Atomic Mall's Owner Preaches the Seller to Seller Sales Doctrine

[rho]

[quote author=PowerSeller link=topic=18789.msg75242#msg75242 date=1253290473]
[quote author=sneakymagenta link=topic=18789.msg75241#msg75241 date=1253285512]analysis: if AtomicDink's traffic grows 35% it will be as big as....its largest seller's website[/quote]

analysis: the number of sites linking to AM's largest seller's website is over 2X more than the number linking to self-proclaimed eBay alternative AM

analysis: If the above is true, the fact that this particular seller USES Atomic Mall SHOULD give everyone here a clue as to the value of Atomic Mall as an alternative.   
[/quote]

[quote author=LittleOnlineStore link=topic=18789.msg75243#msg75243 date=1253294185]
Which bring up the question why that seller is paying 5% FVF (if they even are) when they could be selling the same and probably more on their own site.

It has nothing to do with AM being a viable alternative and more to do with letting AM take the fall for the dupe listings. Especially the way the new system will be and AM will have to provide their own Google feed.

So I guess the ability to flood AM with duplicate listings is worth the 5% FVF.

BTW, Alison, could you provide a link to your store maybe even your feedback in your sig, so we can see how poorly you do there?

This seller has it right. Charge 30 cents per DVD and then $9 to ship....LOL
http://www.atomicmall.com/seller.php?id=10532

Nothing like getting out of those FVF's.
[/quote]

A 5% FVF is a good customer acquisition rate, not a ringing endorsement for AtomicMall or any other rinky-dink. High volume merchants scrap customers from rinky-dinks. As a matter of fact, ChannelAdvisors Sept. seasonal white paper recommends converting your ebay, Amazon, etc. customer to your independent website.

Powerseller, shove the clown back down into the box and crank the handle some more. Maybe there's a third clown lurking in there to delight your imagination!

[LittleOnlineStore]

Love that little clown. Maybe that could be her avatar

I even kind of wonder who that WE seller is. Is that the same guy Mike was going to send those screenshots to? Gotta wonder if Mr WE and Mike are in this together. That would explain a lot.

I just can't imagine why someone would funnel customers to AM to pay a FVF and lose out on sales. There are many not interested in giving their info out to a third party.

Not to mention that whole auto feedback system makes AM lose any and all credibility. Any buyers that take the time to look at feedback will go elsewhere for sure. That auto feedback looks horrid. It's nice that they loudly announce it's auto feedback though.

[Xamer]

[quote author=LittleOnlineStore link=topic=18789.msg75248#msg75248 date=1253319861]
Love that little clown. Maybe that could be her avatar

I even kind of wonder who that WE seller is. Is that the same guy Mike was going to send those screenshots to? Gotta wonder if Mr WE and Mike are in this together. That would explain a lot.

I just can't imagine why someone would funnel customers to AM to pay a FVF and lose out on sales. There are many not interested in giving their info out to a third party.

Not to mention that whole auto feedback system makes AM lose any and all credibility. Any buyers that take the time to look at feedback will go elsewhere for sure. That auto feedback looks horrid. It's nice that they loudly announce it's auto feedback though.
[/quote]

I can not believe I am doing this but I have to as to be fair, right?

Mikey never liked the idea of auto feedback, he only did it because members were complaining and bugging him to add it, so he did, even saying he didn't like it.

I have to give him that, he didn't like it.. but he still did it.

[LittleOnlineStore]

Yes, but he conveniently did it after we noted WE's horrid feedback and were making fun that his claim to fame had 86% positive feedback.

If he's going to let Ken, Alison and Rick run his business, that is his problem.

[Xamer]

[quote author=LittleOnlineStore link=topic=18789.msg75250#msg75250 date=1253327881]
Yes, but he conveniently did it after we noted WE's horrid feedback and were making fun that his claim to fame had 86% positive feedback.

If he's going to let Ken, Alison and Rick run his business, that is his problem.
[/quote]

BINGO!!!!!!!

Wanted somebody else to say it besides me. That is when he finally decided to do it, after it was being talked about on the net, boom he implemented it. 

