Etail/AMDA

[Anonymous]

I just reread Burton's letter to refresh my memory of why we started this discussion in the first place. Several times he talks about how retail only storefronts are what make up most of the membership. Looks like the BOD needs to take a closer look at the member roster. If an outsider like me can spend about 15 minutes doing it, it shouldn't be too tough.

It is sounding more and more like you wish you were on the BOD.

 

[MaryHM]

If I wished I was on the BOD, I wouldn't have resigned in the first place and I wouldn't have turned down the numerous offers since then to "please come back". If I want to waste my time, I'll do it on here- not as an AMDA BOD member. Been there, done that. The only thing I wished was to discuss something other than MAC and cyanide. To examine all sides of the issues and to show that etail isn't as black and white as some like to think. Sorry to offend anyone's tender sensibilities with my opinions. Next time you don't want comments, keep your AMDA business to yourselves.

 

[Anonymous]

If I hadn't wanted to discuss the same topics I wouldn't have continued this one through 12 pages.

 

[JeremyR]

Who could possibly read this whole thing? You guys really need to get lives!

Trivia: Which "super-ethical" persona recently sent out a fax with super specials which read something to the effect of "the last of the brazillian seahorses, get them while you can"?

 

[MaryHM]

Oh, go play with your squirrel.

Hmmmm. The answer couldn't be MSI because we aren't "super-ethical" anymore. Plus we don't sell seahorses.

 

[JeremyR]

Yes, I of course wasn't speaking of you mary. ;p

 

[Anonymous]

mebbe it was sarcasm?

 

[Anonymous]

Jeremy actually *posted* something somewhere?

Sheesh, that's amazing!!!

Peace,

Chip

 

[dizzy]

Witch hunting can be great sport. IMO it would only be unethical if they were brought in illegally after the CITES changes went in effect. The Brazilian ponies usually accept frozen mysis quite readily. I hope plenty of breeding stock got in the country before the restrictions.
Mitch

 

[naesco]

Despite the best intentions of the current crop of dealers... the summer approaches and we find that prices dip to around landed cost for these newbies to remain in the game. Most don't, but the damage is done as the eye for an eye price wars go forth.

What companies are involved in these price wars? I've haven't noticed any, but I don't view etailer sites that often.

And then Quality Marine or SDC does the same and outlowballs me...then its a price war of the primary importers and not the next level up.
So then I ship from my own collecting stations still cheaper to fight with Quality and SDC...and they do the same w/ theirs.
Finally, my own divers open up a website and flog red zooanthids and bluespot jawfish via FEDEX at the Mexican border...before returning.
OOOPs, This will probably happen...and...
Western civilization goes to hell in a shopping basket.

If this is going to happen, it's going to happen. AMDA cannot demand that every wholesaler only sell to B&Ms. It's impossible. Because where there's a market, there's a supplier. Say you get the "Big 5" wholesalers to quit selling to etailers. I can guarantee you that some other company will open up to sell only to etailers or direct to hobbyists (as Mitch said is happening now). It's not going to stop. AMDA has no power to stop it. It's capitalism in all its glory. Of course we can debate the issues of the impacts on wild stocks, etc... but the bottom line is that etail is here to stay, and creating a level playing field containing B&M's and drop shipping etailers will never happen. AMDA may be able to get better pricing by creating a buyer's co-op type situation with some wholesalers. But isn't that what you guys are complaining about now- the low pricing?

So I guess I have a NEW QUESTION for the NEW AMDA.
What exactly does AMDA wish to accomplish with this new stance?

But AMDA can negotiate preferred pricing from one or more wholesalers and demand that those wholesalers not sell to retail or even others.
AMDA may choose to support there own wholesaler as well.
In which case it really dosen't make any difference what the others do.

 

[naesco]

As Jenn pointed out I have a bigger problem with the drygoods than I do with livestock. It's hard to compete when they sell it cheaper than you can buy it.

We intend to address the dry goods issues as well.

If this is going to happen, it's going to happen. AMDA cannot demand that every wholesaler only sell to B&Ms. It's impossible. Because where there's a market, there's a supplier. Say you get the "Big 5" wholesalers to quit selling to etailers. I can guarantee you that some other company will open up to sell only to etailers or direct to hobbyists (as Mitch said is happening now). It's not going to stop. AMDA has no power to stop it. It's capitalism in all its glory. Of course we can debate the issues of the impacts on wild stocks, etc... but the bottom line is that etail is here to stay, and creating a level playing field containing B&M's and drop shipping etailers will never happen. AMDA may be able to get better pricing by creating a buyer's co-op type situation with some wholesalers. But isn't that what you guys are complaining about now- the low pricing?

You are exactly right, which is why I don't understand why people think we are trying to "do away with etail" or squelch competition. If there is a market, there will be a supplier. Exactly the reason why we are trying to let the wholesalers know that there is a market for a livestock wholesaler that doesn't allow cherry pickers jobbers or walk in etailers, or who sells direct. There isn't a market currently because it hasn't been built and organized yet. The level playing field has very little to do with price. It has to do with access to quality livestock before someone with a website and a bonus room walks in and buys it.

