Talk:Drop shipping

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Effect on business

Dropshipping is arguably the fastest growing retail phenomenom in business history.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.222.55.36 (talk • contribs) 15:15, 16 May 2005 (UTC)

The growth of home based business has been the most telling factor with this growth. With mothers wanting to stay home and work to share time with their children and the increased commercial growth of the Internet it has now become possible in the 21st century to conduct business without leaving the home and without investing huge amounts of finance in a business. The follow on effects on children actually having a parent at home with them will be interesting to see in future. Perhaps because of the example of industry that they are exposed to in their homes as children, they will grow up with a better attitude to work than the previous generations.
Wholesale suppliers are also looking more closely at this method of business as they see the downturn of sales through traditional retail outlets. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Aussiemike (talk • contribs) 15:23, 16 May 2005 (UTC)
This is somewhat true, but with all the risks of dropshipping it really is just a way for the dropshippers to make more money than you. Think of them as another middle-man in business which already has tons. You could increase sells by buying the product yourself in bulk for cheaper and shipping out using american express, because on ebay the buyer pays for shipping, you would have more control and would make more money with only having to write emails and drive to the post office than dealing with another middle man. If you can buy direct from a factory you could be making much better money with the right product. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.189.110.11 (talk • contribs) 04:55, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
Drop shipments are an important part of even medium to large sized web based retailers (such as the one I work for) that do keep a large inventory of bulk-purchased merchandise on-site. There are some items (for example, high-value electronics for extremely specialized purposes) that may be purchased by a customer only once or twice a year - having a large amount of money tied up in high-value inventory that may not sell for months at a time doesn't make any sense. With the ability to drop ship we can at least offer the item for sale - and while we may only make say $200 profit on a $4500 customer purchase, it is better than being completely cut out of the market. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.199.63.29 (talk • contribs) 04:34, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Citation

A citation for the "NOTE:" section might be useful. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.249.245.182 (talk • contribs) 18:05, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Drop Shipping Boom Online

Drop shipping has been around for years. Before the internet, drop shipping was used mostly by major corporations with mail catalogs. Since the internet has become commonplace the use of drop shipping has expanded greatly. While it is still a major tool used by large companies (e.g., Kohl's, Costco, Kmart, Circuit City, Sears) supported by companies like Commerce Hub, it has also become a form of business for small startups and eBay businesses.

There are several companies out there targeting the new market, startups trying to get a webstore or eBay business going. Some include companies that provide a list of viable dropshippers someone can contact on their own (like: Hienote) or services that connect business owners direct to multiple suppliers and dropshippers through one system (like: Doba, Doba). Ryskis 14:42, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was move to Drop Shipping —Mets501 (talk) 13:42, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Redirect this to Drop Shipping

I propose that this article be listed under the drop shipping page rather than drop shipment. If you read the article the only time the term "drop shipment" is used is once at the very top, but throughout the page drop shipping is used. The talk page also refers to "drop shipping" instead of "drop shipment".

Additionally, the article relates to a process, not a specific object. Drop shipping is a process, drop shipment is not.

Anyone oppose the move? Ryskis 15:37, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

  • Support per nom. --Yath 13:49, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Discussion

  • I'm neutral about the move - I just want to point out that if you rename/move the page using the "move page" function, it maintains the history. (This is important for our GFDL compliance.) See Help:Moving a page for more explanation. FreplySpang 15:35, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Oppose A bit of Googling shows that "drop shipment" is often used for the process as well as the item, reflecting the two meanings of "shipment". If the article isn't moved, however, the text should use "shipment" consistently. Mangoe 20:13, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Re-Oppose What do you mean a bit of search shows that "drop shipment" is used as the process? Please site some examples. Are they from reputable sites? Or are they from forums and poorly editied sites. If you look at Overture in the past month "drop shipment" was searched for 367 times while "drop shipping" was search for 4,213 times. It seems that "drop shipping" is by far the dominant way to refer to this process. Wikipedia should be refering to the most common referrence especially if it makes more sense grammatically. Ryskis 15:12, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

[edit] No affilliate or products links please!

The idea behind wikipedia is to help people and offer them free legitamate information. Do not post affilliate or product links. It is against Wiki's Rules. Try to HELP people rather than sell them. I know its a new concept for you 'lets make a quick buck' people but in time you'll understand. June B**** —Preceding unsigned comment added by Soulja90 (talk • contribs) 00:16, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

That's very clever June. Ask people to NOT place "affiliate" links or "product" links but then place a link to your own site. The issue isn't "affiliate" links but all spammy links in general. Looks a bit like the pot calling the kettle black. Ryskis 22:10, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Addition needed about types of Drop Shipping

I've seen the options of Blind Shipping and Private Label Shipping and think somebody ought to write up a bit about that. For what it's worth:

Blind Shipping: Where the wholesaler doesn't put its name on the box, the box arrives at the buyer without indications that it was drop shipped (but it doesn't have the retailer's labels either).

Private Label Shipping: Where the wholesaler uses the retailer's labels on the box, so that the buyer is led to believe that the box was shipped by the retailer, instead of the wholesaler. Eric T eh 22:16, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

  • I added info on this to the article. I couldn't find any really good sources to cite for it though; a Google search mainly turned up spammy links. flowersofnight (talk) 04:43, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Hyphenate the name and term?

