Silk Road forums
Discussion => Newbie discussion => Topic started by: bluegreen23 on May 27, 2013, 01:55 pm
-
curious about a long term relationship set up in a 3 part process
lets say, Vendor A decides set up a system for better service and communication. A loose frame work might start with the criteria such as:
"if you have not been a purchasing member on SR for x months, x dollars, and have a good name in the community your order will be cancelled" if you meet this criteria then:
you will receive an inert delivery to view shipping time, method etc. if the buyer feels that this is acceptable then:
a smaller tester sample will be shipped for the buyer to test. If the sample is acceptable to the buyer then the order will be placed in the usual function (escrow etc).
I just want to clarify that at no point until the final agreement is struck (ie the buyer is satisfied with both shipping method/time and with sample quality) that no payment would change hands.
I feel this would lead to greater customer satisfaction but would only be worthwhile to vendors that wished to be here for a long period of time, and for customers that weren't perpetual window shoppers or buyers of small amounts when they are jonesing. The idea would be for the vendor to eat the cost of a few packages (inert first and then sample) as well as eating the cost of the sample for a client base that would purchase certain minimum amount (maybe an oz at a time) and would already know the quality of both product and shipping.
thoughts? ideas?
Any type of suggestions on how to implement this as a seller? or if it would even be wanted by buyers? I mean a way that does NOT circumvent SR. I believe in strong support of this market and the forums, including whatever skim they take from sales to keep this all running.
-
It's an interesting idea. I've been pondering how to fix the problems with SR quite a bit recently, actually... I don't really know that this in particular is the way you'd want to go, or even how much good it would do, but as a buyer: sure. If it meant I got better gear and the service was more reliable, fuck it, I'd jump through a few hoops.
My casual acceptance of it is contingent on it accomplishing the goal though. It does kind of put me off that I'd even need to do it, but as I'm so fond of saying: fuck it, why not. :P You do introduce the necessity for social interaction with this system though, and I feel that's a terrible requirement to have. Surely there must be lurkers who make enormous buys and have no reason to interact on a personal level at all?
If your idea is to make it mandatory, well, see above sentence. It's already optional today, so I don't see it as very effective?
-
No, I would have no interest in mandating anything for anyone else, merely a thought of IF I was to make the leap on to SR how could I possibly provide better service with more transparency to buyers. I would want a buyer to know what to expect in shipping time, method, packaging and most importantly in what quality. In the world around me no deal is struck without a "pic" (tester) occurring first unless it is a very trusted long term relationship.
I do see your point about interaction being a problem. It could be something simple though, a pm here or email simply saying "proceed" None the less I do see your point. Though after initial method acceptance (pkg 1) and quality acceptance (pkg 2) there would no longer be a need for pkg1 to be sent to a re-occurring customer. Similar could be said of the quality control. if you are selling say 1 oz of x, there is no need to provide another sample until you are on to a new unit, or possible if all units are the same batch, no need until after a new batch is acquired and broken down.
Again I suppose with this thinking it would only be useful for buyers that wanted a long standing relationship and would purchase some fashion of "bulk" amount as the initial time investment (roughly 1 week) and effort (2 emails/msgs) does require more than the avg buy. But it also comes with less risk.
-
bump because 11 pages of spam to 50 will never have anyone tell me if this is a good or bad idea. if its doable or not, and if there are any changes that should be made to the idea.
-
As a buyer I would find a system along the lines of the one you proposed very useful; particularly if I was interested in the product of a new vendor but was unwilling to take the plunge and order due to a lack of feedback etc.
It would serve both parties very well, in my opinion.
-
Not bad, but idk it seems to put a damper on the whole free market idea of things...
-
Seems logical.
There needs to be more precedent set for this type of thing, in my opinion. This promotes a healthy market place of choice, and would flush out fraudulent vendors.
-
I'm a fan of this idea, with one small complaint. Or rather, an observation...
This really doesn't curb scamming, does it? Any vendor could send a test shipment to give shipping time info. Then a tester. Then a bunk product. I'm not sure where the improvement comes from.
At the very least, any vendor can send grade A++ 859872354% pure yayo as a tester, and 100 grams of 40% nonsense as the order.
I think it's an AMAZING method of building vendor/customer relationships, but I'm not sure what makes it "scam proof/resistant" moreso than the current system.
-
Not bad, but idk it seems to put a damper on the whole free market idea of things...
I would not want to stop a free market. To be honest I'm not sure how this would prevent a free market. If the assumption is that every vendor HAS to do this? absolutely not. I'm not advocating any change for anyone else. They are 100% free to do as they want when they want how they want. If you mean that a buyer would be locked in? They would not be. I'm not purposing that they are locked in from the point of shipping the inert pkg1 or tester pkg2. If they are not satisfied with shipping speed, options, stealth etc then they don't need to receive a tester (hence 0 risk of any sort to the buyer and only a small cost to the vendor) If they go ahead and receive a tester and are unhappy with the product there would be no obligation to go further. The tester pkg would be just that. Here is a sample. Like going to Costco and trying food samplers before you buy the whole package of hot dogs. Again this would cost the vendor not the buyer. It also provides a second opportunity for the buyer to see how long shipping takes, a little more clarity on the method and should the worst case scenario happen it is with a very small personal amount (ex: half flap of coke).
If anything is not up to the buyers desire then the buyer simply says "no thanks". obviously IF i was the vendor and received someone saying no thanks I might ask what I could do to improve so that I could get your business but no answer would be required in any way.
None the less, I hope that in this it would allow for a better market place.
I'm a fan of this idea, with one small complaint. Or rather, an observation...
This really doesn't curb scamming, does it? Any vendor could send a test shipment to give shipping time info. Then a tester. Then a bunk product. I'm not sure where the improvement comes from.
At the very least, any vendor can send grade A++ 859872354% pure yayo as a tester, and 100 grams of 40% nonsense as the order.
I think it's an AMAZING method of building vendor/customer relationships, but I'm not sure what makes it "scam proof/resistant" moreso than the current system.
You know what! This had never occurred to me. I guess I'm just an honest type of person that believes in good repeat business. At any rate you are 100% correct. IF I was a scammer type person that would work. Well it would work for 1 sale, perhaps 2. But I'm sure the feedback system that is in place already would flush out a scammer very quickly. This would also require the vendor to spend money on pkg 1, 2, and the real sale on 3. #3 would still go through SR as normal (as stated I have no desire to ever circumvent supporting this site) and thus would go into escrow. At least that would be how I would want it to work for me in particular. This way the buyer is protected on multiple levels being assured of what they are getting. the vendor is protected from wasting time with people that aren't serious as well as window shoppers and people that are unsatisfied. The hope would be to eliminate the apprehension and problems that occur after the fact for both vendor and buyer.
Still I can't find a way to definitively prove that the sample would be the same as what is sent. So one small hitch in making a trust free transparent system. However in a world of scams this 1 possible exploit might be acceptable.