Open Standard for Listing Data

We need an open standard for listing items in websites like SecondServer.net and SLExchange.com

If we simply continue to list on one of these websites, the website will develop a network affect whereby it becomes necessary to list there in order to reach customers.

This will give that website leverage over us as vendors and be able to take a larger and larger size commission of our sales.

For example, they are already having a problem where people are competing for top spot in categories. How are they going to solve that .. probably by forcing us to bid for top spot, costing us listing fees.

The solution to this problem is an open standard for listing information, so *anyone* can list the items that we are selling.

Rather than winning our business by the network affect, they will win the business by having the most features and being the most useable for customers.

As long as there is an open standard for listing data (pictures / text / item transfer), then *anyone* can list the data by simply downloading the data dump. In fact, someone could even set up an inworld system for listing for free.

Ignore this email and you'll be paying ebay style listing fees and commisions in the not too near future. You will also be handing over the keys to the kingdom to yet another middleman.

Join together now and the power will remain where it should - with the creators.

In fact there is already a way that they are charging listing fees.

By 'forcing' you to purchase your own item over and over again with an ALT in order to get it to the top of popular items you are in affect bidding for top spot on popular items as you pass over the commission of each sale.

Before you start freakin' on me, if it was the sort of thing I might do I certainly wouldn't be posting about it here..

So write a DTD and post it for comments.

Not sure that's how I'd do it.

My suggestions is a box that you put inventory in, which when given a command by a trusted source will deliver an object to an Avatar.

You populate the box with inventory that you are selling along with a notecard with selling information.

For example, let's say you're selling widget

You'd put in the box:

widget
widgetTempRez (for the temporary rezzed version)
widgetTexture1 (texture picture of object)
widgetTexture2 (texture 2..)
widgetTextureN
widgetNotecard (notecard with price, picture locations, etc)

Where notecard would have information like

price=20 $L
description1 = This is my cool new widget
description2 = Please buy it
pic1=http://www.myserver.com/widgetpic1.jpg
pic2=http://www.myserver.com/widgetpic2.jpg
pic3=http://www.myserver.com/widgetpic3.jpg
pic4=http://www.myserver.com/widgetpic4.jpg

This would require sellers to host their own pictures, though there are plenty of places to host images for free. I would even be happy to give FTP access to people to host them for free.

This is just one approach, meant to inspire better ideas and should not be mistaken for something 100% bulletproof.

Geez, Nexus, don't you think that response is just a bit too predictable considering you are the co-founder of SecondServer.net?

He's been banned from commenting on the forums now.

Regarding the topic concerned, it would be interesting to see this happen - we dont technically make any cash through the web sales system, and the vendor system is sold on it's ability to manage inventory, rather than just storing it, and while, if enough consumer demand warranted it to be added - it would head to my TODO list, at the moment, I'm simply too busy writing code for other area's of the site to take a look at it.

-Adam

Just let us know what we can do in this area. I would happily donate time / code to this cause.

What I'd like to do is give you my open source in world code to browse inventory lists via rezzed 'picture windows'.

It doesn't even have to effect a purchase through the system, it could just give a landmark for the vendor to the buyer and the buyer could teleport to the vendor to the finish the purchase.

IM me in world so I can give you a demo.

I'm looking at what I can do at the very least in terms of some sort of third-party interface, as far as in-world browsing goes, that's kind of been the SecondServer.net 'endgame' for about 4 months now, the fruits of this will probably be launched on friday (if all goes well with testing.).

The biggest problem I have with going full open source with the object containers is unconventional use. Being, this would mean exposing our interfaces to the world, and while, with ordinary usage, I have zero problems with this, I do have a few additional problems for not-so-ordinary circumstances, examples being: Someone spamming someone elses item list with 30,000 items, or prehaps even something so humble as dealing with the extra support load from other people's interfaces.

If you can think of a few good ways around those problems, I could probably be a bit more inclined to seeing about a full open documented interface.



-Adam

You're not privy to our business plan - and you "see" problems where none exist - and your suggestions of how we will force things are silly.

The point isn't what SLExchange.com is or is not going to do. It's realy quite irrelevant, and I only mentioned it as an example of what's already happening.

The point is what a listing service, if it has the inventory and the customers, can do and most likely would do.

It is only natural and obvious for a listing service to take advantage of the fact that it owns the database and the customers. The MLS or eBay are typical (but not the only, by far) examples of such behaviour.

