Amazon and e-Bay Flunk UK Retail Site Test

Written by Fred J. Aun
July 15th, 2009

The UK Web sites for Amazon and eBay were among the worst performing retail sites of 50 tested in June by site review specialist Sitemorse. In fact, with Amazon coming in at 46th place and eBay at 47th, the sites couldn’t do much worse.

Sitemorse tested the first 125 pages of the retailers’ sites and ranked them using several criteria including function, accessibility, code quality, performance and metadata. The top score attainable by a site was a 10.

The top-scoring site was that operated by UK furniture maker/retailer DFS, which scored 9.54. Alas, the much deeper-pocketed Amazon scored 1.86 and the similarly well-heeled eBay only managed a 1.56. Sitemorse Founder Lawrence Shaw said the low scores related to failure of some rudimentary site functions and features, such as page descriptions, problems Sitemorse repeatedly finds when testing both sites.

“Amazon used to lead the pack and be a benchmark of how to do E-Commerce, but I don’t think consumers are getting a very good experience now when they go to the Amazon site,” Shaw said. “When you look at the number of broken links, poor HTML _ all the basics you need to make a Web site work _ they fail pretty miserably.”

The testing of the Amazon site for accessibility found that 56 percent of its top 125 pages fail basic requirements. “Following the Target case, (in which Target paid $6 million to settle a Web site accessibility lawsuit) I would have thought U.S. retailers would make some effort to get the very basics, like ALT text for images (text to describe the picture), correct,” Shaw said.

He said he finds it almost inexcusable for major E-Commerce sites to be riddled with broken links, a problem that will send frustrated prospective customers off to competitor sites. “As an example, Shaw noted Amazon’s link to its own Web Services page was inoperative. “Not a good advert for them if they can’t link to their own sites,” he commented.

On the bright side, Shaw said Sitemorse is seeing trends toward improvement in its regular testing of 250 top global retail sites. “At the top end of the table, the scores are going up to the nines and, even 10s,” he said. “When we first started doing these tables, a lot of sites got four or below. It was very unusual to get a seven.”

There are several benefits to doing a thorough sweep of an E-Commerce site and fixing the basic problems. Aside from providing better user experiences and aiding search engines to find site content, good site structure reduces the workload of a company’s customer-service staff. “We’re finding now, at some sites that are scoring eights or nines, that the number of calls to call centers is reduced and inquiries about problems are down,” Shaw said. “This happens if customers go to a Web site and don’t find errors or bad-performing pages.”


Comments are closed.


StorefrontBacktalk delivers the latest retail technology news & analysis. Join more than 60,000 retail IT leaders who subscribe to our free weekly email. Sign up today!

Most Recent Comments

Why Did Gonzales Hackers Like European Cards So Much Better?

I am still unclear about the core point here-- why higher value of European cards. Supply and demand, yes, makes sense. But the fact that the cards were chip and pin (EMV) should make them less valuable because that demonstrably reduces the ability to use them fraudulently. Did the author mean that the chip and pin cards could be used in a country where EMV is not implemented--the US--and this mis-match make it easier to us them since the issuing banks may not have as robust anti-fraud controls as non-EMV banks because they assumed EMV would do the fraud prevention for them Read more...
Two possible reasons that I can think of and have seen in the past - 1) Cards issued by European banks when used online cross border don't usually support AVS checks. So, when a European card is used with a billing address that's in the US, an ecom merchant wouldn't necessarily know that the shipping zip code doesn't match the billing code. 2) Also, in offline chip countries the card determines whether or not a transaction is approved, not the issuer. In my experience, European issuers haven't developed the same checks on authorization requests as US issuers. So, these cards might be more valuable because they are more likely to get approved. Read more...
A smart card slot in terminals doesn't mean there is a reader or that the reader is activated. Then, activated reader or not, the U.S. processors don't have apps certified or ready to load into those terminals to accept and process smart card transactions just yet. Don't get your card(t) before the terminal (horse). Read more...
The marketplace does speak. More fraud capacity translates to higher value for the stolen data. Because nearly 100% of all US transactions are authorized online in real time, we have less fraud regardless of whether the card is Magstripe only or chip and PIn. Hence, $10 prices for US cards vs $25 for the European counterparts. Read more...
@David True. The European cards have both an EMV chip AND a mag stripe. Europeans may generally use the chip for their transactions, but the insecure stripe remains vulnerable to skimming, whether it be from a false front on an ATM or a dishonest waiter with a handheld skimmer. If their stripe is skimmed, the track data can still be cloned and used fraudulently in the United States. If European banks only detect fraud from 9-5 GMT, that might explain why American criminals prefer them over American bank issued cards, who have fraud detection in place 24x7. Read more...

Our apologies. Due to legal and security copyright issues, we can't facilitate the printing of Premium Content. If you absolutely need a hard copy, please contact customer service.