BrickLink Discussion Forum

In Suggestions, 458italia writes:

I think it would be helpful to have a field on the order summary for Tracking
Number that can be entered by the seller. It is something that applies to a considerable
amount of transactions, yet currently requires either duplication (update messages)
or clunky work arounds (using the VAT field for example). If it does not apply,
it can be left blank.

Already exists - see image below - it is on your 'Customize display settings
from the orders received page - put a tick in the box it adds the column which
once you fill it out the tracking number appears on the order and the order summary
page.

Hope that helps.

Author:

calsbricks

Posted:

Jul 30, 2017 13:28

Subject:

Re: All sellers should have quote options

Viewed:

46 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, Brickwilbo writes:

In Suggestions, mrbisco writes:

Changing price after an inquiry sais any about those sellers.

Bricklink really needs to swings towards the buyers in terms of usage. Take
care of the buyers and things work out better for the sellers. Catering to the
sellers just creates a poor buying environment.

And, of course neither seller will honor the price that I was asking for a quote
on. Of course not. If the thing is in my cart waiting for a shipping quote,
they shouldn't be able to change the price.

Unfortunately the quote feature is designed to cancel the quote completely if
1 item is sold out.

That was another reason why we didn't implement it. It is flawed. Works for
some doesn't work for others. The other big thing from our point of view
is that we would end up doing all the work for the quote and that may be wasted
as the supposed buyer doesn't accept the quote (We process orders first,not
last).

Author:

calsbricks

Posted:

Jul 30, 2017 13:02

Subject:

Re: All sellers should have quote options

Viewed:

45 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, mrbisco writes:

I'm tired of not being able to ask for a quote on an item through the system.
Twice in the last day I have sent an email to a seller asking for a quote and
then have then change the price of the item. It's making me want to just
put through the order and then cancel if I don't like the shipping terms.

Bricklink really needs to swings towards the buyers in terms of usage. Take
care of the buyers and things work out better for the sellers. Catering to the
sellers just creates a poor buying environment.

And, of course neither seller will honor the price that I was asking for a quote
on. Of course not. If the thing is in my cart waiting for a shipping quote,
they shouldn't be able to change the price.

Voted no - totally unnecessary. If you wish for a quote use the message function
in the store - or the quote feature (if they have it enabled) if you do not hear
back - or you get a quote which is not what you expected - move on to another
store. Forcing anyone to do something is never a good idea - that is why features
are optional where they should be.

Without stores there would be no buyers - and of course the reversal is true
- no buyers - no stores. A balance has to be struck and the site has grown significantly
since its inception without forcing buyers or seller to use features which should
be optional.

Author:

calsbricks

Posted:

Jul 25, 2017 12:33

Subject:

Re: Get shipping costs BEFORE final checkout

Viewed:

45 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, Teup writes:

In Suggestions, calsbricks writes:

In Suggestions, Teup writes:

In Suggestions, calsbricks writes:

In Suggestions, Teup writes:

In Suggestions, tonnic writes:

In Suggestions, Teup writes:

It's a common topic you're addressing. It has been in the making for
many years, but the system almost works. There is already a "shipping cost suggestion"
tool which is often quite accurate, but not always. For this to work, the system
needs to know the exact weight and size of all parts. This database still isn't
100% complete. But I suppose we will be getting there and step by step we're
getting to auto checkout. But expect it to remain this way for at least another
year or two..

Your solution 2 of estimating shipping costs before this database is in place
and 100% complete isn't really a good idea. If you order a brick from me,
pessimistic shipping costs are €18,50 - because the brick could be huge. In reality,
it will be €1,33. So it doesn't really mean anything and it would certainly
scare away alot of buyers.

In Suggestions, rumbi_rumun writes:

In my opinion the largest problem of the Bricklink page is that the final shipping
costs are often unknown till the invoice. It is much too late. I suggest calculating
the maximum shipping costs before the final checkout.
Let me display an example:
The buyer Alice orders parts which weigh 80 grams. The seller Bob states that
the shipping costs are 3 EUR up to 100 grams and 4 EUR up to 200 grams. Bob means
the TOTAL weight while from Alice's point of view the weight of packing materials
is unknown and never stated. This way Alice doesn't know the final price.
(Btw. I suppose it is against the EU law.)