Blaze,

While I am finding that I agree with more and more of your posts lately, I have to admit I am not sure what you are after here. I am all for open standards, but sites like SLExchange and Gigas are also a business, of which any vendor is free to sell or not sell through. They are really just a different sales channel, albeit a much higher volume one in some ways and more global. In what you are asking for, how could they be competitive with each other? Ecommerce sites, search engines, auction sites, etc.. .all compete with one another. I don't see how opening up would provide any advantage here - maybe I am missing your original point.

I used to have a senior position at a listing service, so I'm kinda familar with the tricks of the trade.

So, I think a more open listing service would solve a few problems:

a) it's important that creators remain in control -- not the middle man

b) data farming - the data from purchases should be equally available to everyone, like what's selling and what's not. This information should be owned by the creators, not the listing service.

I would be strongly against forcing the above mentioned website from giving up this data, however I would encourage creators to band together and create an open purchasing system so nobody has control over this data.

c) I'd like to see an in world purchasing system.. I would also like to see a purchasing system which pays homage to beautifuly done stores like sky designs.. that's more of a personal agenda. My concern is that these websites draws people away from these destinations. Again, this particular point is probably just my fetish.

d) i'd like to make sure that the majority of the profits stay in the hands of the creators and not the middle man. 10-15% is simply too excessive. On top of that, you have to bid for top spot of popular items by having an ALT artificially buy your goods.

e) Listing services should compete on features and not on insurmountable and artificial barriers to entry.

There is another solution here, and I would like to encourage everyone to think about it carefully. Make sure there is a competitive and viable option. Make sure there isn't just one 'ebay'. And make sure the competitive option is competely equal in stature to the other option.

We can do this by listing on both services and purchasing from both services.

Otherwise, pretty soon you may start seeing 'exclusivity' deals and other such nonsense. It's already bad enough that some of the fees are quite silly.

Blaze,

I agree that the comission fees are quite high - increased competition will ultimately determine what the right price point is, which is healthy for the market. Exclusivity deals are not harmful to the vendor - as they are the ones making those deals.

I think the benefits of web based shopping - being able to show the breadth of what is available in SL in compelling and creative ways will free up the constant need to waste even more land with yet another mall/store. They can't be replaced completely, and shouldn't be - they have immense value. However, the web sites offer a compelling global view that no store/mall can match, and that is exciting. Freeing up in world resources for more creative builds is a benefit as well - we are innundated with shopping. The interfaces are just not there to do this kind of thing through the SL client, it is cumbersome - hell I don't even like most vending machines. The current crop of web stores have a long way to go, but it is a start.

I still fail to see how opening up "listings" will provide any benefit. Vendors are free to list on any site they choose, and will do so where they feel they are getting the best deal/sales ratio. That is driven by the market itself - some people seem to already be developing a preference for one site over the other, just as you do with online stores in general (I much prefer ebworld.com to gamestop.com, for example - same products). It comes down to service, features, and respect for the operators of the site.

I don't think the MLS concept can be extended here as you are trying to do it - you don't have multiple real estate agents trying to sell the same property and making the information available to everyone. You have a vendor trying to sell their product, in whatever venue will bring them sales. Whether they are on one web site or fifty (as you know more will follow), it is just another sales channel, and a great one at that. I think you are trying to solve a problem that doesn't exist, and you aren't making a compelling case for how it would benefit anyone - I see it only harming competition.

Exclusivity is a type of collusion which supports a monopolistic position with artifical barriers that are rarely merit based, as much as the partners like to say it is. Whether this benefits the creator or the vendor, it is a terrible option which reduces competition based on the opinions of the the very few (the vendor and the creator).

As for the rest, yes I agree, competition will certainly take place. My intention is to encourage creators themselves to provide a competitive option to keep the pressure up.

Blaze, your intent is well-taken, and your experience clearly has given you some perspective here. These sites have the potential to be a useful channel, and there are lots of creatives who do not want to worry about customer generation and would love to see greater volume going through a channel. There is always a perpetual power struggle between product creators and their channel in terms of who owns the customer and who can dictate the economics.

On the downside, if you completely commoditize the websites, then you do run the risk of killing this nascent channel, or at least dulling some of the motivation for those channel providers to invest. On the upside, if you lower the cost-of-entry into online commerce with an open standard, then we might see sites investing heavily in trust and functionality issues (which are the issues I see determining the winner here).

I think a network effect is inevitable. All buyers and sellers want to work on the market which gives them the greatest access to their buyers or their sellers. I also bet that alt-purchasing to force the rankings will become less effective as (or if) volumes increase.

At first glance, i see an open standard as a good thing. I would love the tone of the discussion to remain "win-win", i.e: Creators don't want to be price-gouged, but they have to want their channel partners to be successful too.

Yeah, I am actually reconsidering my approach a little bit after this thread - as I was a bit surprised and impressed by Adam's in world technical advances.

So, one serious possibility is rather than forcing a third way as I have proposed, we could simply firm up and make sure there are at least two competitive ways to channel our inventory.

'Tis interesting that one person blew you off as silly, while the other worked with you and put effort toward offering an tangible technical approach to some of your ideas. I admit I don't fully see the benefit of what you are asking for, but I definitely think it is an important idea you are exploring, and I'm glad you brought it up, Blaze.

I'm sitting here ouching as I just paid $21 in ebay selling fees to get rid of some simoleons, games, and books which then sold for not so much more as to make it almost not worth it. So I'm with you on this one, blake. It's just that SL is really more like a village, with only about 3000-5000 people reading this forum, actively logging in, and actively using all these services. And so far, SLExchange behaves like that small village retailer, with personal service with a smile. So let's encourage them and not assume they are going to turn into anonymous cutthroat mass volume Internet middlemen who sub-contract to companies that poison Chinese workers with glue to make $100 sneakers for Americans. Let's assume they are going to serve the community (har har har I know I'm so naive yuk yuk).

Just as you can upload an event in the game, or upload an land for sale, we need to have a commercial section where classified ads for rentals and merchandise can be uploaded by everyone in the game. That just has to be a given. But it hasn't happened in the game and so some players are right to take it out of the game. Why? Because both the Lindens and the players have to get over this myth that they are just in some big free creative hippie geek wiki, and realize Second Life is a second life for a lot of different kinds of people especially as it gets bigger, and in this second life, far from being the ethereal cerebral creatures everyone fantasized about, endlessly scripting and building for free for the Collective Great Mind with Enya on the soundtrack and being paid Linden script for this joy, they are in a second life where lots of people want to spend part of their day with clothes, makeup, houses, dances, Jay-Lo on the soundtrack, and other "real life" type of merchandisable stuff. Such people want and need to engage in that sacred human endeavor known as SHOPPING. Maybe they pretend to find malls unesthetic when they hear their geeky friends dump on them, but they secretly shop in them by night. Maybe they pretend that spam commercial ads and merchandising thinly disguised as events are disgusting, but secretly they found a fabulous new pair of red shoes from this method.

Yes, it's the end of your wiki dream, but it's the start of a new tomorrow where wiki dreams will still have a place, they just won't run the utopia.

If the Lindens don't do this soon, then players should do it in game somehow using notecard deliverable yellow pages with landmarks. This isn't the greatest, but it's a start, at least for say, mall directories.

And once the Lindens do do this, then those outside the game like SLExchange or whomever will not be seen as trolls if they charge people to cross their bridge. Because they will be providing that extra something special, greater visibility, accounting, service, etc.

Right now, as far as I can tell, SLEXchange listing IS free, blake. You just go there, join for free, and list your thing for free. At least, it looks that way to me. Perhaps they clip out a commission when you sell, but at least the listing itself even if it doesn't sell doesn't cost (as on ebay).

I personally would like SLExchange to come up with a way to rent land and property by using a coded box system (as I mentioned to you in-game). Right now you stand in your store and upload your widgets to them with a thingie they provide and it shows up on their webpage, connected to your store. So I'd like them to be able to upload little boxes with pictures of land on it, and when somebody buys that little box, they send it back to me as their proof of purchase, and I turn over the land to them for a $0 sale in-game.

Maybe it's got too many steps, or there are trust issues, but I think it could work. I'm going to try it.

The auction isn't really something people feel that comfortable with because it seems so insane sometimes and the existing Linden one doesn't show who you are bidding against, so you have to hope that you'll see the other guy flying above that piece of land and ask him to back off if it is contiguous to some land you're trying to do a project on.

What we need is something like the in-game land sale device, which lets you put your land for sale for a flat price so someone can right-click on it. But this in-game device is really cumbersome. It can take forever to figure out how to work it as other threads have indicated. It's slow-loading often. It's easy to make a mistake on it so it looks like your land is $50 an acre instead of $5. And it is so crowded that only the very patient can scroll through it. SLExchange and other such services would offer more visibility and vendors would be willing to pay a price for that.