Commercial modders and co-ops: the problems

Status
Not open for further replies.

rolygate

Vaping Master
Supporting Member
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Sep 24, 2009
8,354
12,402
ECF Towers
The whole situation of commercial modders and co-ops has got out of control. This forum has been manipulated by people who are small-scale vendors but who want to take advantage of the ECF facilities and community. It can't go on like this and it is time to clean house.

There are two issues:
1. Modders who are in reality vendors but trying to camouflage their activities.
2. People running co-ops who have no right or ability to do so.


1. Modders who are vendors
In order to protect members, ECF has many policies in place that separate members from vendors. Those rules are there for a reason. If people are selling products, they have to be a Registered Supplier because it allows us to inspect their activities and make sure people are not taken advantage of.

If you have people flouting those rules, two things happen:
a. Members will eventually get ripped in one way or another.
b. It ruins the Modders Forum for genuine modders, who are experimenters, inventors and e-cig improvers who have no commercial agenda.


2. Badly-run co-ops
Some people start co-ops when they have no real ability to run one, or when in reality it is a commercial venture. The result is that members get no product for months, or get ripped, or are unknowingly just part of a commercial project that may or may not go wrong.


What we have to do now
So in the end, ECF has to act. There are two things we have to do: (1) make sure the Modders Forum is for modders not vendors; and (2) make sure people know that money paid into a co-op is high-risk, especially if the numbers are big - either the cost, or the number of units.

It appears that some people here have taken advantage, and that will now be stopped.

As regards the 'dead' co-op/s, those who paid still have all their contacts for the co-ops/s concerned. The people running these ventures do not respond here or anywhere else, so effectively the thread/s is/are dead in any case.

Currently, we are looking at new systems for co-ops on ECF. These may include a new, separate section where they have to be placed (done); a rule that maximum 100 units is the limit; and extensive warnings that any money paid is strictly a risk/benefit wager: you attempt to get a product at half-price (the benefit), against the possibility you get nothing, or the quality is poor, or there is a one-year wait (the risk).

People need to realise the difference between buying in a co-op and buying from an ECF Registered Supplier: there is absolutely no comeback if a co-op goes bad. The same goes for buying from an under-the-counter semi-commercial modder.

So: we need to fix the problem that people are abusing the system, and then when it all goes wrong, members complain to us. They think there is something we can do - but we can't, because you went around the system in the first place.

This needs fixing. There will be some pain at first, but nothing compared to leaving it as-is.


Scale
Like the Classifieds section, which has also had problems that need fixing, the Modders Forum and the co-ops situation need updating. Due to the huge scale of everything on ECF, no problem is small: they may start small, but eventually problems become too big to ignore any longer. As ECF grows, changes have to come. What works with a few close friends doesn't work with tens of thousands of people spread around the world.
 

asdaq

Vaping Master
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Feb 23, 2010
4,570
1,845
poland, and the brassy lands of google
Rolygate, thank you for sharing your insight and the perspective that a site member such as myself is not aware of. All of the reform suggestions sound reasonable and certainly needed, but I agree with Cappadoc about the 100 piece limit. Price breaks, one of the key reasons for having co-ops, don't usually start until 100+ pieces have been ordered. Perhaps 200 or 250 would be more logical.
 

rolygate

Vaping Master
Supporting Member
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Sep 24, 2009
8,354
12,402
ECF Towers
@Cappadoc
Yes, this is a good point. It's probably why this hasn't been brought in by those in charge of setting up a new way of trying to reduce the problems.

But how would you suggest that the following type of issue is fixed?

- A large-scale co-op is advertised on ECF
- It has 500 or more units to be manufactured
- People invest between $100 and $300
- A result is promised in a couple of months
- The people running it obviously have no idea what is really involved in a venture on this scale
- After six months there is no result
- In the end, people may have to wait up to a year for their order (if it appears)
- Complaints to the co-op managers are not replied to, and there are no refunds
- It is obviously a commercial venture - nobody can do work on this scale for free
- Many people complain to ECF
- Some people obviously attach some sort of blame to ECF

One thing that cannot happen is we let these sorts of things carry on. Please suggest a solution.
 

MikeE3

Vaping Master
Supporting Member
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Aug 23, 2011
8,615
110,852
Skippack, PA
First off - I'm a 'newb'. I've only been vaping and hanging out on ECF since Sep. 2011. So, I haven't been around long enough to see the ugly - I've only seen the good. I've taken part in 2 co-ops. One had a minimum of 200 units the other 300 units to be cost effective. One co-op has shipped all the units, the other co-op will be shipping in the next couple weeks. Both went very well, myself and others involved in these co-ops seem to be quite pleased.

From my limited perspective, I don't think 100 max is viable as an upper limit for a co-op nor is the number of units a key indicator / metric to judge the viability or reliability of a co-op. The co-op should be based on other factors such as 'who' is running it (have the been around long, do they have good feedback, lots of likes, knowledgeable in the area/subject of the co-op), have they had previous experience running a co-op, does the costing/pricing of the 'unit' suggest it's really a commercial venture or not, can the perspective co-op manager get 10 or 12 or some other number of endorsements from other ECF members that they are reliable, upstanding members of the ECF community.

