers
from subscription fees and expenses to auction houses which have to be passed
along to users and customers.
Your site is adequate to give me access to what I need. I prefer sites that
are TOOLS to be focused on efficiency of access and streamlined operation.
You won't be able to compete with REFERENCE sites who are expected to be
rich, exciting and ever-changing.
Bottom line: don't listen to FIP, listen to your customers. Giving them
periodic encouragement to sound off is probably more useful than a report
card from FIP, since FIP is comparing apples and oranges IMHO.
I don't know that I would worry too much about being in the top. I would be
lost without SAN regarding what is coming, going and prices realized on
individual lots etc.in those sales where I do not get a catalog or use an
agent. I view your site as an information compilation site, versus a sales
site. In other words there are no whistles, colors, bold headlines and
other jazzy marketing gimmicks. Siegel's, Jackson's, Lee's and similar
sites are wonderful sites, but I believe they serve a different purpose.
They are geared towards sales and/or specialized information such as census
figures etc, revenues, proofs and essays etc and thus would have a higher
rating regarding what they are doing than SAN. The information in SAN is
available elsewhere (kinda'), but the ability to search SAN, obtain prices
realized, links to available catalogs, etc are not readily available other
places. Nuff said. You're doing great! Hang in there.
Other than the issue about the red and green color, everyone I know that
uses SAN likes it a lot. I believe the problem is not with the website,
but with the criteria used to rate the websites. Forty per cent of the
rating has to do with originality, significance, depth of research, etc.
I don't believe the purpose of the SAN website is to provide this sort
of thing. It is primarily a single-site reference to bid on several
auctions at once, and it does that quite well. This is sort of like
trying to rate a Corvette against SUV's, when the rating criteria
include fording of rivers, and so forth. The Corvette is very good at
what it is, but it will never get a good rating when the inappropriate
criteria are used.
I think you are doing great. Another criteria for me would be responsiveness. I have sent you two
questions and received very prompt responses from you. Finally, I appreciate your asking your customer
base this question - it shows a willingness to accept criticism and desire to improve that I laud.
Please feel free to pass this along...
Sorry about your showing on the 2001 FIP.
First, I wouldn't even worry about it. Your site is easy to use and has
been of great benefit for me as well as your list of auction houses. I have
been introduced to several houses that I had not done business with in the
past, with excellent results.
Second, if you note the catagories and their respective ratings, it is the
2nd catagory where you would lose a lot of "points" as you are not an
educational or archival-type site. I personally would prefer that you not
change that concept.
Third, since the FiP has elected not to catagorize the true benefits of
your site: prompt auction results, true ability to bid up to a given price
(without setting the price) and good communications, to name a few; you will
probably not be able to do much better with their scoring system unless you
built the site to fit their points (PLEASE DON'T).
(APS accredited judge)
For what your site is, it's just fine. Keep on truckin'
I love your website; I particularly like the fact that all the major
auctions are in one place. I wish all the sites had a search capability,
but I think you are doing a great job.
Personally, I find your site very comfortable to use. Perhaps the raters
were looking for something less commercial. But if you changed to something
else, I couldn't use you to buy stamps for my collection.
About the FIP competition, if you really are interested in breaking into the
top group I recommend you contact ... At some level,
whether it is on a consulting basis or actually doing the html input, a
professional web designer will make a big difference.
You have a nice site. It could have a better navigation system but it loads
nicely, it is uncluttered and it does the job of delivering auction news.
Your biggest challenge is going to be in the significance category, I think.
There are a number of sites competing with yours to get out the same
information so if your site went out of operation, other sites would fill
the void of delivering on-line auction service. To get more points in this
category (as Siegel has done with it's encyclopedia) you might consider
adding a section analyzing something hard to find but relevant to stamp
collecting or postal history.
You´re not doing anything wrong.
Whatever you lack in design, Java scripts and other fancy stuff
is accounted for by your easy, no-nonsense presentation.
I want to check what´s on sale from Romania,
it takes me very little time to check that with a couple of auctions.
That´s all I need and you supply it good.
Keep up the good work!
I don't know about your website, but the E-mail list has been very helpful
and useful. It has good information, but does not have the funny fonts and
attachments that can be a problem with E-mail. It also doesn't come with
piles of adverts, pop-up boxes, and graphics. Most appreciated.
Don't feel bad: the wrong folks are evaluating the wrong site with the wrong
criteria.
I have seen and tried a variety of websites for stamp auction bidding. Yours is
the best, in my opinion. Different companies apparently sign up for different
capabilities offered by your site. Shreves, for example, must sign up for the
top-of-the-line treatment, and it is a pleasure to bid in their auctions: big,
clear pictures; full descriptions; and instantaneous gratification regarding
whether I'm "currently the high bidder" or not.
