eBay Australia announces Safe Payment Initiative

DaveyOn April 9, 2008 at 6:32 pm Said:

Oh, boy… This company has not only shot itself in the foot, it is trying for vital organs here soon.

I think there has been one other Aussie on INK so far–I hope we hear from them about conditions Down Under and impacts of this change. I have no idea what Australian financial or anti-trust law is like.

While not marked for the US (my guess is the political and anti-trust fallout would be too hard to manage), this will scare a lot of people as a precendent.

Paypal is great for buyers, honest or not. It can become a payment method of convenience or a magic carpet for scamming or abusing sellers (complementing the yanked ability for sellers to leave negative FB).

For even reputable sellers, Paypal is anything but safe. The US Seller Protection Program is as leaky as a sieve, with many ways for sellers to lose their funds to scams and dishonest buyers, especially with international shipments if the seller is not a Powerseller. The forums are full of sellers getting their first wakeup call, incredulous about what Paypal can do and does.

Kevin_TOn April 9, 2008 at 6:38 pm Said:

QUOTE: “Plus, eBay data (note to self: how do I get my hands on this data?) shows that in 2007 people who paid with PayPal were four times less likely to enter a dispute than people who paid with bank deposit.”

Is that based on flat numbers, or percentage of transactions?

PayPal has never particularly gotten a foothold in Australia as a significant proportion of buyers (and domestic sellers) have preferred to use direct deposit. If the quote is based on flat numbers, I wouldn’t doubt that the proportions are similar. If so, Ebay benefits as they earn an additional commission on both the sale, and on the postage charges by forcing all transactions to use PayPal. There are no direct fees on using direct deposit with Australian banks.

In June we will see how many sellers (and buyers) drop from the Australian site because they do not wish to deal with PayPal, and how many Australian sellers list in US dollars so that they can accept a broader range of payment options.

I am yet to decide how this announcement will affect my own business model. It will effectively substantially increase my fees on my Ebay Australia auctions, as I don’t currently use PayPal on those listings. There are many other implications about this announcement I am yet to absorb and address.

Regards, Kevin (in Australia)

Cliff AlipertiOn April 9, 2008 at 8:19 pm Said:

Hi Richard,

Thanks for this blog. There was a little gap in the postings for a few days and I thought it might be a bad sign, but I see you back regularly now, so great!

I just read this tonight and was glad to see you post it because I thought it was a potentially controversial topic that a lot of people might miss because it only applies to the Australia platform.

I’m with Davey on the notion that “this will scare a lot of people as a precendent” as my first reaction was “Uh oh!” but Davey is probably (hopefully?) right about the anti-trust fallout such a move would bring in the U.S.

I’m not a person who bashes PayPal, I love it and have been an enthusiastic user as a buyer and seller for over eight years now, but in terms of U.S. transactions I don’t see it being any safer than checks or money orders (I don’t know if there are special situations in Australia where it is safer than those methods) or even the good ole banned US dollars cash that I used to accept.

I think in the end moves such as this don’t cut down on disputes, what this move does is give eBay total control over disputes, and I think that may be what this is about.

Which does bring me back to my original thought of “Uh oh!”

Scott @ TradingAssistantJournalOn April 9, 2008 at 8:50 pm Said:

Richard,

I think I will have to side with Davey on this announcement. This seems to be a very arrogant and foolish move when merchants are exploring secondary channels in greater numbers every day.

PayPal has its benefits and yet also presents numerous problems for sellers and buyers alike. Some are PayPal fans, others are not. But to limit payment options for both buyers and sellers on any online ecommerce site in this way seems counter productive.

Buyers and sellers can find options now easier than ever before. Restricting those options to only one payment method would seem to encourage both to look for those other options more quickly. Is ebay really trying to encourage both to look elsewhere?

If this policy spills over to the USA or UK, I would say that Stephanie Tilenius was right when she intimated that we hadn’t seen nothin yet!

The resulting firestorm of implementing this type of policy in the USA or UK will be vast and intense.

Kevin_TOn April 9, 2008 at 9:31 pm Said:

Scott,
Ebay UK has already taken the first step of requiring PayPal to be a payment option on all listings (applicable later this month).

http://www2.ebay.com/aw/uk/200803.shtml#2008-03-21143719

Kevin

Chris @ TameBayOn April 10, 2008 at 1:27 am Said:

“I’ve been told that there are no plans to go to a PayPal-only model for eBay in other markets – US included”

And did you believe that? Haven’t they warned you about eBay speak yet? ;-)

If you look at the marketplaces around the world they start off without PayPal, when they get to a million or so items on the site they add PayPal, when they get established users are pushed more and more towards PayPal and now we have eBay Australia going PayPal only.

“No plans” is simply another term for “no timescales”. It’ll happen one day soon. The question is will it be a bad thing?

MechelleOn April 10, 2008 at 2:24 am Said:

I would love to see eBay.com pull that one - I knew last year when they began positioning this BS in the UK with the “select category - you know high dollar” listings they were evaluating the reactions to see how much of a stink it kicked up- must not have been to much, because they have it going that far here now.

I don’t know the marketplace laws in AU or the UK, but this PayPal only scheme just won’t fly here.