Once I have come across such a case that in seller's opinion the maximum
net weight of parts was about 30 grams to keep the total weight below 100 grams!
Is it fair and clear?

I can see the following solutions:
(i) suggest the buyers to state their shipping costs precisely, in terms of net
weight of parts or dimensions of parts
(ii) apply automatic calcultion of maximum shipping costs on the checkout page
so that the seller couldn't apply higher costs.
The latter one is much better.

Best regards
Tomasz Witkowski / rumbi_rumun
Gdynia, Poland

A lot of buyers, maybe some sellers too, do not know the weight of the order.
They are not aware of the excistence of a weight function they can select.
Maybe there is a reason but I think this function should be default and, if not
wanted turned of. Not the other way around. I think it is very helpfull in almost
all orders.
Another thing, sometimes understandable but also sometimes common sence can help
quite well, is the fact that if an order is 15 grams of Lego and one of the shipping
tresholds is 20 grams the order with an envelope etc. will rise above the 20
grams.
A few times a year buyers believe that envelopes, small or large, do not weigh
more than 5 grams and that there is no need for an extra stamp.
A seller could, or even should, mention at the parts description that the dimension
or weight does not allow it to be shipped in an envelope but in a (far) more
expensive parcel.
I am still a bit anxious about a system through Bricklink that 'knows'
what shippingcosts must be.
There are so many variations possible.
It is about the amount of the parts, dimension, strangely formed parts, weight,
value, fragility etc.

I made a tool for myself to generate my invoices, and it generates a shipping
cost table in the invoice. This way, buyers can see where they're at and
how much more they could add. I think the opaque way it is now is OK, as long
as in return, sellers will allow additions or removal of some items. In my opinion
it's not OK if shipping costs are unclear in advance and the seller is rigid
about this after the order is placed. I think that at least the ability to add
more to an order should be mandatory. I don't know any professional webshop
that doesn't allow this.

I get what you're saying about the automatic calculation. You can already
turn on the shipping cost suggestion feature. I am not "using" using it, but
I have it switched on to monitor how it's doing, and I must say it's
usually correct when predicting when something is a letter or a parcel. On
Brickowl there's full auto checkout with this, and there it's correct
95% of the time. (You can debate what to do with the other 5%) I have my weight
bands set up so that they take into account progressively increasing envelope
weight, ie. 20g minus 5g, then 50g minus 10g, or something like that.

5% error means 50 orders per 1000 are not correct - that will soon add up for
stores who receive lots of orders - someone is going to have to bear that cost.

It's not actually a problem, it's just a fact and shops can handle it
how they like. You can set up your shipping calculation to be either optimistic
or pessimistic, decide whether you will refund any discrepancies in the buyer's
advantage or not. To me it's not a problem. And neither is it to the buyer,
as they always see how much it will cost and decide to pay that for the order.

Whilst it may not be a problem for some stores it also may be for others.
Not everyone has moved to BO (for a variety of reasons, of course) but the auto-checkout
over there possibly works based on the fact that the majority of their items
have proper dimensions which the current BL catalogue does not - even if they
are in stud.io or Mosaik). Dimensions are vital and for those parts that do not
have them then the order shouldb't be available to auto-checkout. I think
that is something similar to the way BO works (but not entirely sure as we do
not use that site.

Please Bricklink, if you read these threads and accept constructive thoughts
bring in auto-checkout where it will work (no volume/dimension postal systems),
listen to your members, especially those who have been on the site for many,
many years and talk to them. All of that will help to maintain your position
as Lego's leading marketplace.

If auto checkout would be implemented in only some countries and not in others,
and this situation would persist for longer than a month, I would honestly shut
down my store and leave Bricklink. I think fair competition is the basic foundation
of this marketplace, if this would be compromised I would take my business elsewhere,
just on principle.
Anyway, it is not rocket science. It already almost works. All that's needed
before it can go live is hard data (all parts' dimensions have to be in the
database) and an easy (semi)automatic way to send refunds for missing parts.
That's just about it. They could get this fixed up in a month, but I guess
realistically it will take another year at least.