In looking at the FIP folks' criteria, it's clear that few of them relate to
business. So why are you bothered? Your site helps auction businesses by making
available something usable to bidders. I can navigate quickly. I can get
pictures quickly. It's easy to browse for the things I want--I get just the right
amount of random access. The descriptions are the same that I can get in a
catalog--only quicker! The info on other bidders "so far" is clear and tells me
where I stand or what I need to do to get into the action. There's no junk from
other sites intruding on my thinking. With all that said, their first category
(40%) and last category (5%) come closest to being a set of valid criteria for
evaluating your site.
The other 55% is not applicable to you: in a word, it's a bunch of academic
crap. I don't come to your site to be trained or taught, and your "originality"
is not of interest. And I suppose it's important to be able to "contact the
webmaster" but frankly, I'm more interested in talking to someone who can answer
my questions (in this case, "the boss") who may or may not be a java guru..
If they want to evaluate a business site, they should use the right criteria. If
they want to evaluate educational sites or informational sites, they should leave
you out.
DEAR TOM: I AM A BIT MYSTIFIED AS TO WHY YOU GOT SUCH A BAD REVIEW. THE
FACT IS, YOU PROVIDE A VALUABLE SERVICE THAT NO ONE ELSE HAS PROVIDED
BEFORE OR SINCE YOU BEGAN. FURTHERMORE, YOUR SERVICE ACTUALLY WORKS. Many
of the problems that I suspect you were "dinged" for are the kinds of
problems that gradually get eliminated with time. Here is my own brief
review:
Strengths:
1. Photos, when they are provided, are often better than the ones in the
actual catalogs.
2. You get quick notification of new auctions.
3. You get the content of catalogues that you don't normally subscribe
to.
4. You get to bid on-line.
5. You get prices realized
6. You register once for a bunch of auction firms
7. There is an archive of past auctions that you can refer back to.
8. The server seems reasonably fast
9. At its best, the "table of contents" of each auction allow you to
quickly pinpoint where the lots are that you might be interested in.
Weaknesses:
1. Not all of the auctions have photos of the lots (obviously, the
catalogs don't either)
2. Some ot the "table of contents" contain headings that are repetitious
(e.g. Jim Forte) or misleading (e.g. sometimes postal history is scattered
throughout a section that is called "stamps" Again this probably reflects
the organization -- or disorganization -- of the catalog)
3. Some firms never publish their prices realized
4. The current high bid doesn't seem to get updated very often and in
some auctions (e.g. Nutmeg) never appears at all (or looks suspiciously
like a starting price set by the auction firm)
Any way, I think you might be more discouraged than you should be over the
review. The key issue is whether user volume is meeting the milestones in
your business plan. And I think that soliciting suggestions from your
users is always a good thing. Anyway, I'm glad you guys are around.
On a personal basis, i find the SAN very useful, I have been put in touch with some US auction houses that I would not have normally come into
contact with, and therefore been able to participate with some success. Although my actual purchases have not been numerous YET ! I have
been very pleased with the items i was successful with.
The marking process below looks more like an international exhibition marking system,
personally,
40% - Treatment of contents - Presentation, Clarity, Easy to find, Navigation,
graphics, user-friendly, usability of the links.
30-35%, easy to find a site, therefore user friendly, treatment of contents, a fair an accurate summary of each auction, is given.... usability of the
links ALL OK - SO WHAT IS THIS FIP BODY LOOKING FOR???
40% - Originality, Significance, depth of research - Content, how useful is
the site philatelically? As a reference? Teaching? Training? Original?
Up to Date? How greatly would it be misssed?
never going to score greatly here -
originality - ok plenty of auction sites around, but with good houses subscribing - this is what the philatelist wants.
significance - HIGH - providing a global platform to both auctioneers and buyers alike, thus providing new markets which would have been
previously unavailable.
depth of research - not really applicable,
philatelic use - reference,teaching,original,up to date - difficult, but personally it does give me a good idea of the market values placed upon
quality material across the water in the US.
How greatly would it be missed - either i wouldn't be trading with these auction houses, or it would cost me a fortune in getting catalogues. -
therefore YES it would be missed
mark - 20/40
15% - Technical Matters - Easy to identify the webmaster? Who sponsors the
site? Links up to date? Credit and proper attibution given?
Self explanatory really - all links up to date, the rest irrelevant
7.5/15
5% - Presentation - Overall esthetic appeal. Excessively bloated? Slow
Loading? Frequent interruptions and "clutter" due to advertising.
ok - maybe a bit more colour or pic's, but no clutter, no grotty pop up adverts, which take ages to close down.
My only real criticism is that some (well one) offer the same goods over and over again, with the quality lacking considerably.
But for the website, some descriptions are a little lengthy.
3/5 total 32+20+7.5+3 = 62.5/100
I can find no way to adequately express my dismay at the FIP's latest faux
pas -- except to tell them to stick their stars where they won't shine! You
sell stamps and you do it very well, not just for yourself but for some of
the other biggest and best philatelic firms in the US. I too admire the
Siegel site but to require you to match their efforts while maintaining your
volume is about what I'd expect from those elitist *%(^@!! Forget 'em and
now let me at that new Apfelbaum sale.
Its obvious the standard used in judging is not applicable to stamp auction
network. Your site provides an excellent service to the serious collector
at a savings to both the auction houses and the user.
Thanks for info you sent out general to all.
Your site works super for me.
No extraneous colors, flashing gizmos etc.
Who wants to see ads when the auction houses
are already carrying the freight for your site.
If a company wants you to place an ad for them;
then you can place it in same manner you list the auction,
that is... attached the link same as auction link is set up.
However your site is recognized by searchers for what it does
...list auctions with direct link to them.
5 stars from me for your site.
This site works quite well.
WELL DONE.
Giving your site a low rating is ridiculous. They obviously want bells and whistles rather than timely
information. I regard you as without peer for informing the interested public about philatelic
opportunities. Please feel free to forward this to whomever.
The loudest statement of the quality of your service is the ease and
confidence with which you advertise lousy reviews. Bully for you.
This sounds like a "Damned if you do..." situation. I find this the best
online auction site on the web. When I want to find quality items from
great auction houses, this is the first place I look. I think the site
is great. Some people might think it has too much of this or too little
of that... Do they bid here? Do they use the site? Probably NOT! Just
remember the definition of a critic... Someone who puts down things they
only wish they could do (most judges are critics with a different
title). Keep up the good work. Keep your users and customers happy,
that's your first priority. Don't change things for anyone but these two
groups. Again I think the site is the best auction site on the net.
I find your website very useful, far easier to reference than auction
catalogues (which, to use an analogy, are like the card catalogues they used
to have in libraries). I realize you compile a massive amount of
information that isn't easy to manage, may I say I think you do a good job
of that while keeping a personal touch.
You have been wise to avoid the problems that come with having e.g. Java
script and Flash plug-ins. The "cosmetics" of your site are not great but
are fine with me, I will continue to use SAN because it is so accessible and
convenient.
I would suggest you archive information of past auctions by the auction
house to eliminate some of the clutter on the home page. It loads a little
slow compared to some. Keep up the good work.
To me, your site is the single most important philatelic website on the internet.
Better than Linn's, better than ebay, better than my own site.
As a dealer, your site has saved me thousands of dollars worth of subscriptions and countless hours searching through print catalogues.
And money talks. All of us dealers recognize how important your site is -- we pay to be there !!
And your site helped me find a few new customers who spent in excess of $15,000 (albiet it Canadian $) in my last sale.
The Needs to Improve Feedback
Maybe I haven't seen the other sites to compare, but I don't think I'd
judge your site so harshly. However, I would note my observation that it
seemed too many auctions which had ended were still featured. Do you plan
to more quickly remove the closed auction info? It might help eliminate
some of the "clutter."
I have been actively bidding on auctions at your site, and I have one
suggestion...you need some other method than color to tell us whether
our bid is the high bid...approximately 25% of the male population has
color blindness, including myself. Some sort of positive marking would
be better than green and red, which I cannot distinguish...
SAN: We made changes to "Show All Bids for All Firms" to help here.
Well, I am a neophyte to all of this, but let me say I have seen sites that
are one hell of a lot worse than SAN. I have bid a few times and I am never
certain if I am successful or not. There is no immediate feedback on that,
and no immediate feedback on the realized price for lots you have bid on, so
I have no way of knowing if I am competitive or unlucky. I think you are
in good shape, but improvements would be nice, don't stop now!
Thanks for the email and I thought I would respond to help us both. As you
know I collect certain British Commonwealth countries used stamps. I do
find on going through your voluminous site there is a lot I need to plough
through to get at what I really want to see. May I suggest you split the
listing into separate items to include USA, Canada, Brit Common and then
other countries. As I don't collect outside my own area that could be the
wrong way of approaching the "other" countries but you will know what you
are selling and in what quantity.
Hope this helps. You have such good quality lots it's a shame they are
difficult to reach.
I think your site should have fared better than it did. It isn't that bad;
in fact, it is pretty good.
However, I ( and I assume others) have had problems placing bids, tracking
items, loading pages with anything other than the T-1 line at the office,
etc. I have also had a dispute over shipping charges with one of your
dealers (who insists on charging full postage and handling for every lot - -
10 lots won = $40 in shipping and handling). Since many off us are
"spoiled" by the ease of using other sites, even these small glitches can
turn folks off. This is especially true in today's economy where folks just
do not have the disposable income for their hobbies like they had a few
years ago. I still browse from time-to-time and I will buy from other
dealers from time-to-time, but since you asked for feedback, here it is.
The only thing I can think of right off, is to maybe automatically include
catalogue and bidding images. Well, there is another thing, which is that
for the 'Return to Table of Contents', it would be nice if you could return
to where you left off. If I'm pressed for time, I don't scroll through the
stuff that doesn't interest me, shut down the machine, or site, and get on
with other things that need doing. It might also be helpful to automatically
send the credentials to each new house that you bring on board, rather than
for the collector to have to go through the whole process again;
I know that you've tried to streamline the process, but it still has (or had)
glitches. I pretty much like your site, and use it fairly frequently, whether I'm
bidding or not.
your site slows down when access is made to an auction index since you
automatically display all the scans in that section whether someone is
interested or not in the entire area. Usually, I am only interested in one
particular country (& a certain time frame at that).
Your site is too messy and too confusing. Your front page is too large. The auctions are of all different format with different formats. Confusing
as heck... Takes a while to load.
Your bidding system is not too logical. The interface for bidding is not straight forward.
Best test is ask someone not familiar with your site and see how long it takes them to navigate it.
Hope this is of use.
Where are you going wrong,Answer is as follows, Simply pricing and valueing
of lots,
recently "Acme Auctions" had Irish material on E-bay ,
It never sold as it was priced in access of its value.
Example I bought Irish u\m highvalue set for £99.00 on five occasions on
E-bay.
"Acme Auctions" recently had simular lots on and wanted three quarters of
catalogue which was £270.00 for the same set of stamps ,
they are simply to expensive.YOUR AUCTIONS ARE FANTASTICALLY LAID OUT
BRILLANT,
But i am afraid to say items are just to expensive,
thankyou .
Here are the things about the site....
I choose a category for an auction that is listed. The link brings me up a
page that has the category selected as well as others. This runs into my
next issue...
Pictures are shown on the listing page rather than on a "deeper" page. I
have to download all the pictures even if I'm not interested in any of
those lots. This ties in with the first issue. I choose a category and it
brings me to a position on the page but while pictures are loading, the
page jumps and I'm not at the area I was sent any longer.
I did not participate in any survey, but since you ask what could be wrong,
I would suggest that using your site to bid is not very easy to figure out.
There is nothing on a catalogue page to tell a person looking at the page
that they cannot bid on that page nor giving them any instructions on what
they have to do to place a bid. This is totally frustrating to a potential
bidder who doesn't know how your system is set up. You should have a single
page that a person uses whether bidding or not, with instructions right on
the page where the bid is to be placed on how to bid and how to register.
You have all kinds of instructions in separate places. It may make sense to
you but it is not user friendly to the consumer who doesn't want to spend
hours to try to figure out how to place a bid and who doesn't make a career
of internetting.
Also, you should insist that sellers on your site have scans of each item
being offered. Not many people who can't see what they are buying are going
to bid on an abstract catalogue number and abstract description of FVF or VF
or XF, condition terms which most vendors on the internet have watered down
to the ridiculous stage that barely Fine is now often called VF or XF.
In addition to previous response, you also need to have your site able to be
used to bid on the catalogues that you list, or have a ready address
displayed on each page so that a person who finds an item in a catalogue
which does not allow bidding can readily go to the address where a bid can
be made. Of course, it is obvious that an auction house that can get its
catalogue listed free, with a ready explanation to how to go directly to
them to bid, has no incentive to pay you for executing bids. That's a
problem for your business to address. The reality is that Siegel and
Kelleher have been around long enough and have a large enough customer list
base that they will probably never need to use your company, and that is why
I would assume one can't bid on them now through SAN and I suspect never
will in the forseeable future. (Siegel doesn't even pay the small override
charge of credit cards, so you can assume they probably won't pay any
override for using your software or letting their catalogue be published (if
they will) on SAN.) Basically, in order to be a complete network, which is
what would make your site attractive to the newcomer, you need to list all
the catalogues with ready reference to how to place a bid. If you become a
large enough gatekeeper, with enough people thinking of you first as the
place to find out where to get auction and/or retail items, then maybe at
some point you can squeeze out some margin. You might also try to get
retailer sites listed in abundance; dealers would probably more readily pay
a small override, particularly if it is less than elsewhere (such as APS's
site). Your name would then have to be something like SARN or SAARN for
Stamp Auction and Retail Network. Again, over time, if you became well
enough known as a very large gatekeeper, you might get people willing to
give you an override for the exposure that listing on your site could
provide. As a philatelist, I hope your business succeeds and survives for
many years. Good luck
|
