Ebay is all about margin and volume. I sell yarn, minimum bid $16, average sale price is $19. Package cost is $8 for the goods, then about $2 to ebay and $1 to paypal. My average net/ship is $8. If I run more than 5 auctions per day, I start to get no-sells. So - I have a very healthy margin and potentially could get rich, but I can't generate enough volume. It's a trickle of money, not a flood. Still, 150 shipments/month at $8 each isn't bad.
USPS provides free shipping supplies and picks up at my door. College kids will pack hundreds of envelopes for $50. It's a good deal.
The weird thing is - I link to my own web site with big photos of the yarn. ON that site, I offer to sell directly for less than eBay. I have had people contact me wanting to bid on more yarn...when I direct them to the "buy direct" site, they almost never use it, even tho it's cheaper. They like the bidding process.
Bear in mind that Drexel is a very market-driven, finance-oriented university with a president who has stated "Make no mistake, higher education is a business."
Unfortunately, that money will never be paid as it's not owed by an individual and can't be garnished. Most likely, the judgement was against the company owned by the spammer, which now ceases to exist. It costs just a few hundred bucks to set up an S-Corp, which prevents the owners from being personally liable for any judgements.
Create Spam Company. Spam. Get Sued. Declare Bankruptcy. Create Spam Company. Spam. Get Sued....
It's not a perfect solution, but it is a step in the right direction. $7M is not a lot of money for MS, but it is for the spammer. Given the costs of pursuing this in court, MS probably netted about what they spend on free drinks in a day. This isn't their business and I'm sure they don't want to be spending resources on tracking down spammers. But, a $7M lawsuit is going to give pause to anyone sending unsolicited bulk mail...so, it works and hurray for them.
I don't know where you get your data on universities. I work at an Ivy League university and am a member of several higher ed associations where we trade operational info. Everyone I know has ditched Apple. Three years ago, we were 90% Apple, now the university is probably 80% Windows based. They made a conscious decision to go with the system that's used in the real world. There are departments that tenaciously cling to Apple - they are generally looked down on as averse to change.
comparing owning music to owning raw materials is specious. The Big 5 own a finished product for which there is large, established, and consistent demand,not a raw material which needs to be processed and marketed.
Apple doesn't own the cash cow, the labels do. Can you say that if there was no iPod, there would be no demand for digital music? Nope. The copyright owner's hold all the cards and they will never let a reseller take it away..why would they?
As for the argument that Apple will become a label, that's a stretch. That's not their business, what makes anyone think they would be good at it? Lables make a LOT of money. What they do is difficult and specialized.
well, "the milking machine, the dairy processing plant, the delivery trucks, the sillage fields and almost everything *but* the cow" aren't worth much without the cow....right?
I guess I see it as a market opportunity. Adding features allows companies to increase raise prices, jack up margins, and carve out marketing niches. If the consumer really doesn't want those features tho, it's an opportunity for Simple Product to position against Complicated Product.
Most market research currently shows that male consumers want features, because they think they're getting more for their money.
Women, on the other hand, seem to want simplicity. Ask any woman what she thinks of her man's home theater system and you'll get a big ol' eye-roll.
Before everyone attacks Amazon, understand that they are not the problem.
Like it or not, companies have a duty to maximize their value, which includes pursuing and enforcing patents. If they don't, management can be viewed as negligent by the shareholders and be held accountable and/or liable.
Standing up at the shareholder's meeting and stating that you don't pursue patents because you don't agree with the system would be a quick way to be escorted out the door.
The People's Daily is a state-run paper that is usually full of articles about how much students and peasants love the government and how Falun Gong is a dangerous cult. Interesting if they are accelerating the program, but the source is pretty sketchy.
I wouldn't want to be the one to stand up at a fund manager meeting to explain "we're not pursuing patents on our technology because we think the patent system is flawed". That would be a quick path to unemployement. They have to do what's good for shareholders, regardless of what anyone thinks of the patent system.
I worked there for two years and I have to say I was impressed. When I got there, they were still in the "get big fast" mode where profit and margin didn't mean anything. Then the bottom fell out of the market and they shifted to "get profitable fast". The entire focus and tenor of the company shifted in about 3 months.
Jeff Bezos is a genius as a communicator. At Christmas, everyone goes to work in the warehouse unless you are pregnant, dying, or in customer service. How many warehouses in the world have people with doctorates making boxes? Not many, because no one else can convince a Ph.D to spend two weeks folding boxes. Bezos can....and does.
When they look at a problem, they tend to throw all the smartest people at it and give them the world. It works. The warehouses are incredible...and they haven't even touched the level of efficiency they will be at in 5 years.
Sure, they made mistakes. They overbuilt capacity and had to close a warehouse. But don't underestimate Amazon. The company is smart, plays fair, and is winning. It's good to see.
He's standing on the corner. No wait! He's moving. Now's he's stopped again. He keeps checking his watch! I think he's up to something. No? You're sure? Dang! OK, I'll call you back.
If you were the RIAA, paid to protect the copyright system, what would you be doing? I would probably be doing exactly what they are...a mix of scare tactics and legitimate legal recourse. Unfortunately for music fans, the law is on the RIAA's side.
Personally, the tactics have worked on me. I make enough so that buying CDs isn't that big an expense and the potential for them to send me a letter and collect $12k doesn't seem worth it.
Production of a record is a minor expense, whether it's 15,000 or 750,000. The big money is spent in the marketing of the record. Product placement, touring, radio play, and massive marketing budgets make up the lion's share of the cost of goods sold.
Record companies use a shotgun approach. You throw money at 100 records and maybe 1 hits. The margins on the one that hits need to be huge in order to pay for the loss on the 99 that don't.
Better question: How can a band sell 75,000 records and be considered a failure? Check out Some of Your Friends are Already This Fucked by Steve Albini on the financial machinations of a record label.
If you're only getting 1%, it's not viewer being bored, it's the content of the ad not being targeted. Bet you never looked at a mortgage rate ad until you bought a house. Then, those little numbers get very exciting. It's about targeting.
We just finished a pretty big run on Google with a product that is perfect for text-ads. Unique keyword, small market spread out all over the world. Click throughs varied from under 1% to over 7%, depending on the ad. The good ads served as a good search result, hence, big clickthroughs.
tried playing non-violent quake. she would run around the baddies instead of mowing them down. my brain would have never thought of that.
it doesn't work, by the way. but it will get you into heaven.
has a nice service called Advantage at http://www.amazon.com/advantage If you ever manage to get a lot of press for yourself, they have the ability to handle large volumes of CD sales for you. We used to see this a lot...Howard Stern mentions no-name band, no-name band is inundated with 10,000 orders, site crashes, etc. Works very well to just turn the distribution side to Amazon. Disclaimer: I don't work at Amazon, but I used to.
Unfortunately, you're still in charge of getting Howard Stern to mention your band.
Slashdot Mirror
Ebay is all about margin and volume. I sell yarn, minimum bid $16, average sale price is $19. Package cost is $8 for the goods, then about $2 to ebay and $1 to paypal. My average net/ship is $8. If I run more than 5 auctions per day, I start to get no-sells. So - I have a very healthy margin and potentially could get rich, but I can't generate enough volume. It's a trickle of money, not a flood. Still, 150 shipments/month at $8 each isn't bad. USPS provides free shipping supplies and picks up at my door. College kids will pack hundreds of envelopes for $50. It's a good deal. The weird thing is - I link to my own web site with big photos of the yarn. ON that site, I offer to sell directly for less than eBay. I have had people contact me wanting to bid on more yarn...when I direct them to the "buy direct" site, they almost never use it, even tho it's cheaper. They like the bidding process.
Advertising is about long-term positioning and awareness. This is $10,000 down a rathole.
Bear in mind that Drexel is a very market-driven, finance-oriented university with a president who has stated "Make no mistake, higher education is a business."
Perhaps they are looking for some PR, eh?
Unfortunately, that money will never be paid as it's not owed by an individual and can't be garnished. Most likely, the judgement was against the company owned by the spammer, which now ceases to exist. It costs just a few hundred bucks to set up an S-Corp, which prevents the owners from being personally liable for any judgements.
Create Spam Company. Spam. Get Sued. Declare Bankruptcy. Create Spam Company. Spam. Get Sued....
It's not a perfect solution, but it is a step in the right direction. $7M is not a lot of money for MS, but it is for the spammer. Given the costs of pursuing this in court, MS probably netted about what they spend on free drinks in a day. This isn't their business and I'm sure they don't want to be spending resources on tracking down spammers. But, a $7M lawsuit is going to give pause to anyone sending unsolicited bulk mail...so, it works and hurray for them.
Ok, mod me as Flamebait...
I don't know where you get your data on universities. I work at an Ivy League university and am a member of several higher ed associations where we trade operational info. Everyone I know has ditched Apple. Three years ago, we were 90% Apple, now the university is probably 80% Windows based. They made a conscious decision to go with the system that's used in the real world. There are departments that tenaciously cling to Apple - they are generally looked down on as averse to change.
comparing owning music to owning raw materials is specious. The Big 5 own a finished product for which there is large, established, and consistent demand,not a raw material which needs to be processed and marketed.
Apple doesn't own the cash cow, the labels do. Can you say that if there was no iPod, there would be no demand for digital music? Nope. The copyright owner's hold all the cards and they will never let a reseller take it away..why would they?
As for the argument that Apple will become a label, that's a stretch. That's not their business, what makes anyone think they would be good at it? Lables make a LOT of money. What they do is difficult and specialized.
well, "the milking machine, the dairy processing plant, the delivery trucks, the sillage fields and almost everything *but* the cow" aren't worth much without the cow....right?
There's one problem with that. iTunes doesn't own the cow, they only own the milking machine. The Big 5 own the cow.
iTunes is in a tenuous position, at best.
I guess I see it as a market opportunity. Adding features allows companies to increase raise prices, jack up margins, and carve out marketing niches. If the consumer really doesn't want those features tho, it's an opportunity for Simple Product to position against Complicated Product.
Most market research currently shows that male consumers want features, because they think they're getting more for their money. Women, on the other hand, seem to want simplicity. Ask any woman what she thinks of her man's home theater system and you'll get a big ol' eye-roll.
Before everyone attacks Amazon, understand that they are not the problem.
Like it or not, companies have a duty to maximize their value, which includes pursuing and enforcing patents. If they don't, management can be viewed as negligent by the shareholders and be held accountable and/or liable.
Standing up at the shareholder's meeting and stating that you don't pursue patents because you don't agree with the system would be a quick way to be escorted out the door.
The People's Daily is a state-run paper that is usually full of articles about how much students and peasants love the government and how Falun Gong is a dangerous cult. Interesting if they are accelerating the program, but the source is pretty sketchy.
I wouldn't want to be the one to stand up at a fund manager meeting to explain "we're not pursuing patents on our technology because we think the patent system is flawed". That would be a quick path to unemployement. They have to do what's good for shareholders, regardless of what anyone thinks of the patent system.
I worked there for two years and I have to say I was impressed. When I got there, they were still in the "get big fast" mode where profit and margin didn't mean anything. Then the bottom fell out of the market and they shifted to "get profitable fast". The entire focus and tenor of the company shifted in about 3 months. Jeff Bezos is a genius as a communicator. At Christmas, everyone goes to work in the warehouse unless you are pregnant, dying, or in customer service. How many warehouses in the world have people with doctorates making boxes? Not many, because no one else can convince a Ph.D to spend two weeks folding boxes. Bezos can....and does. When they look at a problem, they tend to throw all the smartest people at it and give them the world. It works. The warehouses are incredible...and they haven't even touched the level of efficiency they will be at in 5 years. Sure, they made mistakes. They overbuilt capacity and had to close a warehouse. But don't underestimate Amazon. The company is smart, plays fair, and is winning. It's good to see.
He's standing on the corner. No wait! He's moving. Now's he's stopped again. He keeps checking his watch! I think he's up to something. No? You're sure? Dang! OK, I'll call you back.
If you were the RIAA, paid to protect the copyright system, what would you be doing? I would probably be doing exactly what they are...a mix of scare tactics and legitimate legal recourse. Unfortunately for music fans, the law is on the RIAA's side. Personally, the tactics have worked on me. I make enough so that buying CDs isn't that big an expense and the potential for them to send me a letter and collect $12k doesn't seem worth it.
Production of a record is a minor expense, whether it's 15,000 or 750,000. The big money is spent in the marketing of the record. Product placement, touring, radio play, and massive marketing budgets make up the lion's share of the cost of goods sold. Record companies use a shotgun approach. You throw money at 100 records and maybe 1 hits. The margins on the one that hits need to be huge in order to pay for the loss on the 99 that don't. Better question: How can a band sell 75,000 records and be considered a failure? Check out Some of Your Friends are Already This Fucked by Steve Albini on the financial machinations of a record label.
If you're only getting 1%, it's not viewer being bored, it's the content of the ad not being targeted. Bet you never looked at a mortgage rate ad until you bought a house. Then, those little numbers get very exciting. It's about targeting. We just finished a pretty big run on Google with a product that is perfect for text-ads. Unique keyword, small market spread out all over the world. Click throughs varied from under 1% to over 7%, depending on the ad. The good ads served as a good search result, hence, big clickthroughs.
tried playing non-violent quake. she would run around the baddies instead of mowing them down. my brain would have never thought of that. it doesn't work, by the way. but it will get you into heaven.
has a nice service called Advantage at http://www.amazon.com/advantage If you ever manage to get a lot of press for yourself, they have the ability to handle large volumes of CD sales for you. We used to see this a lot...Howard Stern mentions no-name band, no-name band is inundated with 10,000 orders, site crashes, etc. Works very well to just turn the distribution side to Amazon. Disclaimer: I don't work at Amazon, but I used to. Unfortunately, you're still in charge of getting Howard Stern to mention your band.