Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : eBay - Superb Internet Business Model -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Don Edgerton who wrote (431)	10/26/1998 6:32:00 PM
From: Kevin McKenzie	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 7772

To be honest, I think Yahoo does provide person-to-person auction service. But if I were going to sell something (which I do from time to time) I would only use Ebay, because it brings in so many bidders. I would be willing to pay the commission to get Ebay's consistent viewership. Of course, if I wanted to buy something, I might check Yahoo first. However, chances are you won't find what you're looking for on Yahoo (at least not yet). As I write this Yahoo has a little over 43,000 items listed; Ebay has over 800,000. Try this experiment: go to Yahoo's site and search for a half-dozen or so obscure things (original oil paintings, civil war period signatures, museum quality jewelry, etc) Now search for the same list at Ebay. I bet you'll get at least 20 or so hits on Ebay no matter what you're looking for (within reason). I bet you won't get any hits on Yahoo for several of your items. I think Ebay has a huge (maybe insurmountable) leap on competition. I don't think sellers mind paying the commission in exchange for the increased prices. Like I said before though. It seemed prohibitively valued at 63 7/8, it then went to 73 1/2 within hours. Internet stocks are scary.

To: Don Edgerton who wrote (431)	10/26/1998 7:52:00 PM
From: Kevin McKenzie	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 7772

Regarding "free" auction sites vs. commission-based auction sites: There are plenty of examples of successful business that charge more for their products/services than do their less successful competitors. (1) Online brokers. Last I saw, Schwab was still the leading online broker in terms of trade volume, despite the fact that they charge 3 times or more for each order execution than do other, less successful brokers (E-trade, Suretrade, Web Street, etc). (2) Internet providers. Many ISP's charge less than AOL does. Some are even "free". But AOL is still dominant as a business. (3) Operating Systems. There are several "free" operating systems available via the internet. However, DOS/Windows is clearly dominant (and it isn't supposed to be free.) These are just the ones that first occurred to me. In each case the dominant and more "expensive" company offers some kind of perceived value for the higher price. In the case of Ebay, I bet the final selling price on Ebay would more than compensate the seller for the listing fee and commission. By way of illustration I list a retired beanie baby (let say Peanut the Royal Blue Elephant) on Ebay and Yahoo. My highest bid on Ebay is $3,500 and my highest bid on Yahoo is $2,900. Even though I paid no explicit listing fee or commission on Yahoo and I paid a listing fee of $2 and commission of $35 on Ebay, Yahoo wasn't exactly "free". It cost me $563 to use Yahoo rather than Ebay, because of the lower final bid price. I know this is an fictitious example, but I think it is realistic at this point in time, given the relative popularity of the sites. However, from the looks of the recent posts to SI, I don't think traders traders care a whit about Ebay's viability and long-term prospect. However, from the looks of the recent posts, on the Ebay thread on SI, I don't think traders much care right now about the long term viability of Ebay.