Etail/AMDA

[Fish World1]

The transhipping of livestock is no different then dropshipping (non facility owning etailers) for the animals health and actually worse depending on the location of the retailer.

AMEN. More animals die being transshipped from overseas, through LA, and to some customer on the east coast than do from a facility in LA directly to a hobbyists door. Transship is the retailer's "etail". It's how they get cheap animals by circumventing the traditional system. But that's fine and dandy apparently.

You know what's really sad about the whole thing. I was talking to the owner of another store here in the area a few months ago. He was doing a lot of tranship. He thought about not doing it anymore because he was losing a lot of stuff so it wasn't any cheaper. It wasn't that he was killing the stuff it was just that it wasn't any cheaper. :x

 

[MaryHM]

Mitch,

I think you overlooked this earlier:

Tell ya what. Name me a wholesaler that is big enough to service the AMDA membership, verifies all business licenses, does not allow walkins, and does not etail either directly or indirectly. Name them, Mitch. They'll be glad for the exposure.

I'd like a response.

I imagine it was you wholesalers who thought this one up to begin with. A lot wholesale and transship. You guys are the ones who keep changing the rules to satisfy your greed. I think it's high time retailers had a say in how things get done.

This "Us against Them" mentality is not going to help AMDA. Wholesalers and retailers are all in this industry together. Why do you think wholesalers thought up transship?? Because retailers are constantly demanding cheaper fish!! Duh!!! If retailers didn't buy it, there wouldn't be a transshipper in every warehouse complex within a 5 mile radius of LAX.

I personally don't like to see marine livestock treated that. They change the water for the fresh stuff in LA and it usually gets through in good shape. The stuff is all being cultured too, so things are not being taken from the wild and killed like in saltwater.

So then I can assume that you never transship any marine livestock?

 

[MaryHM]

You know what's really sad about the whole thing. I was talking to the owner of another store here in the area a few months ago. He was doing a lot of tranship. He thought about not doing it anymore because he was losing a lot of stuff so it wasn't any cheaper. It wasn't that he was killing the stuff it was just that it wasn't any cheaper.

Yep, Jeff. You hit it. Retailers look at a transship list and see a Coral Beauty for $2. "WOW!!", they think "I'm going to make a killing!! These sorry wholesalers have been ripping me off for all of these years!!". Of course, once the mortality and freight and box charges and clearing charges and CITES fees and handling charges and reox charges are added in, most of the time it ends up more expensive in the long run. But by god, that coral beauty is only $2!!!

 

[dizzy]

Mitch,

I think you overlooked this earlier:

Tell ya what. Name me a wholesaler that is big enough to service the AMDA membership, verifies all business licenses, does not allow walkins, and does not etail either directly or indirectly. Name them, Mitch. They'll be glad for the exposure.

So then I can assume that you never transship any marine livestock?

You assume correctly. I tried it years ago and it wasn't worth it. I don't like to see animals die needlessly. There are wholesalers who are big enough to service AMDA. Some may have to change the way they do business if they want our endorcement. We believe people can change if the incentives are good enough. It's a Field of Dreams" type of thing. If we grow the membership someone will step forward to cater to it. The ones that do will be finanically rewarded. The rest can do their etail thing. :roll: Even Wayne can see the benefits of unified retail network. I'm shocked 8O you can't.

 

[MaryHM]

Even Wayne can see the benefits of unified retail network. I'm shocked you can't.

Didn't you say something to this effect earlier and I said you were WRONG about what I think. I do see a benefit of a unified retail network. I just think the devil is in the details. Please, I'm begging you people, quit assuming what I think and quit twisting what I say.

 

[MaryHM]

So my understanding is this. AMDA is going to endorse wholesalers that don't delve into etail indirectly or directly and urge their members to buy from them. Here's a question. Do those wholesalers also have to change their buying habits in order to procure an AMDA endorsement? Like only buying net caught fish?? Or is an AMDA endorsement solely based on etail?

 

[Anonymous]

It is too early to answer that question.

 

[dizzy]

AMDA has not made any decisions on who to endorse. Of course we want netcaught fish. We want fish from all the clean countries too. We encourage aquaculture and post larval collecting. We also expect good the pricing. We can't really police the membership as to who they buy from anyway, nor shall we try. All we can do is point the members toward wholesalers who are doing the right things from our perspective. Sort of like the United Auto workers endorsing John Kerry for President. Members still have choices.

There may be bumps in the road in the beginning but we can get over them. As the organization grows we will be able to use our clout to stop the use of cyanide. We want this very much. We want to make a positive difference. We want this industry to be sustainable. We have our lives invested in it. How many garage dealers can say that?
Mitch

 

[MaryHM]

I can answer it. AMDA cannot make net caught fish a criteria. There aren't enough of them. So basically AMDA will endorse wholesalers that continue to carry cyanide caught fish just as long as that wholesaler isn't etailing them. After all, that's the naughty part. So the big boys win again. Smacks of another organization I know.

I don't think I got an answer to this previous comment:

Quote from Rover:
Wholesalers, service people, and manufacturers that are retailer friendly will have a part in AMDA.


What is "retailer friendly"? It was said earlier that those who produce their own stock are ok to etail that stock and be AMDA members. Like I said earlier, I've been in the process of revamping SeaCrop and it should be completed by the end of June. Damaged pieces that retailers don't want (I've offered them, no retailers (well, maybe 3) want them) and what we produce in our new greenhouse. So I can be an AMDA member?

Quote from dizzy:
We already sent Burton's letter to all the members. By e-mail and by snail mail. It is also posted here and on reefcentral.


Seems to me that it should have been strictly between the AMDA members until a firm course of action was decided. Have you taken a poll of the AMDA members or just sent out a letter? Is there a vote in the works? How is this new direction going to be decided?

 

[Anonymous]

They change the water for the fresh stuff in LA and it usually gets through in good shape.

So since you've delt with them all, you can say that right :wink:

BTW, we're talking salt water (reefs.org=salt IMO) Mitch, transhipped saltwater livestock, not your freshwater junk from Asia.[/quote]

As the organization grows we will be able to use our clout to stop the use of cyanide

:lol: Yup, and stop whaling as well. AMDA will have to get more then 50 members to do that, more around 1,500 and even then, how will it effect other countries buying habits? Almost the entire world is united in anti whaling, yet 2 countries continue to due it. One even gives themselves more "scientific" quotas every year. Even thought almost every country believes its wrong, it still happens. CITES banned sea horses over the medicinal use/over collection of them, does that effect the countries using them, nope, non member nations. So what did the ban do? It effectivielly banned sea horses from the MO trade and Curio trade in member nations. Go to HK, you'll still see thousands of ground up sea horses in every marketplace. Good job CITES, you really protected those sea horses.

 

[Anonymous]

Retailer friendly means just what it sounds like. Those companies who value the business relationships of their storefronts above others. There are several comapanies out there that sell only to independents, it's not too far of a stretch.

 

[MaryHM]

But you still didn't answer my question, Glenn. In your interpretation of this whole thing, since my etail business is going to be focused on aquacultured items that I produce and "damaged goods" that retailers don't want anyway, would I be considered to be retailer friendly? Since it's already been stated that etail of what you produce isn't a bad thing.

 

[Anonymous]

Can those few service the entire proposed large AMDA membership? The few that do it (don't sell to etailers) can be combined into one facility and still not be able to service such a group (even as small as it is currently).

AMDA needs to kick around the definitions of terms they are using. Etail isn't so black and white as to label any that are involed in the use of it as the same. When this first came up, I cruzed the membership list on AMDA's site. Theres TONS of grey areas there. You going to start returning all etailers participants checks? Well, AMDA just went from around 50, to around 30. Thats not growing, thats shrinking. In the past 5 years AMDA went from like 100+ to 50 or so and now your proposing to take it down to 30 or so in the hopes others will join in.


If Mary only sells propigated and damages stuff, hows that effect AMDA retailers? Is it going to cut into their dead and dying section?

 

[MaryHM]

Etail isn't so black and white as to label any that are involed in the use of it as the same.

DING DING DING!!! And Gresham wins the prize for actually understanding the point of this whole thread!!!

 

[Anonymous]

But you still didn't answer my question, Glenn. In your interpretation of this whole thing, since my etail business is going to be focused on aquacultured items that I produce and "damaged goods" that retailers don't want anyway, would I be considered to be retailer friendly? Since it's already been stated that etail of what you produce isn't a bad thing.

I would consider it retailer friendly. But that doesn't mean much at this point. But it still hangs on the question, why would you as a whoelsaler wish to be a member of a retailers group? In other words how does the organization benefit from having you as a member?

 

[MaryHM]

Rover, since AMDA is now to be comprised solely of retailers then I guess I wouldn't want to be a member. Change my "Can I be an AMDA member?" to "Can I get an endorsement?". Now that we're talking about the same thing, answering should be easier.

 

[MaryHM]

Question for the AMDA BOD members:

How many current AMDA members are brick and mortar retail stores with regular business hours and do not participate in etail of any type?

 

[Anonymous]

Question for the AMDA BOD members:

How many current AMDA members are brick and mortar retail stores with regular business hours and do not participate in etail of any type?

I don't know off the top of my head, but the answer is irrelevant. We both know (and it has been expressed, though thinly veiled), that AMDA as is, is a defunct organization. The current efforts are in hopes of raising it from the dead. If it arises as a vastly different organization, so be it, if not, let it stay dead.

 

[MaryHM]

But the point is that you all insisted that you were going to poll the membership about changing the direction of AMDA. If the membership doesn't consist of B&M only stores, then isn't there a possibility that the NEW AMDA wouldn't get voted in? It is becoming clearer that the BOD has an agenda here and has already made up its mind about where AMDA is heading- just not the details.

 

[dizzy]

Mary,
I think Glenn and I have answered enough questions. Other members of the BOD will be attending IMAC and will be there to field questions at the AMDA booth. I think a lot of the brick and mortar stores have left AMDA because they didn't feel like the organization was doing anything to help them. I look at this as a last ditch attempt to save the organization. If this move fails to gain the support of a large number of retailers then I suggest we dissolve it and let everyone fend for themselves.
Mitch

PS
Perhaps something new can be started to protect retailers