Stamp Auction Network (San) Considering Membership Fee

Just received an email from Tom Droege with a survey link regarding SAN beginning to charge an annual fee. If you use SAN or missed the email the link is below.

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1...u7Q/viewform

I do not use SAN, but this thing smells weird. Next thing is that Koger and Publix are charging me for the privilege of shopping in their stores. Greed seems to have no bounds,

Peter

Just got the same email and responded that I would stop using the site and just go back to sending bids directly to the auction firms by whatever means they provide. I've been a big user of SAN for the past few years, although my usage has dropped off a bit lately. I am aware of the benefits to a bidder like myself being able to use SAN for either advance or live bidding across a myriad of auction firms with little fuss and the owner of SAN obviously has to cover his expenses. Nothing is free.

However, it sounds like the auction firms are currently covering expenses and, as far as I am concerned, well they should given that they and their clients presumably benefit from the opportunity for higher realizations from the wider audience that SAN provides. I already pay a stiff premium as a buyer in most auctions - let that cover that cost of SAN as well as other expenses that auction firms incur to attract buyers. I'm not going to pay yet another fee just for the privilege of offering to buy material.

SAN has recently introduced.some additional features on a paying basis (I think) - no problem there. However, the wording of the survey sounded like they wish to do what many other organizations are trying to do - create more " value-added" services as a pretext for creating or raising fees even for folks who just want the basic service. All I'm interested in on SAN is searching the auctions to find material I'm interested in and bidding on it. I will not pay a fee to subsidize other folks who wish to utilize other services. If I decide I want those other services, I'll decide separately whether to pay an appropriate fee for those

I got the same email. Gave the same response. "Bad idea. All you'll do is drive your users to the individual auction websites to bid." I won't subscribe and will simply stop using SAN if they implement that subscription idea.

I agree that the auction houses should fun SAN. They are the ones who benefit from the large audiences SAN provides.

We are on the same page Oracle. I also made it clear to Tom that I will not pay a fee to spend my money. Especially, as you say, on top of the commissions I pay. Ridiculous.

Same here. Tom is in a tough spot given that the vast majority of auction houses provide their catalogs on their websites for free, search capabilities, and allow mail bids AND onsite bids for free. What Stamp Auction Network provides is a convenient place for search and bidding, things I'm reluctant to pay for especially with the rising buyer's premiums.

It also looks like the new pay services aren't selling as well as hoped.

bankrupt collector

Stamp collectors tend to be cost conscious. Online users tend to pride themselves on being able to search out the best value.

In that context, I have never understood SANS business plan; unless they could seal non-compete deals with auction houses they were always at risk. Auctions companies could view SANS as an 'add-on' marketing tool, not anything that would replace their own online functionality.


Consider this from an investor stand point, would you be willing to invest in a business plan like this?
Don

I would go back to being a phone bidder ,the firms also knows that a bidder will bid more often on different lots on SAN that a phone bidder who has to call in ahead of time to list which lots he wants a call back on . The auction firms know the bidders have been pre-screened before they accept bids on SAN. They know if I had payment or issues with other firms on SAN .The firms are getting more bids because of SAN ,let them pay for the service .
A lot of auction firms that me and you never consider to bid at or request a catalog from are getting viewed .SANS is getting good money from firms that are not "TRUE" auction houses but know they show up on my computer .
LETS GET SERIOUS -----SAN cannot have people like me walk away ......because someone else will step in and take the business model ,you don't want to be fighting for customers .

Start this fee stuff with some of your better customers and you will be back-tracking to give them free bonus ,right now everything is quite ,you may charge those who use your system for price discovery or looking at pictures and waste computer time but those spending thousands of dollars should be treated special ......by the way I didn't get my Christmas gift this year {that is a suddle message}

That sums up a few major points that SAN needs to review ,maybe I listed them poorly but the message is clear .

Is it the practice in the US, as it seems to be here, for auction houses using services such as SAN to charge the customer an additional fee for items won via SAN to cover the house's SAN fees? In that case, you'd have your payment to SAN, your buyer's premium and your additional 3% SAN usage fee. All adds up.

At the present time there are no SAN fees of any kind charged to the buyer.

Do the auction house pay SAN for the privilege of listing their auctions? In that case, that fee should cover SAN's expenses. I definitely would not pay just for the privilege of bidding. I already pay enough in buyer's premiums. Don't need any more added on top of that.

I responded to the survey in like fashion.

I do not understand the survey either...was the expectation that a significant number of respondents would say 'yes, I like paying more'? I must be missing a lot of information here, I do not understand any of this.
Don

Surveys of this type have become commonplace in an economy and social atmosphere in which the line between customer and management is sometimes blurred based on the desire to hold a "conversation" with customers to ensure "the best customer experience" or to "align management direction with customer needs." So yes, they are expecting people to say they will accept a fee, and how much. (I told them, "no way.")

If they had any sense, one of the large auction houses like Kelleher or Siegel would find a way to buy SAN, and then rule over the others as a benevolent despot, as Google does with travel data. User fees are unnecessary if the auction houses realize that user click and search data can provide a goldmine of insight into what users want to buy and what they are paying when they do.

Chris

I responded similarly to others in this thread.

This could be a nice boon for auction agents once again.

I also pointed out that if they do this, they should cut a deal with auction houses to offer a buyers premium discount for bids won through SAN.

This will be an interesting fork in the road for the online stamp economy if and apparently when, this happens. They will obviously lose many bidders, and I suspect a lot of people just looking for deals will simply not show up anymore.

I predict even more passed auction lots on less liquid items.

Down the road, I hope and suspect that some other alternative will avail itself, such as a new competitor, or auction firms arranging for their own online live bidding - which some already have.