<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: 7 ways to justify ecommerce upgrades</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.b2cpartners.com/research/7-ways-justify-ecommerce-upgrade/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.b2cpartners.com/research/7-ways-justify-ecommerce-upgrade</link>
	<description>Ecommerce Consulting, RFP Platform Selection</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 28 Apr 2009 15:28:18 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Bill Mirabito</title>
		<link>http://www.b2cpartners.com/research/7-ways-justify-ecommerce-upgrade/comment-page-1#comment-913</link>
		<dc:creator>Bill Mirabito</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 28 Apr 2009 15:28:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.b2cpartners.com/?p=690#comment-913</guid>
		<description>Great question, Cliff! First of all, these terms do lead to confusion because &lt;b&gt;build&lt;/b&gt; is not cost-free, and &lt;b&gt;buy&lt;/b&gt; is not effortless. During roundtables at Luxury Interactive last year, I was surprised how few online business people know what ecommerce software they run. I sometimes wonder when &quot;in-house&quot; is just a euphamism for &quot;un-sure.&quot; 

Having said all this, there are ways to determine if a prospect should start with a low-cost assembly kit (a.k.a. build), or choose a third-party package (a.k.a. buy). Our FAST Score&lt;code&gt;&#153;&lt;/code&gt; method weighs and scores all selection criteria according to the client&#039;s requirements. If the packages fail to make the grade, a build approach is best. This is more common for non-traditional ecommerce -- for example, online services (travel, finance) versus physical goods.

When retailers solicit objective knowledgeable guidance, they&#039;re far more likely to find a third party solution that suits their needs. The most important consideration: &quot;Do NOT re-create the wheel unless necessary.&quot;

Without such guidance and a strong business case for investment, online retailers frequently underestimate the real costs and wrestle over the sheer number of options. When this occurs, cobbling together something in-house is the path of least resistance... and may lead to many sorrows.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Great question, Cliff! First of all, these terms do lead to confusion because <b>build</b> is not cost-free, and <b>buy</b> is not effortless. During roundtables at Luxury Interactive last year, I was surprised how few online business people know what ecommerce software they run. I sometimes wonder when &#8220;in-house&#8221; is just a euphamism for &#8220;un-sure.&#8221; </p>
<p>Having said all this, there are ways to determine if a prospect should start with a low-cost assembly kit (a.k.a. build), or choose a third-party package (a.k.a. buy). Our FAST Score<code>&#8482;</code> method weighs and scores all selection criteria according to the client&#8217;s requirements. If the packages fail to make the grade, a build approach is best. This is more common for non-traditional ecommerce &#8212; for example, online services (travel, finance) versus physical goods.</p>
<p>When retailers solicit objective knowledgeable guidance, they&#8217;re far more likely to find a third party solution that suits their needs. The most important consideration: &#8220;Do NOT re-create the wheel unless necessary.&#8221;</p>
<p>Without such guidance and a strong business case for investment, online retailers frequently underestimate the real costs and wrestle over the sheer number of options. When this occurs, cobbling together something in-house is the path of least resistance&#8230; and may lead to many sorrows.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Cliff Conneighton</title>
		<link>http://www.b2cpartners.com/research/7-ways-justify-ecommerce-upgrade/comment-page-1#comment-911</link>
		<dc:creator>Cliff Conneighton</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 27 Apr 2009 18:26:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.b2cpartners.com/?p=690#comment-911</guid>
		<description>According to the IR500 data, most larger online sellers are still running on home-built systems, without a major commercial platform.  Common wisdom is that these will, over time, convert from “build” to “buy”.  What are your thoughts on this?  At what rate do you think companies will  stop building their own and buy a major platform?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>According to the IR500 data, most larger online sellers are still running on home-built systems, without a major commercial platform.  Common wisdom is that these will, over time, convert from “build” to “buy”.  What are your thoughts on this?  At what rate do you think companies will  stop building their own and buy a major platform?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
