Retailers Should Worry If Google Joins Buy Button Brigade

Are they referring to Google Shopping, organic, or both? If organic is involved, I guess that would mean Google Shopping could become a thing of the past as Google would probably make a commission on the use of the buy button. That might actually be beneficial to those who don't want (or can't afford) to pay for an unknown amount of clicks -- as long as they don't continue charging for them on top of a commission for the buy button usage.

That's one thing that has always bothered me about Google Shopping -- that you're not paying a flat percentage, but for however many clicks THEY say they've produced for your product that you really have no way to verify. Especially when Google Analytics and AdWords stats seem to vary. It makes it impossible to control your profit margin when you have somebody's hand in the pie that will take an unknown amount when all is said and done -- and you can't even verify if they have a right to that amount.

Furthermore, if organic is involved, that would also mean that good SEO and a willingness to use social media marketing will be all that much more necessary to get your products seen. I just hope this doesn't turn out to be yet another way to snuff out small businesses in favor of big businesses. Although, it sounds like even big businesses are worried about this trend. It will certainly have a negative impact on those who are less tech-savvy.

The thing is, with all of these big conglomerates trying to take a bigger piece of the retailer's pie, it will either drive prices up or cause businesses to continue accepting less revenue for themselves -- as they already do on sites like eBay. Since Facebook currently offers the Shop Now button for free, I wonder if Google will charge for it. I know Pinterest is charging for it, but they don't really have many ways in which to earn revenue.

@tam

Why Retailers Should Worry If Google Joins The Buy Button Brigade

Google GOOGL -0.5% is reportedly considering embedding a “buy button” in its search results, according to a report by the Wall Street Journal, which cited anonymous sources.

The nonstop shift to everything mobile, of course, is the reason. Consumers are using their smartphones to search for products and buy them online. The screen size offers no room for Google’s search ads, plus consumers prefer the ease of being able to click on, say, the Amazon buy button, which already has the payment information stored.

The news is dismaying to retailers, the Journal said. It writes:

“Some retailers said they worry the move will turn Google from a valuable source of traffic into a marketplace where purchases happen on Google’s own websites."

Recognizing this potential source of friction, Google is taking steps to soothe retailers concerns. Consumers will be able to opt into the same marketing programs that they would have shown had they made the purchase on the retailers’ own websites, allowing retailers to get the customer’s contact information, one of the WSJ’s sources said. In addition, Google is reportedly promising to heavily brand the product pages where the consumers will go to make the purchase. Also, recommendations for further purchases will only be from that retailer.

Fine then. After all, retailers have been dealing with a slew of new buy button innovations lately. Amazon, for instance, recently rolled out invitations for consumers to participate in Dash, a WiFi enabled button that you press to buy staples and which makes buying laundry detergent look like downright fun.

Facebook has “Shop Now” call-to-action buttons. Twitter's TWTR -0.62% buy button is starting to pop up here and there. Pinterest is supposedly joining the fray. Will Instagram offer its own native buy button? It would be crazy not to, given the commerce on the site already.

This is what StyleCaster says about the trend of selling clothes on the site right now:

“One quick search for hashtags that include #Instashop, #ShopMyCloset, and #InstaSale, and you’ll find millions of posts of people looking to unload everything from rare Chanel handbags, to vintage maxi dresses, to pre-worn J.Crew.

Here’s how it works: Put in one of the top hashtags—say #ShopMyCloset—and pull up all the posts that use it. Browse through, find something you want to buy, and then comment on the photo telling the seller you want it. He or she will then work with you to finalize the purchase, usually using a payment service like Paypal."

Imagine how much more seamless this process would with an Instagram buy button.

Disconnected From The Customer

If it were only these specific innovations, retailers could adapt. After all most brands have done an admirable job of transitioning online to meet e-commerce competition.

But the buy button is emblematic of a much larger trend that doesn’t bode well for retailers at all: every new innovation and business model in this space is based on separating the retailer from the customer.

This is what the WSJ article on Google’s buy button said about the retailers’ concerns:

“The retailers, who wouldn’t voice their concerns publicly, fear such a move will turn them into back-end order takers, weakening their relationships with shoppers."

It’s probably the most telling sentence in the article.

Now consider other innovations, such as Instacart, a service that shops for and then delivers groceries and other goods, like pet supplies, within a few hours to customers. This year it partnered with Whole Foods for Valentine’s Day after months and months of Whole Foods holding it at bay. Whole Foods eventually concluded that the potential benefits of a partnership outweigh the potential cannibalization of sales.

Maybe, but the service does loosen the ties with its customers, who will no longer actually enter the store, or rarely will. Soon, its consumers will see grocery shopping as a, pun intended, “apple to apples comparison” as more retailers like Wal-Mart offer organic produce, but at a cheaper cost. And why not, the customer’s relationship is with Instacart now, not Whole Foods.

So it will go with the Google buy button, but on a far grander scale. Retailers should be afraid.

@tam...True that! As if the problem with customers not reading the description isn't bad enough. Now they want to make sure a customer doesn't even get the chance to read it. Maybe I should write a blog about the dangers of using such buttons -- and the importance of reading descriptions and asking questions if the description isn't sufficient (or simply ignore that seller's product if they're not interested in providing sufficient details in the first place).

I think part of the problem behind customers not reading is they're so used to the likes of eBay sellers who don't provide much of a description, if any. So they've basically been conditioned to not bother scrolling down to read anything. All the more reason sellers like that one Etsy seller saying "Screw SEO" really bug me.

While a detailed description serves an important purpose for the seller (effective SEO), the main purpose is to provide what the customer needs to make an informed decision. To me, when I see a description that is seriously lacking, the impression I get of that seller is that they are either lazy and/or only care about making the sale, whether or not their customer is satisfied with the purchase. When I'm shopping online, unless it's something I really want, I won't bother asking any questions and will just move on to another store.

Anywho, it appears this discussion is morphing into another topic -- albeit a related one. LOL

You should have set a reserve so you weren't obligated to sell them at less than that minimum you felt they should have sold for. I know eBay tries to deter you from doing that, but I couldn't put something up for auction without a reserve knowing that I would have no choice but to sell it for a penny if that's all that was bid on it. LOL