They have already effectively washed the minds of eBay vendor’s consumers with the PayPal is the only safe payment method message on every freaking screen. eBay is hanging on by a cuticle rip as it is with their market manipulations in their current set up. As I stated before they have only been buying their way out of having their unethical business practices exposed. However,, this type of action would probably take a rather large lump out of the 5 billion they are sitting on right now while they wait for their projected 2008 3 billion to roll in. eBay you might want to take pause and consider where you’re located - San Jose (Santa Clara) CA US- Regardless of what your little AU pilot study reveals I suggest you recognize the variables in the two separate locations before try and bring that hammer down.

This blog is like talking to a freaking wall- even if eBay was actually staring and reading every word they are to arrogant to consider reality and choose to spend their days in some enigma of oblivion.

bonniOn April 10, 2008 at 2:43 am Said:

And when someone sells an expensive item with PayPal, are they going to get their account frozen and have to go through the monumental hassle of “proving” they’re legitimate?

Also, what’s being done to protect sellers from unscrupulous buyers who claim an item is “not as described” and send back not the item but an empty box, and then are given their money back by PayPal, leaving the seller out the money AND the expensive item?

Is PayPal going to start CONSISTENTLY accepting Australia Post Registered mail as proof of postage? Will they start to accept Australia Post international insured post for international transactions?

There are so many problems with this isn’t not even funny, and it’s yet more proof that eBay are totally out of touch with their sellers.

bonniOn April 10, 2008 at 2:46 am Said:

Oh, as to the question of anti-trust laws, I’m told that many people are already submitting complaints to the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC). We’ll see how that turns out, I guess.

In the meantime, Australia does have several other options, including a small but growing Australian-based auction site (just Google it, you’ll find it quite quickly).

KittyOn April 10, 2008 at 4:49 am Said:

eBay is doing this because the laws in Australia allow it to do so. Once it monopolizes the payment method, could a huge fee increase be far behind?
Unfortunately I think the answer will be yes.
I’m in the USA and I hope anti-trust laws will prevent this situation from happening here.
Even though most of my customers do pay in Paypal, choice in shipping and payment methods are the hallmarks of a free market.
EBay must choose whether it is just a venue, or take control of the site. Manually remove all the fraud.
Make us buyers and sellers feel like we are getting something for its high fees and manipulative searches.

implogOn April 10, 2008 at 7:13 am Said:

There is a PayPal Discussion board at the Aussie site. You’ll find the postings strangely similar to the eBay US boards in thought, word and deed.

http://forums.ebay.com.au/forum.jspa?forumID=1008

Randy SmytheOn April 10, 2008 at 7:43 am Said:

Amazon requires Amazon payments for purchases on their platform but they’ve done this from the beginning. eBay is adding on all these layers of regulation to the marketplace that was celebrated for being “just a venue” Is it any wonder people are upset.

It like bringing the law to the Wild West

Patricia 1On April 10, 2008 at 9:31 am Said:

Ebay has a long way to go to compete with Amazon. I still buy on Amazon - not Ebay because 1) customer service is a reality there, and 2) I can charge directly to my credit card and not have to deal with online payment handlers. On the one time I had a problem with a seller, I simply left my phone number and Amazon called me back directly within 30 minutes and assured me that if my item wasn’t received they would refund my money. Ebay is light-years away from anything remotely resembling service like that no matter what they try to do otherwise. In these respects - they still ARE only a venue and nothing more! No matter how badly they bash their sellers with policies and regulations - they still depend on automatic policies to do the job for them and they do NOT stand behind either the customer or the seller.

Patricia 1On April 10, 2008 at 10:10 am Said:

Richard - perhaps they want both - but they don’t want retail from ebay. I buy from solid retail companies and now I like the idea that they are all online. Recently bought a new vacuum from Walmart online and my Wacom drawing tablet from Best Buy online. I believe in companies that will be there when I have a complaint…no hassles. In that respect, Amazon provides that security….ebay does not. However, when I broke my corningware baking dish circa 1963 I went to ebay and got a replacement in new condition. Same with my corningware teapot - which isn’t even made anymore…back to ebay. That was such a pleasurable transaction that I actually wrote the seller twice to let her know how utterly pleased I was to find that pot and pleased with her service. Right now I’m replacing pieces of my Oneida silverware circa 1963 and getting those on ebay as well. THESE are the things that made ebay famous and what we sellers are fighting for. I want ebay to stay out of retail and leave it to the big stores who do it so capably! I don’t think that’s so hard to understand. Ebay has no customer service to speak of and a really dubious reputation for scammers and fraud - they need to be working on improving that aspect of their business instead of looking toward a retail situation.

JJHOn April 10, 2008 at 10:35 am Said:

I want the ebaY that’s more like 1998. Unless you were there, selling at that time, you can’t know what it means. So, lets compromise. I’ll take the ebay of last year, before all these bonehead policy changes.

I DON’T WANT RETAIL FROM EBAY! I can go anywhere for that. I want buyers to find the unique items I sell, not be confounded by “best match”.

This whole “Buyer Experience” thing is really starting to look like what it really is, an attempt to make more money for Wall Street Investors. Plain and simple greed.

