VCP rant

[T206.org]

To note, B&L is still listed on the homepage of VCP, under "Want List Auction Alerts".

[Leon]

Originally Posted by T206.org

To note, B&L is still listed on the homepage of VCP, under "Want List Auction Alerts".

We had VCP downloads previously but never paid before.
I don't think we want to pay a company to use our data. Other companies handle their affairs their ways. Scott nor myself have anything against VCP. I still use it and like it.

[slidekellyslide]

Let me get this straight..VCP wants your info, and they want you to pay $100 so they can have that info? That seems odd to me.

[BobbyVCP]

Originally Posted by slidekellyslide

Let me get this straight..VCP wants your info, and they want you to pay $100 so they can have that info? That seems odd to me.

It's not the info I am making reference to it is the 3500+ Want Lists our members will get notices to go to BL and bid on the auction. This is a valuable asset for any auction house to take advantage of to increase traffic and attention to items.

[joebrandon1977]

From what I am reading....

VCP wants data
B&L will give data, but...
B&L utilizes a vendor that will charge B&L $100 to turn on code
B&L isn't interested in paying for that
VCP suggests that B&L change to another vendor that will not charge
B&L is loyal to their existing vendor and is not interested in changing

End Result = Standoff with no data feed from B&L to VCP

[D. Bergin]

Originally Posted by slidekellyslide

Let me get this straight..VCP wants your info, and they want you to pay $100 so they can have that info? That seems odd to me.

It looks to me like VCP wants the info, but B&L's webhost wants to charge VCP $100 for the feed to get the info.

Looks like an issue between B&L and their webhost, not with VCP.

[smtjoy]

True and all it is doing imo is making them both look bad. I am a subscriber to VCP and I think that data is important and should be in there. I have also been a consigner to B & L and I want my lots to have as many bidders as possible and I dont like finding out they could be reaching a larger audience and are not.

This is a PR snafu for both, I really question is it worth the bad press over $100?

[glchen]

Yea, I agree that this makes everybody look real bad.

The situation is VCP wants the info and does not charge B&L for it, and provides the code for the feed for free to B&L's webhost. The webhost wants to charge $100 to turn the code on, which B&L doesn't want to pay. They also don't want to switch to a webhost that doesn't charge for this because they're happy with their current one. B&L also believes that their auction data is worth more than VCP notifying its want lists subscribers that a B&L auction has something in their want list.

[t206hound]

Originally Posted by slidekellyslide

Let me get this straight..VCP wants your info, and they want you to pay $100 so they can have that info? That seems odd to me.

+1

[Jacklitsch]

Originally Posted by slidekellyslide
Let me get this straight..VCP wants your info, and they want you to pay $100 so they can have that info? That seems odd to me.

T206Hound

+1

With all due respect Erick and Dan please read the posts. This statment is totally inaccurate.

[Abravefan11]

Originally Posted by Jacklitsch

With all due respect Erick and Dan please read the posts. This statment is totally inaccurate.

Agreed Steve. Putting the $100 fee on Bobby is misrepresenting this situation entirely. As many have already stated it looks bad for all involved that a reasonable resolution couldn't have been reached for $100 to the benefit of customers and consignors.

[Leon]

After a high level meeting this morning we have decided to continue the service. It certainly had nothing to do with the $100 in our decision. It was more principle of being asked to do something we had never done AND We didn't know it was our s/w provider that was asking for the fee as mentioned above. We will talk to Bobby about it going forward. If it helps our bidders and/or consignors then we want to do it.

[slidekellyslide]

I should have read the whole thread before responding...Seth wants the $100 to do something that will take minutes for an experienced programmer to do and both VCP and B&L will benefit from it. Perhaps VCP and B&L should split this fee then.

[steve B]

Did everyone else miss the part about Ebay changing how outside programs from licensed businesses interact with Ebay?
And that they did that without telling any of those licensed businesses.


That's why the auctions got missed, not that BINs aren't tracked.

Rewriting the software so that it then interacts properly isn't a simple task, and a couple months is a pretty short time for a software fix that requires rewriting stuff.


Leons Software guy wanting $100 to turn on a feature - a fairly quick task, maybe a few minutes if you don't know how - seems a bit expensive.
Unless there's some technical issue between the auction software and VCPs software.

Loyalty to vendors, and unwillingness to pay odd fees are very familiar things to me. My time doing Industrial work and lots of purchasing for a small company taught me a lot about that. I had some vendors I was very loyal to, and wouldn't switch to someone else. I also had a few I wouldn't deal with, to the point where I had 3-4 major corporations that wouldn't complain when I went outside a territory to buy their products because the local distributor was so difficult.

Steve Birmingham