Just thinking off the 'cuff' - but with thought and likely reviewing the current rules (and I really don't know what they are) for running a co-op, one could revise the co-op regulations to tighten up the weak areas and provide for a better more consistent positive outcome without setting an arbitrary upper limit to the number of units.

JMHO
-- Mike ---
 

Teach

Ultra Member
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Aug 3, 2010
1,369
1,806
Florida
These are all good ideas with solid intent behind them, but as cappadoc says - in the end it's between the user and the coop. asdaq is right on with the economy of scale issue - artificial limits simply set the cap on who can afford to participate. Based on what I’ve been seeing, coops will become larger simply due to exposure and growth of the community.

The biggest issue I’m seeing now is that, although people invest stating understanding of the risk, there is a lot of crying when a delay comes up. No coop-operator can foresee delay due to errors in manufacturing or businesses having to back out forcing the for a new manufacturer. C’est la vie.

BTW cappadoc – I’m not so sure we are all adults out here… at least considering some of the tantrums I’ve seen.
 

cappadoc

Super Member
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Sep 9, 2010
869
91
Michigan
I think the co-op's involving buying a bunch of cheap Chinese stuff can live with these rules, but I do not feel they can apply to a mod co-op in any fair sense.
There is too much work involved to limit the numbers arbitrarily.
The design and manufacture of a newly designed part is too costly, as well.
I don't know if this is directed at the G-tank/scubagen co-op's, but Dan has done a hell of a lot of work on these. I don't care one bit if he makes a profit off of me on these. I realize the rules prohibit this; but Dan is unique, to my knowledge, in that he designs and contracts the work. He is not a vendor, nor a supplier, per se. He coordinates many steps to bring his creations to the rest of us.

I respect him more than I can say for all he does.

I would REALLY like to see modder co-op's left alone.

But, alas, it is your house, Roly.
 

Zen~

Unregistered Supplier
ECF Veteran
Sep 12, 2010
6,024
21,316
Spencerport, NY
As a small scale manufacturer, I can think of a few suggestions that may help with the co-op situation.

1: the proposed limit of 100 units is entirely too low, in fact, I would suggest requiring all coops to be at LEAST 100 units to be qualified for status as an approved co-op. Anything below 100 units lacks the economy of scale to create sufficient benefits as compared to risk. I can see a limit of 250 as a cap, as most manufacturing concerns will provide very little additional financial benefits until a price break at 501 units produced, and that quantity may be a bit high for most co-op coordinators to handle.

2: Allow the co-op coordinator to compensate themselves for their time... running a co-op puts the coordinator(s) at extreme financial risk in the event that something goes wrong, yet there is no ability currently for the co-op leaders to be paid for their time. Currently, every vendor that participates in these co-ops makes a profit... Except the coordinator! The postal service, machine shops, small parts suppliers and everybody else that is a part of the coop benefits... A Co-ordinator should be rewarded a flat per piece fee of 1 to 2 dollars for their time... I believe this would cut down on the urge to cut and run if the going gets rough.

3: Co-op organizers should be registered at least to the degree that verifiable contact information is retained so there is at least the ability to hand over contact info in case of fraud. Each person that participates as a purchaser should have to sign a statement in which they agree to hold harmless any and all ECF officers, owners, or their assigns, in the event that something goes wrong.

4:Co-op organizers should be required to submit for review, a full accounting of the bills, receipts, bills of lading and disbursments.

5: last but not least, there should be a limit to how many units any individual person may purchase in the coop to prevent these additional units from becoming a profit motive in the secondary market of the classified section. In many cases folks that purchased large numbers of co-op material have ended up making a tidy profit in the ECF classifieds, while the organizer made nothing.

Granted, this is just my 2cents... But I have observed these co-ops and participated in two of them, and I have seen the good they can do... I have also seen coops in which I did not participate, where the posted costs did not add up... Somebody appears to have feathered their bed quite nicely by putting a markup on certain manufactured parts that was over twice the actual cost to produce...my suggestions would obviate that from happening, while at the same time providing fair compensation for coordinators so they don't have to cook the books to make it worth doing.
 
Last edited:

perlionsmitnick

Super Member
ECF Veteran
Sep 14, 2010
459
135
TX
My short opinion for what it is worth is that some level of regulation is necessary in order to protect ECF from being labeled as a place to get ripped off. However, over-regulation may only drive the whole concept of the community co-op, which benefits the participants in a well run co-op, away by driving away those who would spend their own NOT-for-profit time managing such an endeavor.

I have only participated on 2 co-ops as stated by an earlier poster, 1 of which went off without a hitch and the other currently going on without a hitch. Granted there are a few hiccups with the present one, but anyone involved will tell you of their trust and comfort in the person in charge and his ability to successfully carry out with his commitment to supply us with a stellar product. This person has donated his personal time and even offered to absorb cost over-runs, all while not receiving any compensation for his development and management of the piece.

There must be some differentiation between those who are providing a co-op in the true sense of the word and those whom would have been more suitable to only use ECF as a link to an off site co-op originating from another location to begin with.