Randy SmytheOn April 10, 2008 at 10:44 am Said:

Richard, I want both versions. eBay “Classic” and the “New” eBay - you could even call it Express :).

Make it happen okay!

RKS

MistyOn April 10, 2008 at 10:57 am Said:

Richard,
Speaking for myself but I believe I echo many other small sellers feelings here.
We want eBay 1998 with the unique, hard to find one of a kind items but with better customer service and for eBay to uphold it’s promises to remove problem members and close all the loopholes for fraud and scammers. when they are sent a report of such they need to act on it and remove the problem not turn a blind eye to it as they have for far to many years now. PayPal only is not the answer because PayPal/eBay (monopoly) will decide with what makes them the most money not what makes the most sense and is right.

TWOn April 10, 2008 at 11:17 am Said:

“I’ve been told that there are no plans to go to a PayPal-only model for eBay in other markets – US included.”

I wish I could believe this. We know the PayPal must be required as a payment method is coming soon.

Patricia 1On April 10, 2008 at 11:17 am Said:

Richard - I cannot believe ebay (and you for that matter) don’t get it. Its very simple and its been posted in every which way in thousands of posts on ebay and at the end of articles and blogs on the net. Just about everyone is saying the same thing. They DO NOT WANT Donahoe’s new policies. They DO NOT WANT ebay to be just another retail experience…the world is FULL of companies who have been at it forever and do it expertly - like ebay can NEVER do. Ebay has its own unique niche and its beating it to death and destroying it instead of improving it! How many other ways do they need to hear it? I fail to see just why they are still going forward with their plans in spite of all the protests.

If I were Donahoe I would 1) roll up my sleeves and get truly bad sellers off the site; 2) get bad buyers off the site too - ebay has to be “hands on” in this and not simply rely on automatic policies and rules and canned replies to reports; 3) institute a new advertising plan - not a silly one, but a serious one assuring people they can come back to ebay and find the rare and the unique and buy safely. Institute some kind of safety net for buyers - some kind of assurance that they can buy with safety. Perhaps some kind of “insurance” funded by a small monthly charge to sellers? I wouldn’t mind that - IF the rest of these really dumb (pardon my bluntness) new policies are rescinded and the path of trying to make ebay into a retailer where dropped.

There, I’ve given you my very best advice and charged nothing for it and no golden parachute either ;-)

TWOn April 10, 2008 at 11:23 am Said:

“So, which is it that people want? eBay to be more like Amazon; eBay 2008 to be more like eBay 1998; or a streamlined combo of the two?”

I want an eBay classic site and eBay to quit trying to be Amazon which they will fail at with their current level of customer service.

At the very least I want to know that eBay will always have an auction format with a more reasonable price structure. I also want eBay to allow me to run my business the way I want to which means accepting which form of payment I want to.

kimbersOn April 10, 2008 at 12:51 pm Said:

Richard-

When you ask ‘So, which is it that people want? eBay to be more like Amazon; eBay 2008 to be more like eBay 1998; or a streamlined combo of the two?’ I have to say that personally, I’d like to see and eBay more like it was in 1998.

One of the things that made eBay so successful in my humble opinion, was that it was not retail. There were problems back then but the biggest complaint was the site would go down fairly regularly.(I remember a time where if the site would go down for however many hours, eBay would automatically add extra time to the auctions that were closing during that time. That was good customer service for a problem while it was being worked on.)

People came to eBay at that time to find the unusual. The site grew into a place where you could find anything and people told their friends.

You don’t hear that anymore. Part of it is because the media continually used eBay as an example when they were talking about internet fraud and frankly, eBay didn’t hit back hard enough publically against that perception but also, the more eBay grew away from it’s core, the more cumbersome it became to use. Seller found themselves finding the ‘venue’ having more control over their business and the buyers were finding it harder to find what they are looking for.
The endless on-going change has only made it worse.

All that said, what I’d really like to see is a copy of Ebay’s business plan or a recap of it anyway. It is not reassuring to have read that a member of the management team says that I am not going to recognize eBay in a year from now.

Fat chance of seeing that I know, but a girl can dream!

Oh and as an aside,when you wrote ‘I’m getting mixed messages’, I thought to myself well that’s exactly what eBay users (buyers and sellers)feel they are getting.

LurchOn April 10, 2008 at 1:13 pm Said:

Yes - definitely more like 1998. In service, attitude (especially attitude from eBay’s side), usability for both buyer and seller, encouragement of people to stay on the site (and not via silly social networking and blogging tools - but by getting them to actual be encouraged to look around at listings), actually making it fun again for all (and no, having a “Back for more fun?” above the login box don’t make it so), and I could go on. I’m not bothering to get as detailed as Patricia’s post, because there’s still been no follow-up to my comment/question on the other blog entry (Catalyst Conference). Someone might want to think about closing comments on older posts if no one is going to check back on them. I’d also let people know how long comments will be open for a specific entry…

Then again - given the fact that it sounds like you’re pretty much new to eBay, do you have any idea what it was like in 1996? or 1997? or 1998?