[sneakymagenta]

Duplicate content alert- same AM item listed twice in Google Product Search, once as seller "Atomic Mall' and then again as seller 'Atomic Mall - seller name'.  Google Base policy violation! PDF saved! (do the watch search mentioned earlier to see it)

OMFG, another Google Base policy violation - identical items listed on 2 sites and submitted to Base.

------------------
Stay tuned -when I have time I'll upload the pdf to bayimg.com I saved from the AM boards of a deleted post by an AM staff member that was chock full o' libelous comments :blinkie:

[regic]

Email me a copy of that PDF Ms. Shark. 

[LittleOnlineStore]

Can't wait!

Not sure why they think they can sue anyone. The only thing one can sue over is if they can show malicious intent, but not when the intent is to prevent sellers from being manipulated. 

[xwpopper]

[quote author=R and C from the Atomic Mall forum]
Well, last evening I went back to the TT place and I saw some things that was not true concerning myself, but I did not rebuke any of it in the forum, I did however send a PM stating my intentions if it was not removed and I also reported the post to the moderator, 2 minutes later they blocked my IP address. So they gave me their answer and I submitted my grievance for review to the FCC using form Form 2000A - Deceptive or Unlawful Advertising or Marketing Complaint, my reason for filing this in response to their post was using my copyrighted business name as a vehicle to advertise untrue statements, I did call the FCC and I pointed out the post while I was on the phone and they confirmed that I could use this form as a grievance, I also sent the Company who actually has this domain on their server and explained the situation and the action that has already been taken. Enough foolishness from these people, they are going to get their chance to prove their post.
[/quote]
http://atomicmall.proboards.com/index.cg...on=display&board=general&thread=2147&page=2#21877
OK, #1, your business name was at no point tarnished, disrespected, or displayed in any untruth. other than the fact that you have so eloquently informed Atomic Mall members of how wrong you were for telling them that the site was a bad place to sell, and how you have absolutely zero experience selling anything in any volume and any claims otherwise are as misleading as the AM feedback system.
#2, You cannot copyright a business name. You can incorporate it. You can trademark it. You can publish it. You can license it. You can copyright the content (that you copy directly from the manufacturer) on your website. But the only thing you can copyright about your business name is the way it is spelled, and that would never happen.

[rho]

[quote author=xwpopper link=topic=18789.msg75255#msg75255 date=1253424558]
[quote author=R and C from the Atomic Mall forum]
Well, last evening I went back to the TT place and I saw some things that was not true concerning myself, but I did not rebuke any of it in the forum, I did however send a PM stating my intentions if it was not removed and I also reported the post to the moderator, 2 minutes later they blocked my IP address. So they gave me their answer and I submitted my grievance for review to the FCC using form Form 2000A - Deceptive or Unlawful Advertising or Marketing Complaint, my reason for filing this in response to their post was using my copyrighted business name as a vehicle to advertise untrue statements, I did call the FCC and I pointed out the post while I was on the phone and they confirmed that I could use this form as a grievance, I also sent the Company who actually has this domain on their server and explained the situation and the action that has already been taken. Enough foolishness from these people, they are going to get their chance to prove their post.
[/quote]
http://atomicmall.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=general&thread=2147&page=2#21877
OK, #1, your business name was at no point tarnished, disrespected, or displayed in any untruth. other than the fact that you have so eloquently informed Atomic Mall members of how wrong you were for telling them that the site was a bad place to sell, and how you have absolutely zero experience selling anything in any volume and any claims otherwise are as misleading as the AM feedback system.
#2, You cannot copyright a business name. You can incorporate it. You can trademark it. You can publish it. You can license it. You can copyright the content (that you copy directly from the manufacturer) on your website. But the only thing you can copyright about your business name is the way it is spelled, and that would never happen.
[/quote]

Of course the FCC will provide a form to fill out. Once the form is filled out and the investigator accesses the forum and discovers it's a bunch of people discussing various businesses and not actually advertising or marketing, notations will be made, the form scanned and filed. 

Ever been to AngiesList? Business discussions - by name - 24/7. And it ain't all hearts and flowers.

Whadda' goober!!

Oh, and BTW, I used to work in the internet investigation division of legal  compliance for a large corporation. When I contacted a  hosting company with a customer's verifiable breech of policy  8 times out of 10 the site immediately dissolved before my eyes.

goober.