Blackthorne Software Discussion Forum: Seller's Assistant Release: An open letter to John Slocum

By Michael Eastick (meastick) on Wednesday, February 07, 2001 - 06:33 pm:

An open letter to John Slocum



One point that needs to be looked at is will the program actually be a decent program.



For all of the good things that AAPro did it certainly did some bad things and was still as buggy as hell (remember my emails John). Version 1.26 may have been out of Beta but it was still not 100% (not that software ever is). Beta 40 was a work in progress that still had major problems. Who is to say that the new program will be any good – it would need to be far better than Beta 40 to warrant the “price” you are asking.



Do you not just get it, people will not pay for something they already have. My concern is if I rent it and nothing is upgraded to keep up with ebay I STILL HAVE TO PAY THE RENT, EVEN IF THE PROGRAM DOES NOT WORK PROPERLY. Sure you can say, “we would never do that”, and if you believe that I have a nice little bridge in New York I would like to sell to you cheap (We do nor believe in fairytales).



John you stuffed up - if you had charged a nominal upgrade fee to go to the new software you would not have had anywhere as many complaints. This concept is a far better proposal than a "rent" based fee. People want to own things, renting something gives them no control (and quite likely has lesser legal implications for you if things do not work).



We all know that a lifetimes upgrades could only go so far.

We all know that software development takes time and money.

We all know that you have worked long and hard to get the program to this stage.

We all know that eBay is dynamic - ever changing to meet the needs of buyers and sellers.



But the concept of a fee based charge for something we already have is just not on.



I know the cost of software development, I have had my own real world accounts/client/stock/sales/auctions software written (it is for sale for those that need a real world, not internet, package).



eBay as an auction house should be giving the software away to attract more sellers and hence more buyers and hence more SELLING FEES.



The amount of the increase in selling fees would far outweigh the cost of the software development, plus would increase the size of the turnover of ebay.



Why a auction company in this day and age would give clients a reason to look elsewhere is beyond me. I would have thought you would have been looking at as many ways to attract more sellers and buyers as you can.



Do you really believe that you are so big that you can dictate terms to your customers, think again, companies that do that fail!



Yours sincerely



Michael Eastick

8/02/01

By Jim Roberts (downmeltd) on Wednesday, February 07, 2001 - 07:10 pm:

I completely agree. I have no problem at all paying a nominal upgrade fee ONCE, if the upgrade WARRANTS a fee. This fee-based system doesn't. For one thing, I have not, nor will I ever rent, lease, or pay fees to use software I purchased, because a parent company decided to change their programming, and felt it would be a great way to take more money from me (the API's).

For another, I will never pay for this thing when the ONLY new features being offered, according to the FAQ, are BIN, and some other trinkets. The rest of the stuff is ALREADY available in 1.27.

Sorry, but no thank you. Try again.

By Laurie Primavera (laurie) on Wednesday, February 07, 2001 - 07:27 pm:

PLEASE READ AND RESPOND:
Follow the link below to add contact info to a simple form. We need to have some numbers in order to figure out our next step. If any laws have been broken, and you want to participate in a quest for a refund, please add your contact info here. Enter only once so an accurate count can be achieved: http://www.blackroseleather.com/blackthorne.html