Thank You

edit: One possible solution to keep re-sellers posing as buyers participating in co-op's is to limit the amount of pieces purchased to 1 or 2. Some may be inclined to purchase 4 or 5 only with the intent of re-selling them at a profit.
 
Last edited:

unloaded

Ultra Member
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Jun 2, 2011
2,491
2,365
SW. Indiana
I'll add my 2 cents. I'd like to see two co-op areas, one for people to join it and then it locked once the appropriate number is reached. Another area for the co-op organizer to post regular, required updates and nobody else allowed to post in the thread. This would cut out all the clutter and allow easy monitoring by the staff.
 

Zen~

Unregistered Supplier
ECF Veteran
Sep 12, 2010
6,024
21,316
Spencerport, NY
I'll add my 2 cents. I'd like to see two co-op areas, one for people to join it and then it locked once the appropriate number is reached. Another area for the co-op organizer to post regular, required updates and nobody else allowed to post in the thread. This would cut out all the clutter and allow easy monitoring by the staff.

I feel a third support thread with interaction ONLY with coop members would need to be included in this scenario... So far all of the coops have ended up with lengthy and really informative support threads, and this has become pretty much standard for these unique types of procurement. One of the most disruptive aspects of these threads is the inevitable Johnny come lately that feels the need to ask "is it too late to get one of these?" on page 231 of the support thread... Make it so nobody but participants can even post.
 

raidy

Super Member
ECF Veteran
Oct 26, 2010
437
604
Germany
The ECF is a great free platform for modders and vapors. Thanks to all the moderators and admins.
And because it is a free platform, I accept the rules of the ECF. As they are.
And I think it's good, that is clearly separated between private and commercial.
Go to all the rumors out of the way: I've never earned a dime of my developments and I will not.
 

rolygate

Vaping Master
Supporting Member
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Sep 24, 2009
8,354
12,402
ECF Towers
............. I would REALLY like to see modder co-op's left alone.

But, alas, it is your house, Roly.

Well it's not alas, surely :)

Things are going wrong, and what we have to do is fix two main and one minor problems:

1. People need to have it made VERY CLEAR to them that buying into a co-op is a risk venture. The money has to be disposable. No complaints if it doesn't go to plan.

2. We have had a lot of complaints recently, which is something that has to be fixed. Also, people are blaming us for it when things go wrong: the co-op is on ECF so it must be our fault. And we have to stop the trend that co-ops and Classified sales are becoming very risky here, in some people's eyes.

3. And perhaps less important, though it is related to these other issues: too many commercial deals being done under the counter, in the Modder's Forum.



People are blaming us for the issues currently, so it's not a question of unnecessary meddling with the rules - something has to be done.

OK it's not a risk if you are dealing with someone like Scuba, but not everybody has his experience or rep.

But the whole situation is becoming clearer to me now. It seems like we can fix most of it with warnings, as we normally prefer to do, rather than use excessive rules. It worked with the exploding mods: people began to realize they needed to buy protected batteries, the manufacturers started to build in safety features, and finally, now people know that if they buy a pipebomb with unprotected batts they have taken on a risk that is down to them, and maybe they need to get a multimeter at least. It's been about a year since the last reported blowup so I'd count that as a win - and all done with warnings, no rules needed.

There have been some good points made about many things in this thread: unit numbers need to be high, maybe restrict people to one or two buys per co-op, setting up several threads per co-op, no off-site linking, and so on.
 

unloaded

Ultra Member
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Jun 2, 2011
2,491
2,365
SW. Indiana
I feel a third support thread with interaction ONLY with coop members would need to be included in this scenario... So far all of the coops have ended up with lengthy and really informative support threads, and this has become pretty much standard for these unique types of procurement. One of the most disruptive aspects of these threads is the inevitable Johnny come lately that feels the need to ask "is it too late to get one of these?" on page 231 of the support thread... Make it so nobody but participants can even post.

I agree, to an extent. I've been in two co-ops and in the last one (LV-Kronos) it seemed like the members were the biggest trouble. All of the "Are we there yet?", conspiracy theories, and unwillingness to meet in the middle of a language barrier seemed to drive the organizer to silence. I really can't blame him. I'm hoping he just got tired of banging his head against the wall and decided to finish and ship them without further comment or headache. Maybe I'm being niave but at least I don't have to sift through that thread looking for gems of info. It would have been nice to have subscribed to a one-man thread for updates. I do see the need for a "support" thread but I think it would be better to start it once the items start shipping. That way it would be in support of the hardware rather than the insecurites and paranoia of the members. Because the risk is known there really shouldn't be all the whining. Wow, got a little long winded, sorry.
 

Zen~

Unregistered Supplier
ECF Veteran
Sep 12, 2010
6,024
21,316
Spencerport, NY
Wow, got a little long winded, sorry.

Too funny... You will never corner rhe market on long-winded as long as I'm around!

I completely agree with the need for a single sided update thread... I even think it should go one step further and require updates weekly until all items have shipped.

It doesn't have to be anything major... Even a simple post stating "no new news" would provide much needed comfort.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread