Ormita Commerce Network || Barter Exchange Barter Network Barter System Barter Franchise Barter Exchange Franchise Barter Software Countertrade Offset Trade Bartering

Home > Why We're Different > Our “No Warehousing” Policy

Our “No Warehousing” Policy

For a barter exchange to survive critical mass is needed. An exchange with a small number of members, members all in a niche market, and low trade volumes will not generate the revenues needed to survive. This often results in the exchange owners themselves “borrowing” barter dollars from the exchange to survive and never repaying them which, in turn, creates inflation and worsens the problems of the exchange.

Ormita NEVER borrows barter money from its members and NEVER deficit spends.

Critical mass of buyers and sellers is essential to create a stable marketplace, with sufficient goods and services as well as sufficient trade volumes per members (referred to as liquidity). One of the major success factors for any exchange is early liquidity however all too often new enterprises do not reach this break-even point and instead get into a cycle of servicing existing members to ensure that those with credit balances are doing SOME trade rather than building the marketplace to ensure that all members can do OPTIMAL trade.

Why We're Different

Direct Customer Contact

Expertise

Our Global Footprint

Tailored Services

Ormita Vs Competition

Our “No Warehousing”
Policy

Our “No Deficit” Policy

Ormita already has an international critical mass that means the business is self-sustaining.

The company can leverage international offerings of goods and services into new marketplaces to allow customers to immediately buy and, in turn, sell their own goods and services. Even when a sole operator is a member of IRTA (Universal Currency) or NATE (National Association of Trade Exchanges) this is difficult to achieve.

When data management, too, is poor; when systems are few and when procedures are documented; as the quantity of members increases, a “new” and unorganised barter exchange may falter owing to its inability to keep up to date with the technical and financial obligations of effectively managing a members data. This results in:

Incomplete information on members offerings
Lack of knowledge or differentiation of those members who are obligated to sell and those who wish to spend down
It is time consuming to collect all the information on each seller directly
Difficult to find out about others experiences with the seller
Members being unaware if they are obligated to trade
Sellers may be located further away than other cash suppliers leading to perceived ‘cost’ differences
Sole operators operate in silos which gives members the perception that they are often the only seller of those goods or services and they may price accordingly (i.e. not in line with their cash market prices)
Settlement does not take place immediately
Historically, systems are labour intensive and commissions are therefore high