Site dropped :: How can I get relisted again?

Good points, lissa, and to add to the muddiness of the waters, lets not forget the Shopping > Directories category, which is of course a whole category of listings in the Shopping category that do not sell unique products, and may not sell any products at all. The sites listed correctly there are of course often much more what was earlier described:
"Most so-called e-businesses do not offer products or services to surfers. They offer promotional services to other businesses. And so they can't possibly have anything unique information for the surfer."


Just showing that there are exceptions to every simple rule.

Sadly, I'm still having to read between the lines as much as read the lines themselves, but am getting the message that a well presented USP (Unique Selling Point) is as valuable to DMOZ as it is to the marketing of any site anyway. I'm glad of that, because it is one of the first and foremost things that I tell webmasters.

"Most so-called e-businesses do not offer products or services to surfers. They offer promotional services to other businesses. And so they can't possibly have anything unique information for the surfer."

These words just absolutely horrify me. I have an e-biz that resells high-end outdoor gear. I offer nothing that the manufacturer offers, except:
1. Zealous customer service. It's rare that I don't get a letter saying how incredibly impressed my customers are with our customer service.
2. Better packaging.
3. Better stock. Yes, better than the manufacturer. I would never - EVER - think about running out of products and making my customers wait. I won't even be bested by the manufactures.
4. Don't like the product? I'll pay to have it shipped back - no questions asked. Nobody else offers this service.
5. Want to feel like royalty for a day? Buy one of my products.

What you are saying is that since I sell the same product, I'm no different than the manufacturer or some other schmuck that sends you the same product wrapped in a plastic bag, 10 days late?

And what about price differentiation? What if the original poster sells his posters (stick with me here!) for less than allposters.com ? That indeed makes his content unique!

lsolomon, what you're saying is that you offer services that nobody else can match. You stock and package the stuff yourself, in order to make such claims?

That's no e-business. You are describing an entity with, so you say, the best warehouse flunkies around -- that would make it a real business. It could do mail-order, phone-order, fax-order, walkin -- all those are MARKETING decisions that are really irrelevant to us. If they want to put up a website describing all the unique goods and services they offer -- we'd be happy to list it. And we'd list it regardless of what kind of order-taking they happened to choose.

I have said before -- and I think it's worth repeating -- if you have unique content you'll know what it is. This is, I think, a good example of that.

Black_Knight said:

Sadly, I'm still having to read between the lines as much as read the lines themselves ...

Click to expand...

Sounds like you're starting to understand what editors really do.

Black_Knight said:

but am getting the message that a well presented USP (Unique Selling Point) is as valuable to DMOZ as it is to the marketing of any site anyway. I'm glad of that, because it is one of the first and foremost things that I tell webmasters.

Click to expand...

Exactly! Glad there are professionals such as yourself helping to make the web a more useful place.

hutcheson said:

That's no e-business. You are describing an entity with, so you say, the best warehouse flunkies around -- that would make it a real business. It could do mail-order, phone-order, fax-order, walkin -- all those are MARKETING decisions that are really irrelevant to us. If they want to put up a website describing all the unique goods and services they offer -- we'd be happy to list it. And we'd list it regardless of what kind of order-taking they happened to choose.

I have said before -- and I think it's worth repeating -- if you have unique content you'll know what it is. This is, I think, a good example of that.

Click to expand...

OK. I gave a bad analysis because I got carried away tooting my own horn.

Please take this as a question about editing rather than a complaint or statement of my beliefs. I haven't really come to any informed decision about what I believe about this thread.

What I meant to say in my original post is - Respree, like myself, seems to compete with many sites offering identical physical products. They all sell the same stuff. However, he may offer better customer service and better pricing. Does it seem right to bump him from the list? I know that DMOZ can only list so many sites, or can't it? Is there anything wrong with listing 100 poster sites, as long as they aren't merely affiliate sites?
Like it or not, since Google uses results from DMOZ to decide whether an e-biz survives or not, you guys have a tremendous responsibility thrown on your shoulder.

How could an editor judge customer service? I would never stoop to proclaim my great customer service on my site. My business relies mainly on word of mouth; but I would be out of business if it weren't for search engines. Hmmm... maybe I need to sell something to your editors!

Despite much speculation that Google favours sites listed in Dmoz, there is no solid evidence that it does. Google recommends that webmasters gain links to their sites. Links enable them to be found by Googlebot and Google to assign PageRank. But

1. PageRank is only one of c.100 factors in the Google algorithm.

2. Dmoz is only one of the places a webmaster could gain a link. It is one of the two recommended by Google - yes. But Yahoo is the other and will do just as well. Much is made of the fact that a link in Dmoz will generate extra links from its clones, including the Google Directory. That's true enough. But Yahoo has a number of versions for different countries, which act much the same way.

3. Yahoo is the better choice for the commercial webmaster, who can pay for fast review. A link from any volunteer-edited directory could be slow to arrive.

I won't digress at length into Google, because this isn't the place for it, but briefly businesses can advertise on Google. If that attracts sufficient ROI, they will do well out of Google. To gain a good ROI, their business needs not only to attract clicks, but to get customers. That means offering what people want at the price they want it, with the service they want. All that is in the hands of the webmaster.

Coming back to the ODP - we serve the user, not the webmaster. We have no responsibility to try to ensure the survival of the 100th sell-alike site in any field and we couldn't do it if we wanted to. Proof of that is the number of dead business sites that we have to delete all the time.

How could an editor judge customer service? I would never stoop to proclaim my great customer service on my site. My business relies mainly on word of mouth; but I would be out of business if it weren't for search engines.

Click to expand...

The Open Directory lists websites, not customer feelings. Whatever changes in policy have come about since I was an active editor, that will not be likely to change, ever.

If your site itself gives and shows your great customer service, if your levels of service are palpable and visible through your site, then it may help your site to get listed.

If I may be so bold as to offer some advice rather than just commentary, I'd strongly advise you not to be so quickly dismissive of 'stooping' to proclaim your customer service. That doesn't mean go around shouting that you have it, it means showing it in ways that count, that make you feel good about it, and in ways that matter to the customers (and the editors).

How do you show your returns policy? Is it clearly visible in every page, or tucked away in an area that an Editor (with hundreds of sites to review) might miss? Any page of your site can be an entry page, thanks to search referrals, so don't leave your customer service policies only accessible through the front of site. Make sure it is visible instantly to all - wherever they start out.

>Respree, like myself, seems to compete with many sites offering identical physical products.
That is your impression. The editors' impression was different.

>They all sell the same stuff.
Not true, not true at all, but an utterly false and damnable heresy! Some sites simply sell posters to customers; some sites simply sell advertising to allposters.com. Granted, it is not always easy to tell the difference.

>However, he may offer better customer service and better pricing.
Editors try to avoid the more flagrant forms of speculation -- especially secondhand speculation, and simply review the site.

>Does it seem right to bump him from the list?
You have said nothing that was both true and relevant to that decision.

hutcheson said:

For Amazon, the issues are simple enough that any idiot can see them. Amazon is a genuine, legitimate bricks-and-mortar distributor, with its own stock, services, price list, etc. Amazon affiliates are promotional advertisements, nothing more, with no conceivable unique shopping information. For Vstore/SMC, the concepts are again idiot-visible simple: the affiliates are merely promotional advertisers. The difference between a vstore affiliate and an amazon affiliate is twofold: the amazon affiliate is MUCH more informative--they tell you up front whom they're promoting--while the vstore affiliate does not give that information. And that difference in information provided reflects an intentional distinction. The Amazon program is fundamentally honest: they created something that could be used to add value to a unique site. The vstore/SMC program is fundamentally dishonest and evil: the retained information is the most important part of purchasing something by mail, and it is concealed specifically for the sake of ease of spamming both search engines and directories. We ODP editors, as one of the biggest single collection of SMC victims, take their contemptible behavior VERY personally and VERY seriously. But that doesn't make it any easier to prevent being injured by them.

What does all this have to do with the site in question? Well, it's very hard for us to tell whether it's something like an SMC shrouded-doorway-page, or is a legitimate business. Nothing that has been said about the site in this forum (even assuming it's true, which is not something we could do without independant verification anyway) helps resolve that question.

Click to expand...

You are eluding to the fact that my SMC products are the reason for my site being delisted.

I will be the first to admit that the marketplace is overly flooded with these products. However, your view of sites that market these products being "evil and contemptable" is grossly misguided. You refer to these marketers as being affiliates. This is not true. SMC does not sell directly to the public. They are wholesalers, no different from the tens of thousands of wholesalers who sell to E-Tailers, drop shipping products directly to the customers of E-Tailers. SMC has no affiliates; they have wholesale customers.

There are currently 195,000 art prints and posters on my site, with only a miniscule percentage being SMC (about 300 products or one tenth of one percent). In the grand scheme of things, does that really warrant a entire site from being dismissed? If so, on that basis, you also need to de-list Amazon.com, who also offers SMC products on their website.
http://s1.amazon.com/exec/varzea/se...eywords
alabastrite&sz=50&pg=1&full-results=1

hutcheson said:

Not true, not true at all, but an utterly false and damnable heresy! Some sites simply sell posters to customers; some sites simply sell advertising to allposters.com. Granted, it is not always easy to tell the difference.

Click to expand...

Actualy, hutcheson, it is very easy to tell. There are also many hundreds (if not thousands) of allposters affiliates. It is very clear that they are affiliates, because no matter how clever they are on their website about concealing the fact that they are an affiliate, the ultimate sales transaction ("buy now" or "add to cart") will always lead to the allposters.com website.

>> There are currently 195,000 art prints and posters on my site, with only a miniscule percentage being SMC (about 300 products or one tenth of one percent). In the grand scheme of things, does that really warrant a entire site from being dismissed? If so, on that basis, you also need to de-list Amazon.com, who also offers SMC products on their website.
http://s1.amazon.com/exec/varzea/se...&full-results=1

Technically, the link you provided shows user-owned shops that happen to use Amazon as their sales vehicle (much like eBay), not that Amazon itself is selling SMC products.

Read my post again. I grant you, Amazon and allposters are generally easy to spot, although I'm running into people going to more and more trouble to try to hide that information. It is SMC that is pure evil; their affiliates lie about what they are, and SMC lies about what it is -- and you repeat the lie.

It is not a wholesaler. They do not sell to retailers, they do not ship to retailers, and they do not provide any services to retailers. It is a retailer in drag.

As you say, unlike an honest company (amazon or allposters), SMC doesn't host its own storefront. But to say that it doesn't provide one is extremely dishonest. It seduces co-conspirators to host tens of thousands of copies of its storefront, giving a false name as the business entity which provides the product.

Experienced shopping editors know the SMC product line, and yes, if they spot one or two unidentified SMC products on a website, that is good and sufficient cause for immediate rejection. At that point, we know what kind of "business" the website is fronting for, and further details are really unnecessary. It's time to reject it and move on. -- there's no reason for editors to waste time wondering "Does this website have 30,000 SMC products as well as one bit of klitch they make themselves and sell nowhere else on the internet?"

So the only way to keep a "mixed-source" site from being immediately rejected is to identify the sources, so editors can ignore the non-unique ones, and review the possibly unique ones. And yes, I have heard that SMC does not allow its affiliates to give true information about the source of the products they are advertising -- and that is another mark of the beast.

This is not a negotiable ODP policy. At one time, SMC was unique among all the distributed-denial-of-service-spammers in that ODP staff had attempted to reject all SMC affiliates automatically. That didn't work, but that will give you an idea of the attitude that is inculcated in the ODP community.

hutcheson said:

Read my post again. I grant you, Amazon and allposters are generally easy to spot, although I'm running into people going to more and more trouble to try to hide that information. It is SMC that is pure evil; their affiliates lie about what they are, and SMC lies about what it is -- and you repeat the lie.

It is not a wholesaler. They do not sell to retailers, they do not ship to retailers, and they do not provide any services to retailers. It is a retailer in drag.

As you say, unlike an honest company (amazon or allposters), SMC doesn't host its own storefront. But to say that it doesn't provide one is extremely dishonest. It seduces co-conspirators to host tens of thousands of copies of its storefront, giving a false name as the business entity which provides the product.

Experienced shopping editors know the SMC product line, and yes, if they spot one or two unidentified SMC products on a website, that is good and sufficient cause for immediate rejection. At that point, we know what kind of "business" the website is fronting for, and further details are really unnecessary. It's time to reject it and move on. -- there's no reason for editors to waste time wondering "Does this website have 30,000 SMC products as well as one bit of klitch they make themselves and sell nowhere else on the internet?"

So the only way to keep a "mixed-source" site from being immediately rejected is to identify the sources, so editors can ignore the non-unique ones, and review the possibly unique ones. And yes, I have heard that SMC does not allow its affiliates to give true information about the source of the products they are advertising -- and that is another mark of the beast.

This is not a negotiable ODP policy. At one time, SMC was unique among all the distributed-denial-of-service-spammers in that ODP staff had attempted to reject all SMC affiliates automatically. That didn't work, but that will give you an idea of the attitude that is inculcated in the ODP community.

Click to expand...

You speak very authoritatively about something you know little about. However, you have been patient, so I will educate you on what is reality so your perception of what is happening can be clarified.

- "It is SMC that is pure evil" FALSE. I'll admit they are very aggressive in obtaining customers who market their products on the internet, but pure evil, as you so eloquently put it is not the same thing as being aggressive.

"their affiliates lie about what they are" FALSE. Once again, you are mistaken about the word affiliate. They have no affiliates as far as I am aware of. What you are calling affiliates are, in fact, wholesale customers who buy product from them. They just happen to drop ship directly to the the end consumer. An affiliate is commission is paid to the referring site. The company itself, processes the order, collects the money and pays a referal fee.

"SMC lies about what it is" FALSE. This is based on the incorrect assumption that the E-Tailers marketing these products are affiliates. SMC is up-front that it is a wholesaler, who has a drop-ship product fulfillment service.

"and you repeat the lie." FALSE. Assuming you are correct, yes, I have repeated the lie. However, that assumption is false.

"It is not a wholesaler." FALSE. I would not call them a traditional wholesaler, which large quantities must be ordered and shipped directly to the Retailer. Their business model is different. They will sell an E-tailer one unit and drop ship directly to the end consumer. Be that as it may, they are a wholesaler.

"They do not sell to retailers" FALSE. The fact is, it is just the opposite. The 'only' sell to retailers. You and the general public cannot buy directly from SMC. That's the definition of wholesale.

"they do not ship to retailers" FALSE. They do ship to retailers. However, on the Internet, it does not make sense to invest money to have inventory on hand. That is what makes their drop ship business model attractive.

"and they do not provide any services to retailers." FALSE. The service they provide is they drop ship products to end customers, they process retailer orders, provide customer service, etc. These services are all provided to retailers. They will not provide these services to the genera public; again the definition of being a wholesaler.

"It is a retailer in drag." FALSE. I've been involved in retail for 20 years now and have never heard that term. Are you making this up? A retailer, by definition, collects funds from the end customer. They do not.

To be frank, I really don't even actively market these products. Whether they sell or not, I really don't care. My main business is prints and posters. They have been left on my site only as a matter of selection to my customers who are shopping for art.

Of course, I cannot speak for any the marketing tactics of other merchants who offer these products, but it seems wrong to indiscriminately view 'anyone' marketing these products in the same light.

By your argument, if Amazon.com were to sell these products, would they be delisted?

Respree, if all of what Hutcheson says is as false as you say it is, then surely you wouldn't have a problem with identifying the source of each product on your own website as he suggests? After all, if SMC is merely a wholesaler as you say it is, then they couldn't possibly object to this, could they? And the product identification would help customers--as a frequent online shopper, I *hate* trying to scroll through stuff I've already seen on other sites. E-stores that legitimately sell products from many different wholesalers nearly always try to make this more convenient for their customers by allowing them to shop by brand as well as by object type. (Amazon.com's clothing sales are a good example of this.)

Looking for product information on an online shopping site is hardly an unreasonable policy on the ODP's part--we are trying to provide our users with a similar level of convenience and freedom from drudgery that these excellent e-commerce sites provide, by *not* linking to the muddled-up ones that will make them page through all the same stuff repeatedly and exert their memory to keep track of which ones are unidentified SMC stuff if that isn't what they're looking for.

It seems pretty straightforward to me.

Actually, he does have one good point. Amazon and probably 95% of the retailers you guys list do drop ship from other retailers.

Most retailers on the web are going to want to cross sell products that aren't necessarily in their inventory. Why send the profit to someone elses website just because of a minor technicality?

What you guys are trying to do is noble but probably deserves a bit more thought to make it fair for the little guy.

>>By your argument, if Amazon.com were to sell these products, would they be delisted?

If the bulk of their products started coming from dropshippers, yes, we might well delist them.

I am content to let my representation of SMC stand.

I should mention tshephard's usual disengenuity: this has nothing whatsoever to with "stores offering items that are not in their inventory", it's about non-stores with no inventory not to have items in.

flicker, it's not a matter of "accidentally forgetting to give the source." SMC requires their participation in the scam to be concealed -- the exact opposite of a legitimate company with pride in their brand name. And even so, they've had to change their name at least twice in the past five years: for the wicked, a reputation is a hard thing to have hanging over one's head.

That's precisely what I was trying to ask... if these folks were the legitimate wholesalers Respree says they are, then why wouldn't they permit their partners to label their goods with their business' name, as most reputable salesmen who carry other people's products do? Amazon.com not only lets me know I'm buying a skirt from Newport News, they'll let me search within their Newport News inventory if that's what I'm looking for or search excluding Newport News if I have no interest in that line. Full disclosure AND convenience to their users. If I physically go to Target, they won't hide from me the manufacturers of the toaster ovens I'm looking at. If SMC were real wholesalers and their distributors were real retailers, surely this wouldn't pose a problem?

I really can't see any reason why the ODP should *ever* list a site that fails to provide the true identity of *any* of its products; not even if it's only one of thousands. I can't think of any legitimate reason for such duplicity. Either the sellers are trying to hide the fact that they're affiliates of the manufacturer, or else the manufacturer is involved in dodgy things they don't want the law or consumer advocates tracking them down over. Or both. Leaving sites like that out will only improve the directory... and my shopping experience as a user of the directory.

Let me ask a few questions.

Where did Amazon.com buy this book?
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0143035002/

Or this CD?
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/B0000DZTOM/qid=/br=1-/

The largest online retailer on the planet doesn't list the brand. Don't you think Amazon has invested millions into creating a formula that would present its products in a manner to create the most favorable marketing experience possible? I think its fair to say the topic was debated and it was deemed to be a non-issue. A Warner Brothers DVD is no better and no worse than a Universal Studios DVD and does not help the customer to make an informed buying decision. In short, it serves no purpose (in this example).

The fact is SMC does not prohibit using its name and I could easily list my products as SMC, but what would be the purpose? If I did, now that would be deceptive. They are a wholesaler who purchases products from hundreds of overseas manufacturers that you would not recognize by name. There is no "SMC brand" products.

It would be the exact same thing if I started a wholesale company called Respree Wholesale. With enough capital, I could set up an operation exactly like SMC purchasing products from the exact same manufacturers SMC does, but it would both wrong and unethical to respresent these products as a "Respree Brand." A wholesaler is not a brand. They are middlemen, logistically moving product from manufacturer to retailer.

Isn't the goal of ODP to serve its visitors? Let's step back from this thread for a moment.

Close your eyes and imagine the following.

You visit an online store through ODP. You find a product which interests you, serves to fill a need or for whatever reason you decide to make a purchase. You call customer service with a question and receive service that is friendly, professional and helpful. Questions are answered on this website giving you information to make an informed buying decision. All the facts are disclosed. The site does what they say they will do, shipping your promptly. You receive your purchase promptly in perfect condition and you are happy with the product. Overall you look back on the overall online shopping experience you just had and conclude you were very happy to deal with them. Because of this, you revisit the time and time again because you like shopping there. They offer great value and service.

Here's the question: In the customers eyes (the person ODP is trying to serve), what difference does it make whether a brand was listed with the product or whether the item was drop shipped? In this case, the retailer is happy. The wholesaler is happy. The customer is happy. Why is ODP unhappy?

Where did Amazon.com buy this book?

Click to expand...

Penguin

Or this CD?

Click to expand...

It's not a CD, it's a DVD. Buena Vista Home Video.

Enough. Thread closed.