JJHOn April 10, 2008 at 1:40 pm Said:

Speaking of 1998, you should see screen shots of what item listing pages looked like back them. SIMPLE. uncluttered, just the facts, nothing else. Pages weren’t bogged down in javascripts, tracking icons, cookies. No hidden ID’s, people used their actual email address as their user ID and users could talk to users directly with eMail. You could spot shill bidding easily. Feedback was not transaction based, you could give anyone feedback for any reason. It was friendly, it was fun, it was not loaded down in crap like it is now.

Then ebaY went public, the lawyers came in, and things changed. Not for the better. And here we are in 2008, 10 years later, with an ebaY that looks nothing like it’s roots. It’s rather sad, really.

SharonOn April 10, 2008 at 1:49 pm Said:

We want Ebay 1998 back, only with a company that recognizes that as Ebay grows, so will the fraud. Bad buyers learned to scam the system, bad sellers also.

More often than not, when a situation is reported to Ebay, all that is ever sent is a canned response totally unrelated to the topic at hand. Customer service is at an all time low.

We want Ebay back with the recent changes reversed, i.e. Only positives for buyers, DSR’s, Best Match,etc. Sellers need to have the ability to leave negatives or neutrals for buyers. Many times this is the only protection sellers do have. It forces buyers to atleast work with us.

We want customer service that will deal with the real problems that we face on Ebay. To police the site and deal with the fraud.

Recognize that there are bad sellers who use feedback wrongly and remove them. Just as there are some bad buyers who need removed.

Stop with the multiple ID insanity. I know that Ebay has our IP addresses, use that to tie all ID’s together and to prohibit bad buyers and sellers from simply getting another ID, after being suspended. It happens way too often.

If Ebay insists on exploring retail, which I don’t think will work, then separate the two. An Ebay classic and an Ebay Retail Division.

We want Ebay back. There are many people who depend on Ebay for their income. These changes are coming at a bad time what with the economy such as it is. Many people are desperate and just want Ebay to Listen!

Just my two cents worth.

MechelleOn April 10, 2008 at 2:10 pm Said:

The absurdity with going into a retail format for eBay is that the eBay brand is synonymous with lower than retail, bargain, discount, wholesale pricing. Even I having my own eBay store if looking for a product on eBay I can’t find it cheaper than retail - I just buy from a source outside of eBay. To be honest it irritates me when the same prices as retail are being offered on eBay unless it is discontinued product.

On the other hand I am not only interested in the unique I like to win an auction or a BIN for a new release or a very high end -out of reach for the normal income people- products cheaply. This cannot be achieved on Amazon, Wal-Mart, or any other retail source right now.

So, yes eBay is tossing its special something with their lack of understanding eBay’s value- essentially they demonstrate a lack of faith in the eBay company and that certainly doesn’t create a wave of security for eBay’s customers- clearly, we are feeling that right now.

Are frauds and cons an issue on eBay? Yes! Who’s fault is it eBay’s? eBay perpetuates and enables these marketplace deviants at the expense of every eBay member. It is outrageous to announce to the world and its customers that it is eBay customers (their only customers those of us renting space to run our business from) who are at fault. How dare they put that on us as a whole or at all- frankly it is eBay’s fault that I have potential customers email me asking if something I am selling is real, new, or whatever. Why?
1. They tell the world we are all frauds and scammers with their incessant announcements of creating a safe fraud free marketplace.
2. When making declarations of cleaning up the fraud in the marketplace it is always in reference to those of us doing business on eBay .
3. They have “PayPal the only safe payment method” posted every where and after suggesting rather stating to purchasing eBay members that they are putting their selves at risk if they don’t use PayPal, because they will not have buyer protection. This game they play to get everyone to use PayPal is in essence spreading the message that eBay is an unsafe marketplace.

All of these action on eBay’s part sets an expectation in eBay marketplace buyers that they will indeed be scammed so they better prepare and protect themselves by using PayPal- “the only safe payment method”.

EBay fails to mention to the world or post all over the eBay site that they indirectly (giving eBay the benefit of the doubt) encourage and enable fraud and retaliatory feedback. Why when feedback removal is petitioned in clear cases of feedback extortion do they deny the removal- yet on the other hand they have Feedback Withdraw? Because if eBay’s customer gets a low enough feedback rating it is eBay’s policy to suspend them of course if that occurs they will lose out on money that its customer brings in regardless of their disgusting character . Never mind this deviants injurious effect on their customers and to hell with the deviants effect on the perception of the rest of the vendors choosing to do business on eBay.

Example you tell me why this person is still doing business in the eBay marketplace if eBay is so concerned about the buyer experience and ridding the marketplace of these plagues?

This is from the feedback thread in the eBay answer center- this person actually charged 39 dollars for HANDLING fees and the package and product arrived in sub-par condition. The customer left a neutral - the vendor a negative
Seller’s feedback % only 98.1 %
231 users left negatives
84 neutrals past year
77 negatives past year
130 Mutual Feedback Withdrawals

DSR shipping and handling only 4.0

Is this the picture of a ethical professional? Or is this the picture of someone who should not be participating in the eBay marketplace if eBay is sincere about their wanting to clean the place up? This individual should have been evicted long ago and certainly shouldn’t still be around.

These counterfeit listings are all over the auction floor in this category

http://health-beauty.search.ebay.com/mac_Makeup_W0QQcatrefZC6QQdfspZ32QQfromZR2QQfrtsZ24QQftrtZ1QQftrvZ1QQsabfmtsZ1QQsacatZ31786

This page is littered with fraudulent Mac cosmetic listings- it is well known that Thailand and china list fake Mac and unsuspecting “eBay Buyers” purchase this garbage.

Another indicator that this is trash and not real is the auction floor flooding of the essentially the same lot auctions from the same “seller”. Mac is not cheap it is in high demand so naturally in the free marketplace it is costly not only for my customers but me as well and 99% of everyone selling Mac. Even if it could be purchased dirt cheap, which it can’t, no one in their right mind would degrade its potential value by flooding the floor with these lot auctions.

I have reported this crap at least a hundred times in the last 6 months and not one time has eBay removed the listing- not once!

Even worse one of the people selling Mac had put in her listings to beware of fake Mac and listed some of the indicators and they removed her listing and when she put it back up the limited her account.

Some idiots would suggest that eBay can’t police every listing, however when I and many others report specific listings they should have no obstructions to investigating the listings. Also, due to the known reality that the frequency of these listings coming from China and Thailand are fake they could very easily dis-allow these people from selling on eBay.com, but they don’t and the probable thousands of people being scammed by these crooks are not as much of a concern to eBay as getting the fees from the sold junk.

Not only is eBay allowing these people to be ripped off they are literally putting the person physical wellbeing at risk. Who knows what these people are using to put in the pots they are distributing to eBay.com members. It’s disgusting their flagrant disregard of these deviants and their very negative and potentially hazardous effects in the eBay marketplace.

So, yes there are a lot of problems within the eBay marketplace, but these will not be solved solely by switching to a more retail like platform- that will only lead to eBay’s demise. If eBay wants to clean up the garbage they very easily could, but rather than pay an employee to actually work and not just hit a random response to a customer’s question, they just let it be so they can keep collecting fees.

You know the problem with eBay’s business approach is that it function in the short term- they want the quick right now dollar and sacrifice the long term effects of building a good reputation that would exponentially increase revenue. These new policies are not succeeding in their own customer retention, and they may believe that they are effectively weeding out the deviants, but it is quite the opposite. When the only customers they have left are those with reputations such as those above examples eBay will bottom out and die. None of this BS they are inflicting on us will clean anything up it will only increase the deviant behavior, because that is all that will be left here as their customers- it only takes so long before everyone learns that eBay is filled with gutter trash , and never go back.

So this safe payment idea is irrelevant even more so than it is right now. All the time you hear “buyers” claiming PayPal always sides with the “seller” and the oppsing from the “seller”, but the reality is PayPal sides with whom ever it is that will allow them to keep their fees. If the “buyer” uses a credit card they win because Paypal doesn’t want to take the loss of a chargeback if they sid with the “seller”, no credit card and they side with the “seller”. They want their money and that is their priority always the idea of pretections is a myth

Kevin_TOn April 10, 2008 at 2:33 pm Said:

Richard,
Forget 1998 or 2008, Ebay should simply be a service and a tool with which I can run a reliable small international business. I am happy to pay for that service, but I do not want Ebay INTERFERING with either my business or with the marketplace in general.

I appreciate that Ebay has moved on from it’s “just a venue” stance, and that it needs to control aspects of the site that will allow fraud, but it should not be trying to dominate MY business (and that MY stands for the individual business of each and every seller), it should not be throwing up constant change which everyone has to adjust to, and interferes with productivity and sales (and affects Ebay’s own bottom line). We do not work for Ebay, we pay them a fair price for providing a service. Whilst no-one complains about Amazon’s payment service, it was always there - Ebay offered the ability for business or private sellers to use their own terms and payment methods according to what they found appropriate for their own business. Ebay prospered because of this, but now is trying to impose their will on all businesses as though they don’t realise that they are only a service provider.

Ebay needs to realise that every time they change rules, make the site harder to use, or remove payment options which will make some buyers leave the site, that they are affecting livelihoods. Ebay need to consider changes BEFORE they make them, and how they impact on the businesses that are paying for the service. Don’t threaten us with bolder and bigger changes more often, promise us a simple trading platform where we can work efficiently, create a better turnover, and Ebay can simply reap more fees and commissions. Don’t threaten to raise fees at any time, stick with annual fee adjustments so that businesses can budget and work to a business plan. Oh, and try to understand that the people who pay the fees and commissions to Ebay are actually their clients - many announcements nowadays treat sellers like criminals and the buyers like Ebay’s clients. Yes, the buyers are very important in the marketplace, but the sellers are the ones who are paying for Ebay’s services and are running the businesses that attract the buyers.

The Australian market will be adversely affected by the changes to payments allowed on Ebay. Some buyers will leave and some prices will fall (we won’t know which parts of the market will be affected until specific buyers dissappear). Ebay will make up the shortfall through the additional income from PayPal, but the businesses that are selling on the site get the worst of both - lower prices for their auction goods and increased fees because they are not allowed to accept payments which cost nothing to process, and which some buyers prefer. Livelihoods and business models will be affected by this, and this is not the business structure we were enticed to the site with.

After 10 years on Ebay, I am currently considering my future as an online seller. There SHOULD be no reason for me to do so, but I prefer to work for myself rather than being treated like an untrustworthy employee by someone who *I* am paying.

I am frustrated and dissappointed with what Ebay is doing to the marketplace.

Richard, I do thank you for taking the time to at least try to analyse and listen to the responses that you are receiving - that aspect is appreciated.

Kind Regards, Kevin

BrendaOn April 10, 2008 at 5:35 pm Said:

Sarah,

I have only bought so far on Ebay. Being tech challenged it is easier for me to call someone. I am thankful that Paypal has phone service. Unfortunately out of 4 phone calls made to Paypal mistakes were made by the phone reps 2 out of the 4 times I called creating follow up time that I had to lose by doublechecking the information. 50% isn’t an acceptable standard.

I can’t risk a 21 day payment hold to a company that has shown me only a 50% accuracy rate while doing business on a venue that doesn’t have viable customer service until certain levels of performance are met. Would you trust this situation if you were me? If yes why

HenriettaOn April 10, 2008 at 5:48 pm Said:

Richard you come across as a very sincere person.

For your average long time small seller eBay has always been more than a sales venue. It has been a community and a way of life. Go take a look on the Answer Center board. There are people with thousands of posts who put in a regular shift every day, they are performing voluntary community service. They do not do this for recognition or pay, it is a way of making eBay a better place. THAT is the eBay we don’t want to loose.

It is a very emotional issue. People who are emotionally involved in a relationship that is breaking, if not already irretrievably broken are not always able to make clear and reasoned summaries. These are the people who take pride in their feedback, I can assure you the Bargainland type sellers don’t give a rip.

For many the ‘noise’ is a form of grieving. People like Usher Lieberman casually dropping dismissive and denigrating comments all over the media do nothing to smooth over the fuss. They exacerbate it! Its like pouring vinegar on an open wound.

Over the last two years we have been living in a metaphorical earthquake zone. The ground beneath our feet is shaking but we don’t know which way to run to safety. If that seems overly dramatic please consider the plight of sellers of digital items. Not just 99c eBooks, but template and website designers, graphic artists, logo and branding specialists, accounting templates, knitting, crochet and sewing pattern makers, the list is very long. Rather than putting them ALL out of business with less than five days notice, couldn’t eBay have simply said ‘no feedback on any item which sells at less than $XX’?

Those same digital sellers, exploring eBay Classifieds found that when a potential lead clicks on their paid advertisement for further information, they get a warning from eBay that off eBay transactions are not safe. This is OUTRAGEOUS! How can eBay take money for an advertisement and warn off respondents?

What I and many others see is “My way or the highway” eBay wants to control how I interact with my fellow sellers, how I get paid, (for a fee), how I ship, and my opinion of my buyers, because sellers are bad and retaliatory. Paypal will freeze my entire account if it ‘thinks’ I may have engaged in a restricted activity, because I am guilty until able to prove innocence.

There is a lot of bad stuff out there and one wonders if there is a plan or if management is merely reacting to a perceived problem without thinking it out.

DaveyOn April 10, 2008 at 8:07 pm Said:

@Richard,

I don’t know if I’ve said this before, but I not only sell, I also buy (and very large-ticket items too). I walk both sides of the aisle.

What disturbs sellers about the eBay/Paypal functional monopoly gets back to the absolutely, indescribably, bottom feeding (I feel like Clark Griswold on Chirstmas Vacation here), horribly poor customer service of either one, leading to the lack of trust on the part of sellers or buyers. The next problematic root area is the denigration of the feedback “trust” system. Both problems point to the abandonment of Pierre’s original Community Values by eBaY corporate. When eBay pays lip service to trust issues, they reciprocally lose that trust from their customer base.

You buy from a merchant or private seller because you perceive they and their product have integrity, first and foremost. People and organizations who have integrity don’t need a safety net for those they interact with. Buyers are also proud of their integrity, and want it recognized and respected. A good, bidirectional feedback system, when it still worked, was an assurance of that integrity. Every sale also has a bit of caveat emptor for buyers and sellers alike (I don’t know the latin for “seller beware”), even with a B&M business. But, people found fit to trust each other, did their research, and part of the joy of the marketplace was that Pierre’s ideas REALLY WORKED!

Paypal in its early days was a breeze to use, and although you had some payment holds and glitches, I found that if you had a problem, you could get someone that would understand the problem and dealt with it fairly. This is no longer so. Lurch noted that eBay/auctionweb likewise was approachable and took the ideas of their community as being important to their growth.

Now, Paypal is very dangerous for sellers–extremely dangerous. Much more so than a merchant account, which the sellers of Australia will not be able to use anymore. For buyers, Paypal has fewer pitfalls than for sellers, save the “glitches” that pop up like the current chronic payment priority bug that has been around for 2 months or more. For sellers, more and more stories pop up of arbitrary claims decisions that defy logic and cannot be appealed for independent review, holds that can go on up to 180 days for secretive reasons, limited rights of data submission to support a seller’s position in a claim, and the like. A buyer SNAD claim, the hardest to defent against, is a nearly sure loss for a seller of everything from the item, shipping, and listing fees. And of course the brain-dead cusomter service does nothing but anger an aggrieved buyer or seller! Dishonest buyers are starting to take advantage of Paypal and shipping loopholes, which drive up sellers’ losses. Sellers are taking economy shipping off of the buyers’ choice list (raising prices) because of the losses they can suffer by using it and buyers cannot be trusted to take on responsibility for their chosen shipping type and inherent risks thereof. I could go on and on over stunts Paypal has pulled on me alone that would amaze even a third grader, and I’m only a 1/2 Powerseller.

I won’t comment on the executive team that grew eBay, but I think other than keeping them adequately capitalized through growth, I don’t see much of anything Meg did that made the marketplace any healthier at all. Of course she made herself and some of the other management fabulously rich, but community members began to sense the base principles of eBay changing from “What do we do to be mutually successful,” to “What can I do to bring in more net revenue at any cost to my community?” Customer service went to computerized responses that are mostly worthless and care-less (and customers see that immediately and scorn any business that would treat them that way). Then, other problems that popped up on the marketplace were dealth with in kneejerk ways that tried to minimize any use of judgement on the part of a human being. Suggestions for simple ways to change things that needed to be changed were ignored, which gave the appearance of extreme arrogance. Fraud was swept under the rug and never talked about publically.

Yes, I want eBay something-less-than-2006. It worked, it grew (even though every business cannot grow infinitely large), and it was enjoyable. The current eBay doesn’t recognize who its customers are, take care of them, and does not appear to care who they are anyway.

Incidentally, when you are talking internally, ask why Google Payments is not considered “safe.” If you look at that objectively, you should see that the “safe” does not consider the buyer nor the seller, but eBay’s bottom line and control of the sale.

Crabby PattyOn April 10, 2008 at 8:40 pm Said:

Goodness - all this time has passed and ebay STILL can’t figure out what its strengths were? The uniqueness, the community, the fun of it all, the (gasp!) garage sale kitsch of it all - THAT’S eBay to many people.

And now it seems eBay can’t find the nails fast enough to seal their coffin. Sky-high fees, laughable customer service, fraud, a widening disconnect with sellers, the horrid no-negative-feedback policy looming on the horizon, and now making eBay OZ all PayPal, all the time.

oakteakOn April 10, 2008 at 8:54 pm Said:

Sadly, I think the theme of most of these posts is that eBay is not trustworthy and even worse, is non-responsive, and quite frankly arrogant about it.

Whether this is true or not, I don’t know. But if that is the impression that is being transmitted, then something is seriously wrong with the business model you have chosen or have evolved into.

I don’t think any business can operate in that kind of atmosphere.

Your sellers and your buyers are trying to make you see the light because they really care about what is happening to eBay!

You are closing your eyes and ears.

It is time to do some soul searching about the health of your business. And I mean you have to look at everything, warts and all. Forget that a change is someone’s pet project. If it isn’t working, for Heaven’s sake get rid of it. And maybe get rid of little Johnny or Janie who thought it up.

I think it’s Jack Welch time. Time to get rid of the mummies in the back room.

DaveyOn April 10, 2008 at 9:05 pm Said:

@Sarah

Wow, Richard has enticed some decision-makers here! I must say your entry surprises me more than Usher’s!

I’m glad to hear that they are getting a few more protections Down Under. I feel like I’m left naked shipping anywhere else besides the States, as there is no international equivalent to First Class with Delivery Confirmation, and a class that would cover me is more expensive than what I sell and would earn me lower Shipping Cost stars for sure! Maybe if eBay didn’t have Shipping Cost DSRs to punish me for international sales, I’d be inclined to require EMI, but that’s another subject. Of course, my customers praise the affordability of my items’ shipped total cost, which is the lowest anywhere online. I still consider my customers intelligent enough to understand the transit time/loss/cost equation of makng shipping choices that fit their needs.

Here’s one for your homework, though. Why can an international buyer open up an INR claim two days after cleared payment, and win before the package arrives two weeks or so later?? Seems like a huge Paypal procedural oversight, but this happens frequently. In the International forums, we deal with the wreckage of such whacky claims all the time. Why not some level of reason applied here to shipping transit times before moving complaints forward?

I haven’t talked to an empowered customer service agent at Paypal in the last 6 years or so. Heck, it took four days of calls to finally get an English-speaking agent to reverse a couple dollars of bogus shipping charges from a Multiple Order Shipping glitch. Report a bug? Forget it. You’ll be told the problem is yours, but see the trend reported in forums a day or so later. I’m not impressed.

Sounds like Aussies are getting fair dinkum (square deal) on international shipping, though, with more affordable, SPP-covered shipping options and lower burdens of proof.

I don’t understand why the expanded protection is only offered to Powersellers, as my business metrics, customer handling, and “buyer experience” is better than someone dealing in larger volume. If the package loss rates in transit are constant, I shouldn’t be any more of a INR claim risk than a Powerseller. How is eBay going to entice me to sell more internationally, by doing things that consistently raise the risk of loss and fraud too high? Right now, every FCI package I send out, I do so on faith that the recipient is honest, as I could get hit with an undefendable INR claim every shipment. Or I could charge $26 for shipping and limit my sales to the UK and Canada. This is not right. I might even achieve Powerseller reliably all season if I had markets to aggressively expand into without risking losing my shirt. Of course, eBay is asking me to lose 40 cents more of my shirt per listing to be seen internationally now too.

