Re: [AGA-sc] Pams off sale? -- Or gracefully acepting the agony of success (albeit minor success)

["S. Hieber" <shieber@yahoo.com>]

Comments below.
 
 


----- Original Message ----
From: Erik Olson <erik@thekrib.com>
To: Aquatic Gardeners Association Board <aga-sc@thekrib.com>
Sent: Saturday, July 15, 2006 3:42:25 PM
Subject: Re: [AGA-sc] Pams off sale?


I've found the script to run the numbers of single PAMs sold since 
the sale...looks like about $250 brought as a result of the sale, and 
about 73 single copies sold.

Breakdown by month:

2006-03 24
2006-04 24
2006-05 10
2006-06 8
2006-07 7

We didn't split out TAG vs. PAM previous to the sale, but I was able to 
determine that in the lifetime of the PayPal system, we've only sold about 
88 single copies of PAM to begin with.  Which means that over 2/3 of the 
lifetime sales of these issues happened between March and May of this 
year... which I suppose means Scott is perhaps right.
 
>> well, that was the whole point of the sale and it seems like it worked. Yet 
>> somehow, we are disappointed with achieving our goal? I'm not getting the 
>> thinking here at all. If we sold a thousand of them, would we think we had 
>> done better or just made too much work? Otoh, if we sold only 10, would we 
>> believe we had succeeded in what we set out to do?

On the other hand, how much work did it take Diana to mail 76 copies of 
PAM to bring in that $250...which was my original point on the sale.
 
>>>That's how we sell stuff. They but; we ship. If individual copies are too 
>>>much work. Maybe we should limit sales to lots of all six issues, although I 
>>>doubt that they would move as quickly without a further price drop. I 
>>>thought the point was to move the PAMs because they are worthwhile items for 
>>>aquatic gardeners even if we can't make a lot of money on them. I don't 
>>>think PAMs are going to bring a lot of money. They have minimal, negligible, 
>>>market value. I still think we should either move them or destroy them. What 
>>>are we saving them for?

Looking at the numbers again, it appears that not many people have bought 
the combo during the sale...though it brought in $240 and probably wasted 
less of Diana's time.

2006-03 3
2006-04 2
2006-05 0
2006-06 1
2006-07 0
total   6
code    AGA-PAM6
description     All 6 PAM + 4 TAG
 
>>>This makes it pretty clear to me that the larger sums are less attractive 
>>>and probably not an effective way to move the PAMs--at least, without 
>>>further steep discounting.. 

OK, point being, we're taking a couple hundred bucks income total here, 
and probably moving less copies than we gave away at last year's ACA. 
 
>>>>"Free" alsways beats charging anything at all. 
>>>>If there to much trouble to sell at sale and they don't sell off-sale, 
>>>>then, let's just ship the remainder to SF and mark the boxes "free" or 
>>>>throw in a set of six with each membership, no extra charge except to cover 
>>>>the extra postal cost. The fact that they don't bring in money isn't a good 
>>>>reason to hang on to them.
 

So 
if it was Cheryl's choice to do the sale, I think Cheryl could very well 
end the sale and I don't think we're much different for it.

>>>>In the context of a business decision, I don't understand this last comment 
>>>>at all. Boredom doesn't seem like an appropriate basis. If the point is 
>>>>that PAMs don't matter one way or the other, let's just dump the buggers.
 
 
 
sh
_______________________________________________
AGA-sc mailing list
AGA-sc@thekrib.com
http://lists.thekrib.com/mailman/listinfo/aga-sc