It is relatively easy to gloss over and make the issues surrounding this appear
to be simple and straightforward, after all the other site had it at their launch,
so I am told, however the BL team are not having the easiest of times getting
everyone behind this or getting the code/system right. Where it works, implement
it. Not all countries are the same - where it doesn't yet work solve the
problems and then with what they have learned from the other implementations
move on. I do not see why people suggest that by not using auto-checkout we
would be disadvantaged. As a buyer who has made just under 1000 purchases in
my time on the site I have never even considered auto-checkout. It isn't
going to increase sales and the only tangible thing it may or may not do is prevent
NPB's. It might make it easier for those buyers who are shipping cost sensitive
to see the full price before they place and pay for their order, but we provide
all that information anyway, and give the buyer a choice of how they want their
items shipped. Auto-checkout is not the panacea people make it out to be. As
and when it arrives and it can be shown to work for the UK postal system we will
look at it further - I do believe, like many others that is a way off yet, but
for those countries where it works and works well why not give them an opportunity
to get on with it. People are not going to buy from a seller just because they
use auto-checkout - they buy because they have the parts at the right price and
are reliable and more and more because they do not charge additional fees. Postage
at cost and that is it.

Good luck with this, anyway, we will be watching the issue very closely, as I
am sure many others will be doing as well. Of the stores that we are in regular
communications with none have spent any real time looking at the preview site
and all but 1 have said they will not be implementing it as and when it arrives
- but did not rule it out in the future.

You raise two topics, potential problems with the system and how it wouldn't
increase the number of orders. Well, I really think it would increase it alot.
Yes, your reasoning is sound, but on an emotional level, seeing a number on your
screen of what you will pay, and then paying right away, and having bought something
immediately, it's really a big thing. You could argue that the Snickers at
the counter of the supermarket are pointless as they are already in the candy
section and even cheaper at that..... still, it works, and it's a strategy
used worldwide. Auto checkout really takes away an emotional barrier I think.
Well, we could discuss that endlessly probably, but in the end we won't know
until it is there. But I'll just say that I really believe it's a "thing".

As for problems with the algorythms, I don't really see what could be the
problem. Well, I see one potential issue: Part dimensions are missing and the
order shows up as costing €10 more shipping that it actually costs to post. That's
the worst thing that could happen, right?
So is that that bad? OK, it could be an order missed. But parts with missing
dimensions will be rare - and already are rare. I don't understand what makes
you say it's way off? So far, I really haven't had any of these issues
yet. Shipping cost suggestion is simply correct for all orders I checked. Miscalculations
would be somewhere in the order of 1 out of a 100 (neglible even if the added
popularity because of auto checkout is only 1%). And even if it happens, a buyer
may still go through with the order. And as a seller the extra €10 spent on shipping&handling
is really yours to fairly keep, although you could also decide to refund it.
It's not like it would undermine in the system, a shop, or someone's
administration. You can also set it up in a way you will lose €10 some of the
time, and make up for it with higher prices, handling fee, or whatever. But it
will probably be off less often then your (well, at least my) inventory is off.

The only thing that is really lacking is packing dimensions besides functional
dimensions. A diagonal part is now considered a solid block by the system, while
it should really have a separate set of dimensions that take into account that
you could put the part flat by rotating it 45 degrees. That is relevant for big
panels for example, but the amount of orders this would really affect is less
than 1%.

Thank you for taking the time to respond to our thoughts on the matter. Time
will be the judge of whether it increases sales or not - we don't believe
it will but understand your logic. Fortunately, in life, there are always going
to be differing opinions on matters such as this. As I said earlier when we buy
we look at who has the parts we need not whether they offer auto-checkout or
not but then again we are not shipping cost sensitive as some buyers appear to
be.