We expect to accomplish better distribution from the wholesalers, and to do away with looking on the net and seeing killer animals that we can't ever seem to get. It has to do with throwing some more advantage toward going into an LFS and being able to see quality stuff and not the dregs that made it to the east coast. It has to do with making fish stores more profitable and enticing to own and operate in order to grow that segment of the industry as opposed to perpetually turning out new web sites with even lower prices.

My question for you is this. If a retail store is not purchasing from my wholesale company, then why should I protect them by not selling to their customers? Why should I protect someone's profit margin who isn't concerned about mine? Support me, and I'll support you. Don't support me, and I could really care less about whether I'm dipping into your customer base. Retailers also circumvent the traditional overseas supplier-wholesaler-retailer chain by purchasing via transship. Is AMDA going to disallow transshipping members in order to protect the wholesalers or is AMDA just out for the retailers?

The only reason is if you are losing customers because of it. It would be silly of me to treat a new customer differently just because they are in frequent customers, or to treat those who only shop in the store every so often differently than the weeklies. Because the goal is to turn every infrequent customer into a frequent one. Those with something to sell have very little power over those who wish to buy. It's just the way it is. You have to treat everyone the same, like a valuable customer.

AMDA is a retailers group. We have no desire to tell our members who or where or what to buy. If they choose to tranship, they have that right, if they choose to order from etailers r us, they have that right. The customer chain is a one way street. I can't make demands of my customers any more than my distributors can make demands of me. There is always somewhere else to buy.

Yes but a united AMDA could make pricing delivery and quality demands on any wholesaler using a buying group approach which would be in the best interest of all. Of course nothing stops anyone from buying outside the buying group but if the price, quality and deliver is better, why would they.

 

[naesco]

Mary you seem to imply that all wholesalers are lying cheats that will stab retailers in the back every chance they get.

No I'm not. You're twisting my words yet again into something worse than what they are. They're business people trying to make money in a very tough industry. 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.

Mary they will line up to get a united AMDA's business and your firm will be in the line.
Any wholesaler would give their eye and teeth to be the AMDA wholesaler.

 

[naesco]

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.

It is great that you support a unified NEW AMDA.

Details

Do you think it would be in the best interest of the AMDA members to have AMDA form a buying group and approach several vendors for special pricing, delivery and quality?

Do you a agree as a general comment that a buying group is in the best interest of the members of the group?

 

[naesco]

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?

A unitee NEW AMDA can enter into an exclusive agreement with net caught suppliers for the Philippines and Indonesia and exclusive agreement with suppliers from many of the smaller island suppliers if they choose to.

 

[naesco]

Apparently I'm going to have to hand out two prizes today. One to Gresham and one to Devil's Advocate. Anyone know where I can find some cool prizes online for cheap?

Mary Are you saying that you support Devils Advocate when he posted this below?

The use of the term "traditional store front" will be the spike in the heart of AMDA, IMO. All this arguing over etail, in all the forms that Mary has stated, is silly. This industry is changing and is not going back to the "traditional store front". The internet has changed almost all the retail sectors. If it's changed for the good is a matter for another debate.

This new direction of AMDA seems like sour grapes and the inability or refusal to bring change within their business in order to adapt to the new marketplace driven by the internet.

 

[naesco]

Great thread chock full of ideas for the NEW AMDA

Here is a summary to date.

1. AMDA is looking for input in changing the organization to make it into an organization that will benefit B&Ms.

2. AMDA should be commended for getting input not only from its membership but hobbyists and those adverse to its interest.

3. AMDA needs time to reconstitute the NEW AMDA and will not be bullied into making committments at this time.

4. AMDA should explore the potential benefits of the following.
a. creating a buying group to reduce prices, increase quality and delivery.
b. contract an exclusive wholesaler(s) who would support only to AMDA and thus give all B&Ms no matter where they are situate equal rights to the choice specimens (cherry pick)
c. contract with suppliers from some of the smaller islands for exclusive rights to the islands fish and coral
d. contract with net caught suppliers for the exclusive rights to the suppliers fish.

5. No AMDA member is required to buy from the buying group. Each member can buy from any wholesaler of its choosing.

6. That the environmental component of AMDA remain strong and be encouraged to make reeform in the industry for the betterment of the industry.

7. That AMDA members with excellent leadership abilities and the desire for change be encouraged to run for office and hold directorships in the NEW AMDA.

 

[JeremyR]

See, 7 posts in a row by naesco.... makes me wonder how the lot of you have held up in here this long. Shame on you rover for telling me about this thread. I'm going to go crawl back under my rock now.

 

[MaryHM]

Glenn actually *talked* to you??!!! <gasp> But you...you're the....ENEMY!! One of those etailing B&Ms!!! HOW DARE YOU!!!!!!!!!! :twisted:


Even if you are one of those EBMs (there's a new acronym to add to our repertoire ), you're also one of about 5 retailers I know that really cares and actually tries damn hard to do the right thing rather than just talk about the right thing.

 

[JeremyR]

Oh come on.. etail is like 1% of my biz.. and rarely livestock.. heh. I"m going into the flower biz, remember?

 

[JeremyR]

EBM.. enema bowel movement?