Dictionary.com (which grants blanket permission for links) and its sources show "drop-ship" and "back-order" as hyphenated verbs only. Perhaps the title should be changed accordingly, as well as these terms within the article. The last paragraph of the article uses the hyphen, so consistency is also an issue here. I haven't changed it in case there is some support of which I'm not aware (e. g., UK usage?) for the non-hyphenated form. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Unimaginative Username (talk • contribs) 04:39, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

  • The USPS writes it all in one word, as "dropship", "dropshipping", etc: [1] Google results seem to have a mix of the three. I'm not sure which one would be best. flowersofnight (talk) 21:09, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
    • Wouldn't a dictionary be regarded as a more authoritative source than the USPS, or than Google, which is nothing more than a compendium of what is on the (unedited) Internet? Thanks for the comment -- hope to see some other views here, as this is probably too large a change for a unilateral edit. Unimaginative Username 00:16, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
  • That might make sense for "drop-ship" which is a verb; however, "drop shipping" is not a verb and that is what this article is about. I would vote against a hyphen. Ryskis (talk) 17:38, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Copyedit

This article, or a portion of it, was copyedited by the League of Copyeditors in February 2007. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.

See edit history for areas of concern (in hidden comments within article text).

[edit] Advice for Retailers?

Suggest possible methods that might steer businesses away from potential middlemen organizations....i.e. requests by legitimate distributors for a Federal EIN and/or SSN number as a form of tax identification, etc. Notable ref found HERE. --LeroyWilkins 01:34, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

I hate to burst your bubble, but I think this is steering away from the base topic Leroy. Let's not lose focus here and end up making this a "How to..." section.--Postmstr 19:38, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
Yes, I believe the "How-to" aspect was the reason it was removed in the first place. Mr.Z-mantalk¢ 19:39, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
Understood, and agreed! Thanks for the input. --LeroyWilkins 22:25, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Packing Slip Reference

Just an FYI to indicate that a reference to packing slip usage has been included within the revised description. This is based on a recently created packing slip definition within the Wiki. --LeroyWilkins 03:31, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Removed "drop ship professor" link

I was unable to find any information indicating that the proprietor of the disputed link has any notability. As near as I can tell, he is just a professor at Montclair State University in New Jersey - not a particularly prestigious posting. A Google search didn't turn up any independent and unbiased results demonstrating that this is someone of sufficient stature that his site should be referenced here despite its unprofessional look and sparse content. If someone can find some cites to the contrary, I'll withdraw my objection to the link. flowersofnight (talk) 03:19, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Dr. Malaga was cited as one of the top 4 e-commerce experts in the world in 2006 edition of the Business Research Yearbook. He has also published in the very prestigious Communications of the ACM and has taught at the University of Maryland and Georgetown - 2 of the top 20 business schools in the country. I have therefore re-added the link. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ramprof (talk • contribs) 17:53, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
Since nothing in your edit history (or that of the other user who also persists in adding this link (and edits the same two articles as you)) would indicate this is not linkspam, the link had been removed again. Please refer to WP:EL and do not re-add the link. Closenplay 19:02, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

I has come to my attention that one of my students added this recently. He described the current conflict. I believe there are two main problems that need to be addressed. First is one of philosophy. Should we not include a citation, even from a source that is deemed not authoritative? I, for one, would rather have a source so I can determine how much veracity I should give to the information. What if the information is incorrect? Just having it in Wikipedia gives it a patina of legitimacy. Second, my academic credentials have been called into question, so allow me to remedy that situation. As noted above, I have taught at not one, but two of the top business schools in the US. I have also been cited (in a peer reviewed article) as one of the top e-commerce experts in the world. If that is not enough to verify my creds, please let everyone know exactly what credentials are required. Perhaps only Nobel prize winners should be cited? In order to end this thread, if you have any problems and believe the citation should be removed, please have the curtesy to contact me directly to discuss this - malagar at mail dot montclair dot edu.

[edit] Removed Benefits

I originally added this section with an appropriate citation. Since others have determined that the citation is not authoritative enough (even given the credentials of the author), then the material should also be excluded. You cannot have it both ways. If the content is good enough for Wikipedia the citation must be as well.

Closenplay - you can threaten to block me all you want. I will keep coming back. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ramprof (talk • contribs) 19:10, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

OK - I didn't want to go this far but the material on benefits is copyrighted by DropShipProfessor.com and CANNOT be used for any purpose without providing an link back or other citation. If you continue to add this material to Wikipedia legal action will be taken. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ramprof (talk • contribs) 23:50, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

As I mentioned on your talk page, please refer to WP:LEGAL. Closenplay 00:14, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

Oh how silly we can be. This reminds me of little kid behavior, taking your ball home if you don't get your way. Ryskis 20:59, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Drop Shipping Business Decision

Something that may be useful for this article is a bit on the business decision process for drop shipping. I suppose it could be beyond the scope of the article but I thought I throw it out there incase someone wanted to try and tackle it. This drop shipping value page may be a starter source. Crankur 21:04, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Sorry to disagree, but your link to DOBA is just another non notable, spam-worthy source. DOBA (the company) had a previously entered WIKI entry that was deleted after considerable discussion FYI. --LeroyWilkins 09:32, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
Sorry to disagree? About the link or the suggested topic? If you have a problem with the suggested starting resource fine recommend a better one. Ranting on about it as a "spam-worthy source" doesn't help anyone. It's easy to rag on someone else's suggestion but much harder to actually offer meaningful feedback. Crankur (talk) 18:07, 21 February 2008 (UTC)