As for the database, dimensions are vital whether they be part or packaging and
there is not really any sign of that in the database yet. I am convinced that
BL have held up offering out that change to the database due to the issues they
had in the very beginning about images, intellectual property etc. They may have
seen that BO did not go to the members for that, they incorporated it in their
system from the outset. The data is available somewhere. Lego certainly have
it and probably use it in LDD. We could, of course be wrong, but they aren't
commenting so again we really cannot be sure.

As for the system and how it actually works out shipping costs we, like many
others we communicate with, are waiting on the release of the feature and testing
it in real life before committing to it. That may sound like 'sour grapes'
or something similar but to be honest as we charge postage at cost with no packaging
costs or any other fees, there really isn't any room to manoeuvre. An awful
lot of our orders are bulk orders with 'heavy postage costs' - it wouldn't
take too many of those to start hitting our bottom line and that is something
we are not prepared to get into.

We do believe BL need to offer out a lot more information on how this is going
to work. We have multiple size large letter and small parcel boxes each with
different tare weights and capacities. Is the system going to stop short of choosing
the box and just say it is a large letter. If not how is it going to determine
capacity of the box? We know, for example, exactly how many 2 x 4 bricks will
go into the largest large letter box in the UK. Will they know that? Some of
the stores we buy from take great time and pride out of their packaging getting
as much as possible to lay flat so it will fit in a large letter rather than
a small parcel - is it going to know that? What about large brick orders - we
get lots of those and often find it is more economical to split the order (for
packaging purposes) into two parcels rather than use a medium parcel. It may
be possible to cope with that by setting up an over 2Kg method but really not
sure about it.

We also receive lots of multiple batch orders and we don't have any idea
how that is going to work. We certainly do not wish to end up paying multiple
Pay[pal fees for a single order.

Lots more detail is required and of course in this case the proof of all of this
will take time to emerge.

Anyway - thanks again for your time in responding

Author:

calsbricks

Posted:

Jul 24, 2017 15:06

Subject:

Re: Get shipping costs BEFORE final checkout

Viewed:

46 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, Teup writes:

In Suggestions, calsbricks writes:

In Suggestions, Teup writes:

In Suggestions, tonnic writes:

In Suggestions, Teup writes:

5% error means 50 orders per 1000 are not correct - that will soon add up for
stores who receive lots of orders - someone is going to have to bear that cost.

Author:

calsbricks

Posted:

Jul 24, 2017 10:06

Subject:

Re: Get shipping costs BEFORE final checkout

Viewed:

45 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, Teup writes:

In Suggestions, tonnic writes:

In Suggestions, Teup writes:

5% error means 50 orders per 1000 are not correct - that will soon add up for
stores who receive lots of orders - someone is going to have to bear that cost.
If dimensions are added to the catalogue with specific guidelines for that data
then the catalogue will get better but there are lots and lots of other things
for us that need to be dealt with before - multiple batches - box volume capacity,
missing items in inventory (we need inventory tracking capabilities which already
exist in the system but we cannot get at them).

Yes it would be nice to know the shipping cost before you place your order, I
do not believe anyone can justifiably dispute that but there is also a lot more
to be done before the system is ready to provide that. The quote system doesn't
work for us as we process before we invoice and the shipping suggestion feature
we never implemented as it was suspect (no dimensions in the catalogue).

Someone mentioned a further couple of years before this is available and that
is a shame for some; and of little or no interest to others, As a store owner
I have asked myself do I need auto-checkout - the answer is it would be nice,
but it is not essential. What is needed far more in our opinion are working tools
for the stores - better inventory management tools, outputs to Excel (proper
outputs not garbled up xml files) and a whole lot more. More options and choice
on invoicing and printing formats. The messaging system needs to be updated to
offer more of a marketing tool. Orders need to have all information attached
(Drive through, etc) to them so the audit trail is complete on each transaction,
etc., etc. The list does go on.

Please Bricklink, if you read these threads and accept constructive thoughts
bring in auto-checkout where it will work (no volume/dimension postal systems),
listen to your members, especially those who have been on the site for many,
many years and talk to them. All of that will help to maintain your position
as Lego's leading marketplace.

Author:

calsbricks

Posted:

Jul 4, 2017 13:41

Subject:

Re: Classic Wanted List Unavailable on June 5th

Viewed:

68 times

Topic:

In Administrative, martineamonson writes:

It seems like the "Improvements" you are planning aren't very popular with
your user base...

I, for one, find your new, improved version of the site 10x more difficult to
use than the old one - why don't you just leave it alone ?

It ain't broke - don't fix it...

And if you insist on shoving YOUR version down everyone's throats, why not
also just leave the Classic versions and let us CHOOSE ?????

Whilst we agree with you about the classic v new look we also see problems leaving
it. People always want change whether it is broken or not. If classic is left
how long before people are clamouring for changes to that which means two code
bases to deal with and double the issues. Even today the changes made to the
order detail pages have created bugs in the classic look (which, coincidently
remain unfixed). There isn't really a simple straightforward resolution to
this issue. We, like you and many others would vote for the classic look - there
are some who will vote for the new look. The best option would be a balance between
the two - but we do not head up development for BL.

As the head of a professional development company in the UK for far too many
years to recall the site needs a re-think, that much everyone agrees with - (IOO)
but that is unlikely to happen.

Not everyone went to BO when it was launched or even today and it has a newer
fresher look than BL, It has also had autocheckout working (in a fashion) since
its inception but still not everyone left here for there. So it isn't totally
about the software - it is more about the presence rather than the look.

Yesterday we got a message from a newish buyer that we had gone the extra mile
for that once he figured out how to leave feedback he would give us a thumbs
up - nice of him - but giving feedback is really quite simple and straightforward.
You click on the Post link at the end of the order line and get on with it. These
simple little functions/features need much better documenting. Adding a batch
to an existing order. The number of times we get asked to add to an order and
have to explain stores cannot do that, but here is how you can do it - is beyond
recollection.

The catalogue needs improvement- the sellers need the right tools to do their
job for the buyers and a level playing field, where possible. The Award winning
web developer who commented on here has obviously won plaudits for their work
as I am sure the BL development team has - in their own arena. Bricklink, however
is different - yes it is a marketplace but its catalogue is unique and invaluable
- as a reference guide it is better than Lego's public face. Their stores
cannot tell you which sets contain which pieces nor do they differentiate between
mould changes (and sometimes that is vital to a build) - all of that is here
not elsewhere and that is what helps to give this site its enormous presence
in the Lego marketplace. Market leaders they certainly are and quite possibly
always will be but when you do not listen to your 'customers' beware
strange things can happen.

Enough for tonight - Hope you all had a great Independence day.

An Ex-pat in the UK

Author:

calsbricks

Posted:

Jun 27, 2017 12:12

Subject:

Inventory Change Request for Set 60012-1

Viewed:

21 times

Topic:

Inventories Requests (Entry)

Status:

Open

Please make changes to the following inventory:

60012-1 (Inv) 4x4 & Diving Boat
119 Parts, 2 Minifigures, 2013
Sets: Town: City: Coast Guard

* Add 2 Part 4865b Trans-Light Blue Panel 1 x 2 x 1 with Rounded Corners (Alternate)
* Add 2 Part 92409 Black Tire 17.5mm D. x 6mm with Shallow Staggered Treads - Band Around Center of Tread (Alternate)

Comments from Submitter:
2 sets parted out today both with alternates as above

Author:

calsbricks

Posted:

Jun 22, 2017 10:57

Subject:

Inventory Change Request for Set 21019-1

Viewed:

20 times

Topic:

Inventories Requests (Entry)

Status:

Open

Please make changes to the following inventory:

21019-1 (Inv) The Eiffel Tower
321 Parts, 2013
Sets: Architecture

* Add 8 Part 3794b Light Bluish Gray Plate, Modified 1 x 2 with 1 Stud with Groove (Jumper) (Alternate)

Comments from Submitter:
2 sets parted out today both had the b variant.

Author:

calsbricks

Posted:

May 17, 2017 10:01

Subject:

Re: Add variant field

Viewed:

27 times

Topic: