Why Sellouts are our Goal
87I thought maybe I'd make this more formal someday but then it probably wouldn't get done. So here's a forum-quality attempt (which means it rambles on a bit):
Years ago I made a slide that defined the term "Deal" to venture capitalists. I was having many stupid conversations; and, at the time, I hadn't realized it was the audience. I wanted a stronger talking point of what our company philosophy was. Deal vs. Discount basically. My slide said something like: a deal is an offering at a lower price to a subset of those who would want it.
So, by my definition, the key requirement of a deal was that demand outstrip supply. Now, having come up with the daily deal business model, I would of course talk about how time limits can effectively create ambiguity that a business could use to their advantage. If many people bought an offer in a short time period then assumptions are very likely correct that the offer was a deal. Do it again and again and you become a deal site. However, my point here to you is more precise: until the last unit is sold, you cannot define whether you have a deal or a price drop.
Why does that matter? Price drops might be enjoyable good entry points to buy a product, but they are inherently prone to future price drops. Market clearing price is what I was after -- in fact building a platform to achieve market clearing price is still what most excites me. A platform where price drops are announced is just a retailer. Retail is boring. Amazon bought my business and it became (to me, I'll qualify) a boring retailer.
When you see a sellout occurring on a product, we've done our job. Market clearing price was realized. When you see us offer a smaller quantity event, it is because we found the deal quality to make up for the quantity. And hey, we're small so let's have some fun and show how we want this platform to work. But, be assured we're still not entirely happy. These small quantity deals can be enjoyed for the day, but they don't help us grow and build a better market clearing platform.
So again, if a single person wants one afterwards, the offering was a deal. However, most of the time, the sizes of closeouts available to us are larger than our existing audience can handle. We can't price large quantity deals low enough to get enough people in on the same day. To do this better, we have to build over time. We want a bigger audience to be able to participate and sell out of these potential larger deals. Be assured, right now these opportunities are out languishing in the marketplace without buyers.
Basically, know that we enjoy our sellouts as sort of interim goals. If we have a ridiculously small quantity, know we are pained but also proud to have locked in the true definition of a deal to our audience. Help us grow and we'll use that negotiation power to your advantage on larger deals. (not to mention other mediocre sites & fun to be had)
- 33 comments, 95 replies
- Comment
Just do me a favor: no matter how "big" meh may get, keep the tone of the communication the same.
@bakerzdosen definitely a goal of mine.
@bakerzdosen Did anyone ever tell you you have excellent taste?
@JasonToon Just my wife.
And only when talking about my taste in women.
Also, I should append that this is not our only mode of event. There are times where a product is interesting enough and a "normal discount" special enough that of course it becomes worth doing. Just big picture above on sellouts.
Thanks for the explanation. It seems the perfect balance would be an item that sells out moments before the day ends, but reality is a constraint. For a deal-a-day site, any remaining stock has to be sold through another channel or warehoused to be served up as leftovers at some later time. Both tend to reduce your margin.
Speaking only for myself, I would rather see items sell out frequently, than to see the same item keep turning up like a bad penny. There's enough of the latter at other sites.
This makes a lot of sense. Thanks for the thorough explanation. I for one am always delighted to hear about the inner workings of business models.
This explanation answers my question about how much growth is needed and why. Thank you for the insight. The hypothesis cannot be thoroughly tested until you can test it on a huge level, which requires more people. I hope it happens and will keep shoving people here at every opportunity.
Ditto what @jsh139 said. I get tired of all of the second-guessing and whining (okay, I get tired of everyone else's; my contrary comments are always insightful and you'd be brilliant to adjust accordingly) and I have a lot of respect for a company that does what they're gonna do and doesn't feel the need to pander. Which reminds me of this awesome thing (BTW, I kinda like lawyers; the one who wrote this Yelp review is an ass).
http://uproxx.com/webculture/2014/10/a-negative-yelp-review-led-to-this-hilarious-take-down-from-the-restaurants-owner/
"Help us grow" = "Tell somebody in the Dakotas! We're dying there!"
@PocketBrain Got you covered. Just told my ND friend who introduced me to woot back in 2006 about it. Reply: ":O omgosh"
@FSSZilla And now, I notice, ND shows up with color. Quick! Tell him to call his cousin in SD and we can fill in that state as well!
Came back from a bit of a forum-reading absence to find this great post. Well put and I hope I'm slowly doing my part converting people into customers of your amazing site since showing off the fun I had with my fukubukuro. (I did tell them not to expect similar treatment, but now I feel I didn't allow them to be properly disappointed as a result.)
I enjoy the Price is Right-esque aspect of the market-clearing price determination frame a game-theory aspect. Sort of like closest price without going over, in reverse. Then add in the aspect that you also use the price to control how fast the market clears. It's really a fascinating problem, with the additional complication that there are going to be some significant differences in the algorithm depending on if your deal is at a low point (AA batteries) versus a higher one (Dysons).
@pmulry YES. This is what is fun. It's why I'm back for more.
@pmulry It would be interesting to use algorithmic controls to adjust the price thoughout the day. If stock is low and it is selling out, the price goes up. If the item isn't selling then the price goes down. The game to the customer is to know if the price will go up or down...
@tightwad I believe Amazon basically does this already.
@snapster Economics always has been the most fun of the dark sciences.
@tightwad that's an interesting problem and the airlines spend big money on it, but it's different than equilibrium price for a daily deal site.
Another good thing about sellouts is they encourage people to excitedly check the new deal right when it's posted, just like in the good old days. That same fun and excitement of 2006 can be brought back with just the right touch.
@snapster ... No need to explain, you and your team are doing just fine, keep up the great work
I like the cut of your jib @snapster
Also this:
Basically equals speaker docks.
Thanks for sharing your retail philosophy with us!
Not to start a stupid conversation, but since I am now in the audience, I disagree with trying to change the meaning of subjective terms like 'deal'. By that logic it would be like defining a meal as 'delicious' only if it was completely eaten. People will still think the food was delicious even if they don't clean their plate or the restaurant doesn't run out. Deals are only deals to a certain constantly rotating and evolving subset of people, and whether the items sell out or not is immaterial - unless I completely misread or misunderstood this post, which I will be the first to admit is a distinct possibility.
@hallmike it's not important that I convince you that my definition is correct if the outcome is aligned with what you want.
A chef wanting to make a meal delicious is objectively good. If he's serving more than people can eat that's objectively bad. I'd let him be officially wrong in rolling the two together.
@hallmike A fair point, but don't you think that if something was truly delicious people would want to finish it? If you cook a meal of 5 people and they all call it delicious but don't finish, it's likely they were only saying so to be polite. If Meh (or Woot, or whoever) posts a deal where the price isn't good, it will still convey the appearance of a deal due to its context, but if consumers don't bother buying it wasn't really a deal. Do that once or twice and people forgive it, but do it really often and it hurts the brand.
@Starblind Hey, if he cooks a meal of 5 people, I'm out of here, MVP or not.
Nobody wants to eat at @Starblind 's house now... hope you didn't get a bunch of fryers today to cook for all of us.
@Starblind Not necessarily. I may have just eaten recently or the servings may be too large for me to finish, but the food is still delicious. The same way I might think the item up for sale on any given day is still a deal even thought I can't afford it right now or don't need it. A deal is a deal whether or not I am able to buy it, or whether it sells out or not.
@snapster True, it is not important to convince me of your definitions. I will still come here every day I am able, and see whether I think your offering meets MY definition of a deal, and purchase or 'meh' it accordingly.
@hallmike i understand your perspective, but think you might be looking at this at a more micro level instead of the macro lens through which @snapster is viewing it.
To use your meal analogy, at a macro level it doesn't qualify as delicious (ie. "a deal") if you finish the meal, it's delicious if so many people like it that the chef sells out of that meal during dinner service.
@hallmike Deal is definitely subjective. For you and /or 5 friends, that may be true. But the aggregate of all customer or potential customer base, is what is important to the @snapster. His making a deal or not, is limited by the number of MEHmbers.
Snapster, I'm making a run at the Necomimi brainwave cat ears for you . So far, they can't produce enough to satisfy the demand.....
(honkerbob-Russ)
I'm a shopaholic. Just sell me stuff.
@Teripie Without selling out before I get to buy it- that should [in my own and admittedly subjective world view] constitute the only acceptable and successful definition of deal...
@Collin1000 linked this thread for everyone, but I figured it would be helpful to resurrect it for everyone.
@Thumperchick that works too. tyvm!
I would like to refute that selling out of an item is the best indicator of a "deal". If that were the only measurement then success could be achieved as easily as just buying a very limited number of said item. The Fryer was certainly a "deal" at $10. Had Meh had 2,000 of them it could still have qualified as a "deal" since there was no other opportunity to buy them at that kind of price. If the sellout had happened in 20 hours instead of 20 minutes it would still have met the @snapster qualification of a "deal". If it hadn't sold out, although the price point was the same, simply because there was enough quantity to meet the demand it would still have been a "deal" to those who purchased it. It is clear then that the simple qualification of a sellout is NOT the only litmus test for "deal" status. The true test is "Can I get the same item at the same price through other outlets?" If you can buy the item multiple places at the same price it is no longer a "deal" and is instead just a "discount"...if even that. Comparing MSRP to current price is the worst kind of qualification....MSRP is often inflated and has little value on it's own.
@tightwad I'm including stock elsewhere when I define deal, but it's true that it's not always realistic that a sellout here is empirical proof. However, in practice we are buying all that a manufacturer has left and amounts elsewhere are often limited and irrelevant. This is a particular mode of event where we are trying to clear the market of a close out, which is my favorite mode (and generally the most exciting events) but is not our only mode.
I'm explaining philosophy and how we go about making decisions. Most retailers would maximize price against demand and not like an empty store. The technical accuracy of terms is not what I'm worried about. Replace deal with Market Clearing Price and maybe that helps.
@snapster So the goal of Meh is to have a sellout just before 11:00 CST. Selling out before that would indicate a lack of supply and having remaining stock after that would indicate an excess of product...or a price point that did not indicate a good enough "deal"
@tightwad I don't suspect that's completely the goal. There is an additional strategic element to when you clear the market because the timing of the sell-out is likely to influence future demand. If you always sell out at 11:01pm CST (1 minute into the daily deal), then you are going to encourage buyers who can always remember to check at 11:00 on the dot, but you will discourage everyone else, and that loyal (some would say dysfunctional) coterie is not big enough to really build the business. If you sell out at 10:50pm CST the following day (23h59m into the daily deal), then you are not really ginning up excitement for your deals and are probably underachieving demand -- one intermediate goal is that you want your customers to want to come back and check on the deal every day with some rational expectation that there may still be a deal to be had, but with the knowledge that they may miss out. There's a sweet spot somewhere in between there, but you'd probably keep it somewhat ambiguous for strategic purposes.
@pmulry this ties well into the concept of intermittent reinforcement
@pmulry this is true - but it's so far out of our control that basically aiming for a sellout "within the day" is going to result in variance as an output that is likely as good as any "best laid plans" we'd decide on strategically.
@nadroj And like slot machines, the perception [although not necessarily the reality] of random/intermittent reinforcement makes people more likely to keep playing...
I love the explanation.
But this only feeds more into my question as to why you haven't tried the reverse buy it now auction method? Start out the day at a "good price", and as the day progresses drop it until it reaches what you'd initially thought to set as a good deal. Then drop it further until it's gone if you had enough sales at the beginning to subsidize the sellout of the last few.
Given that customers don't know your "good price" and "deal price" setpoints, and they don't know the quantity, you would end up getting a very different type of sale - but still an interesting experience, and you'd rarely not sell out - thus also satisfying your primary criteria.
This, though, may be a different mediocre experiment rather than trying it on meh. But it could be the "special day" event that eventually you will have to have.
In a way, that's the purpose woot offs and BoCs served for woot - a way to complete a sellout without lowering the price during the sale. But the reality is that you'll increase the "gambling" aspect that already exists - if you don't buy something in the morning, it might not be there in the afternoon. With this method, you'd have a few purchases in the morning of people who think it's a decent deal and don't want to risk missing out, then you'd reach a tipping point during the day where people think it's a great deal and you end up with a mini-BoC war as people start to see the purchase counter go up like crazy.
At any rate, I hope you eventually try this out, here or elsewhere on mediocre, I'm really interested in seeing that tweak on the daily deal idea.
@stienman TL;DR I don't ever want to see this happen on Meh.com
@stienman Agreed that this would be a great idea for another Mediocre experiment, but definitely not here on Meh. I think @snapster could really make that work. It would be like jellyfish.com and their smack shopping. That was an amazing site, and the users/customers loved it. It also had the game element every day, which I think would do well with this crowd. Guess how low the deal will go before it sells, and the closest guesser gets to stop the spinning wheel and win a prize (sometimes awesome, sometimes a rubber chicken). I keep hoping someone will revive such a site (hint, hint, @snapster).
@stienman Lands' End has a version of this, only the discounts are set, and the time frame is one week. The buyers have to gamble as to which price will sell out : Each Saturday, we put a new group of products "On the Counter," in very limited quantities, substantially reduced from the original catalog price. On Monday, that discount price is reduced another 25%. On Wednesday, 50%. And on Friday, 75%. The price at which you purchase is the only one we can honor.
@stienman the inherent problem is that most of an events buyers didn't get the best price. it's market-efficient but joy-deficient.
@ceagee I really like this idea, probably not for Meh but I do like it.
@snapster I'm not convinced that's true. It has a little bit of gambling - a game of chicken, so to speak - in it, and a lot of people enjoy that kind of game. This is also the way realestate works (with a few differences) - put a house on the market, then start dropping the price. Everyone knows there's only one available, though, so it's tilted in favor of the seller.
@stienman fun during the event is one thing but I'm putting myself in the shoes of people who receive an item and unbox it. Most of those who paid more than the minimum will know it and they will fear that they jumped a little too soon, maybe missing something that brought down the value to the folks who waited. This is not a situation I'd want the majority of customers to experience on their purchases. The joy of the win is enjoyed by too few imo.
@snapster Ah, yes, post purchase regret would be an issue with this.
@stienman Why would I buy early if I know I can get it for less later? That's the problem with a deflationary market.
@snapster So how about the same concept but the amount charged is the lowest value...everyone pays the "sellout" price point. This would encourage people to get in early, and the further down the price goes the happier they are (they already wanted it anyway).
@tightwad there was an auction company in the first dot-com boom that did something similar to your adjustment but basically as an auction where the lowest winning price set the mark and items escalated as more bidders bid. It was actually fun but had the even clearer misalignment of goals where you wanted fewer people around. You could also tell that the product owners were releasing small batches to drive up prices and that was a distraction.
@jqubed You are correct when the quantity of items is unlimited, or known well enough that you could wait until just before sellout and get in at the lowest price. But since people wouldn't know how many are available, there's a chance you'll wait too long and miss out entirely. Meh and Woot already depend on this to some degree, both by saying "one day only" and by not indicating how many there are. A lot of people who are on the fence buy a thing only because they know they can't get it later.
Thanks for the explanation. I hope to keep seeing more of the fun and variety, and jokes about them all. Good job and here's to more sellouts.
@snapster I can agree with that definition with the qualifier as a business goal or ideal. The key is the buying. You need to buy at a good wholesale price and know your operating costs to calculate a mark-up that generates a profit. When choosing what to purchase, you also need to know your target audience. If you do not sell out, the overhead goes up no matter what. Then you are choosing what to do with the stuff. Store it, wholesale it out, resell in a new outlet, sell again with same or different price or write-up all have costs involved.
As a consumer, I do not buy every deal that I find. I would like to buy more than I do but the wallet and common sense get in the way. I do not need 3 fryers at any price although I would have bought one at your price if I had stayed up to see it. I bought a Dyson and I hope I do not need another for a good long time! Cheaper fun stuff I may impulse buy many and often. That said, I do not object to the wide range of products offered so far. Looking forward to the new and exciting things here.
I am finicky and love a deal. I will base my purchase on desire, price and availability. Don't try to write an algorithm for me though, because even I can't understand myself.
I go to Sam's Club at least once a week, purchasing what I need and use like everyone does. Many seasonal items fall into the "Gosh that is really neat, but not for that price." I know that most of these are unique, temporary and will go on clearance when the store needs to make space for the new stuffs (If you aren't aware, anything ending in a penny, 88.71 for example, is on clearance.)
Oftentimes, even when an item intrigues me, I will wait until it goes on clearance before even considering to purchase it. Once on clearance my mind game begins. If i see plenty of stock available, I will wait to see if the price decline will continue. (Every Sam's is different, too. We have 3 close by and the items' clearance prices can vary drastically between the stores.) There comes a point when either a very small amount remains or the price has gone down as much as I think they will discount and it is then i must make the decision to buy or walk (usually the former.) I am a shopper I imagine these places hate.
Why this rambling? Because I'm an oversharer and can never get to the point without too much information.
Again, Desire, Price, Availability. Availability is the wild card. When i see only a few left, panic sets in and an impulse decision is made. How does this apply here? I don't know. I said all of this to suggest adding a way to inform us that there really isn't much left in the bin so you better buy it now or forever be sad (I personally don't like woot's flashing buy button because 10% remaining is too vague.)
@jaybird I agree in most of what you "overshared", in fact, I agreed and have the same shared experiences at Sam's [Walmart, BJ's, TSC, and virtually every other "mortar and brick" store I shop/buy at], in fact in all but your judgement that you are in some way oversharing... That is where we disagree- I couldn't have agreed with you, if you hadn't said all that you said...
@unixrab tl;dr
@editorkid :|
tl;dr
@phatmass Short version: stuff and things happen sometimes
@MEHcus meh
@MEHcus
@hart Or as on AMC's Zomb-tacular show- TWD- it's "Stuff and Things...."
@snapster Just curious -- was this the original distinction you intended when you rolled out sellout.woot, or is the name more or less a coincidence?
Note to meh employees: This should keep him going for a couple of hours if you want to finish up that squares game.
@editorkid I always assumed it was a jokey reference to "selling out" to Yahoo.
@Starblind Bezos will be interested in that news
@nadroj Sellout.woot was originally a link to Yahoo Shopping, long before the dark shadow of Amazon loomed on the horizon.
@Starblind yep, good memory.
@editorkid it was tongue in cheek on us partnering with a large corporation by diluting our model to sell 2 things a day. Or, you know, foreshadowing.
@snapster Not to change the topic... How did you create a 2 paragraph reply? Will cut and paste of multiple paragraphs work? [edit: no it did not.]
@hamjudo secret mobile phone feature/bug
b
o
o
y
a
h
@snapster l
See
What
You
Mean.
@snapster I wish I could type with all of my tentacles.
@Starblind Thank you. This grasshopper is one hop closer to enlightenment.
Wait,
Hitting
Enter
On
The
Phone
Works?
Weird. Do phone keyboards insert some sort of carriage return character or something? At least I know I don't have to go find the angle bracket characters on my phone keyboard anymore.
@snapster I'm assuming you grew up in the DFW area. This business model is familiar, like those best at Trader's Village, First Saturday, and Vikon Village. But less mud.
@festercluck yep - some of the First Saturday element made it into the D-magazine profile if you're bored someday.
i'm not sure i agree with trying to change the definition of deal, but i do like and agree with the concept. the selling out is fun to watch from my perspective. the randomness of the products in also interesting. i've seen products i did not know existed or wanted.
@vampje fer gawd's sake, no one tell The Donald you've just redefined "The Art of the Deal"
@Jdub oh, was it a reference to some book i haven't and probably won't read? sometimes the planes take off over my head, and i prefer sci-fi fantasy
@vampje not at all! Just appreciate and am thankful that people appreciate randomness and deals.
@vampje @jdub
Please understand
.............so... this conversation will be reported
@unixrab oh dear, a tarnish on my reputation. i am so distraught.
@unixrab, @vampje Touche! Someone should tell @jonT to tell it to my balls, but it won't be me!
@Jdub DIVERGENT!
I manage process change and improvement for a small telecommunications company (<100m in revenue), mostly in order management and workflow. We are trying to act like a 15 year old startup and we need a lot of help. Stuff like this has the potential to be transformative. I used to have to make them read, but now they clamor for it.
Regarding the 'dumber than me' thread, just wanted to see if you were paying attention :)
@marklog A bit of trivia. My personal annual income is <100m. Weird huh?
@cengland0 are you also a small telecommunications company? because that would answer a lot of questions.
@carl669 I think you misunderstand. The <100m means less than 100 million. Even the small amount I make is less than 100 million. It's also less than 1 billion and less than 20 trillion.
@cengland0 in the context it means "less than 100 million but not so far under 100 million to say under 50 million."
@cengland0 so what you're telling us is you don't play in the NFL
@cengland0 The question is is it less than $10… LOL
But if the supply is artificially restricted doesn't it follow that the demand is artificially restricted. So by not allowing a consumer to by as many units as they wish one requires a larger pool of consumers to achieve the same goals. At the end of the day why would the supplier care if it provided a deal to one consumer or a million?
@Ruger9mm Probably because beyond a certain number X, the only people buying that many are dealers and resellers, who are not your audience. You want to sell to regular users, so you cap the quantity per user at some reasonable value, with exceptions as needed.
@Ruger9mm no, but if customers can never get the "good" deals because a reseller buys them up then they will stop visiting the site.
So the box you've drawn around yourself here is that you can never discount the same item or you will hurt future deals when people expect a price drop. You need to a way to move leftover inventory for when you get it wrong without setting anyone's expectation that they can wait you out.
Let's brainstorm solutions to that problem. I'll start:
Two. Do amazing things with items. Film it. Make dozens of dollars in YouTube ads.
Three. Offer the entire lot for sale at 1/3 the markup, no service provided.
Four. New employees must build all their own furniture and computer using leftover inventory.
Five. MehCon. You hold an annual con. Swag & Sales = Problem Solved.
@JerseyFrank Granted those are possible solutions to the overstock problem. However, I don't think that's the experiment @snapster is conducting. Rather, it sounds like he's passionate about market clearing price, with a 24 hour constraint. Devoting resources to the overstock problem would only distract from the mission statement, imho.
@JerseyFrank that may be the ideal box I'm drawing for Meh but reality is that we will not always achieve it - repeats will happen and different modes of sales will look like we are ignoring our market clearing objectives. There's actually a huge alternate perspective on the business creating viable opportunities for our wholesale partners, but I'll have to flesh that out in a future rambling post.
@snapster So no MehCon?
@JerseyFrank Do you have to have a Meh tshirt to get into MehCon, or does attending MehCon get you a Meh tshirt?
All I know is this, you guys made over $12,000 today selling an unknown brand, bunch of batteries. That my friends is pure f'n genius and you win!
@somf69 They didn't make $12,000. They had $12,000 in revenue. Since we have no idea what they paid for the batteries (much less all the other overhead), we have no idea what they made. If anything.
@somf69 That was gross, not net.
@cengland0 More than gross. It was disgusting.
@SIMBM even cost was 20% they still made a lot more money than me and you in a day!
With reference to the conversation on the loud projection alarm clock sells outs (5/6/15 deal sold out in 15 min with 585 units or whatever it was) which is why I presume someone at meh bumped this old thread onto the home page to address the sell out/deal/ business model of snapster's (I presume with enough volume of business overall and enough average margins that they remain solvent…) Of course then we have the customer goals, several are which are that stuff is still around in the morning for those of us in bed at that hour and of course enough leftovers that cool stuff lands in fukus… I guess ideally, if @snapter's deal objective is consistently met, there would be no fukus for small lot leftover clearance and we'd only get dollar tree style items, if there were even fuku's at all. Good to live in an imperfect world (grin) and long live the quality fuku (the broken TV's @jont almost sent me in that fuko not withstanding, although considering I made a working mac laptop out of two $25 broken ones I likely would have finally had a working TV that didn't need a converter box LOL). Interesting to read some of the threads on business model kind of stuff.
@Kidsandliz The official record shows it sold out in 5 minutes.
@cengland0 One of the things that interests me about this sellout - and the speed it sold out in - what price should have Meh sold it at? I've got a feeling that at $10, it would have still sold out, and Meh would have doubled their income for the day.
@Collin1000 if we optimized for maximum market clearing price all the time, our events would be too boring. These alarm clocks were very boring. There weren't enough of them to sustain much energy but at least we made the 500 we had exciting for 5 minutes.
@snapster Only for the [Number unknown because it sold out before I could look to see what the purchase limit was] people who were able to buy the clocks in that 5 minute window ....
@Collin1000 Warning: speculative post to follow. Every day, a product is either priced too high or too low. Only a product that sells out at 11:59pm would be priced perfectly. As @snapster said, there is excitement in the low price. The profit from 500 $5 clocks likely doesn't cover @jasontoon and @matthew's creative work (though maybe that's why we got the warehouse video...? :). What it did do is get a bunch of traffic driven to the site. Unique views will likely be up tomorrow.
@snapster I see what you mean by the excitement.. but if the price were the same other than excitement which would earn you more money, a quick sell out and lots of traffic wondering what happened ETC, or a slow sellout over 20-23.99 hours?
So glad this thread was bumped. I have been wanting to reread the OP and pass it out to execs as free advice regarding the positive effects surrounding transparency of business processes (they already have seen the OHSHITs and the 'dumber than me' thread) but couldn't find it.
@marklog i can see the point of the execs reading the OHSHIT thread, but the 'dumber than me' thread? and, where do you work where execs will read those threads?
Why is this thread at the bottom of today’s deal? What determines what threads are surfaced there?
@GLaDOS Whatever threads are the last 5 or so posted to.
Same as if you go to meh.com/forums for “The Full Monty”.
@mike808 But this thread has no visible posts from 2022 except from you and me?
@GLaDOS @mike808 It’s probably been dredged up by a spammer whose comments have been deleted by a mod.
OR - it’s been pulled up because it was referred to in another thread.
https://meh.com/forum/topics/gofundme-needed-for-meh-purchasers