Trust? Do you want me to trust Paypal as much as you demonstrate trust towards me? Why, when I have an 8 year nearly flawless history with you, do I get treated like I’m being seen for the first time each time I contact you? Why does a $20 claim get frozen in my account–do you not trust that I am good to meet it if I lose? There are little things that my bank and other financial partners do that say they value my business. Paypal does none of these things.

I hope, Sarah, that you can take some of our perspectives and sarcasm into account, and see things from our side. Your paycheck doesn’t take a hit when a Hungarian buyer gets my package, tells me it is great, then files a chargeback for non receipt that after tying up some of my funds for up to 75 days until I lose–my paycheck does. Paypal to me has turned into a deaf, secretive colossus that is fine to use as a buyer, but hell as a seller. Now we see national markets that are required to use it. Unless Paypal can show me as a seller that my concerns are considered and judgement and policies are fair, I’m scared of this Aussie move.

DaveyOn April 10, 2008 at 9:29 pm Said:

@Richard

Thanks for bringing Sarah here. Hopefully the staff participants begin to realize we’re all not all whining nuts, but people who know the marketplace by being in it deeply (unlike some prominent eBay management members who mainly buy shoes here) and experiencing the joys and flaws of it.

I did forget to comment on your intro point #2, that data shows that sellers using Paypal are half as likely to have an unpaid item. This really has no connection to the infamous Seller Protection Program.

Here’s a thought–I’d much rather have my item remain unpaid than paid, shipped, and the payment reversed later in a Paypal claim…

Of course, eBay would rather have my item get “paid” (they keep the Final Value Fees if the item is not claimed as unpaid, and by the time a payment is reversed, the timeframe to claim an unpaid item and get my fees back has long passed). Beyond that, well, Paypal only cares if I complied with the SPP to the letter. For domestic shipments, that is pretty easy to do and prove delivery. Internationally, much harder without soaking your buyer for expensive shipping, and restricting countries if you are not a Powerseller. Of course, the infamous SNAD claim is almost impossible to defend whether domestic or not, and you may or may not get your goods back.

Prior to the Paypal economy, these trades were done based on integrity. The flakes usually became obvious quickly. Risks were shared between buyer and seller. Can’t do that anymore when buyer feedback is always positive!

The economics that drive shipping choices, insurance purchase by the seller (there is NO incentive for insurance purchase by the buyer if bought through Paypal), and the like are multivariate and include DSR punishment, item cost, risk tolerance, etc. SPP is another variable. Allowing economy shipping was a win-win for me and my buyers. Now, not so much.

implogOn April 10, 2008 at 9:44 pm Said:

@ Sarah Livnat

Hi Sarah. Thanks for dropping by.

Take a moment and read the PowerSeller board posts concerning PayPal’s “improved seller protection”.

Your analysis may be a little rosier than that of some of the PowerSellers. Many posts seem to support DAVEY’s post that PayPal is “anything but safe”.

Here is one PowerSeller comment from the “Safer Payments on eBay Policy” thread locked to the top of the page.

“Safe Payments” is a joke — safe for Paypal because it’s not their money but hardly safe for sellers who are supposed to ship before getting paid.”

Post below from a PowerSeller:

“After a chargeback for a “not as described” (from shipping damage), we learned the hard way that the seller protection PayPal is offering is only for non-delivery. They always immediately yank the funds from the account when the buyer chooses this. “Not as describe” is not covered.

Even with non-delivery, all we are getting is a possible delay in a chargeback.

So is that all that seller protection is really about?”

One more thing Sarah. You might want to rework your opener, “We have listened to sellers.”. A lot of us have been around a long time and kinda know that you/eBay probably hasn’t listened to sellers quite as much as you could. If eBay listened to sellers, we wouldn’t be in the mess that brought about the creation of this blog.

I don’t mean any offense. It’s just that this is a tough room and may not really be an ideal place to pitch using “corporate speak” and “Disruptionese”. We would appreciate straight, honest, no BS communication.

Cheers!

DaveyOn April 10, 2008 at 9:45 pm Said:

One last gasp for tonight–my comments on fraud and fraud management as relates to Paypal and feedback:

When in Town Halls or other meetings where thorny questions of seller protection arise, Someone, often Tom Halprin, breezily says that sellers must chose and continue to use whatever fraud management systems fit their business.

As as smaller seller, I had one, and only one system available–reliable buyer feedback. As of May 1st, I don’t have even that threadbare system anymore as eBay intervened and took it from me.

Paypal hides fraud-judging data from me as a seller, such as credit card CVV, buyer address data, and other fraud metrics that they use. They do the fraud searching for me, as a service I guess. Of course, I can’t opt out of some of the more fraud-laden payment types within Paypal.

Sometimes, though, they have the courtesy to tell me, after the payment has cleared, they’ve authorized shipment, and the package is gone, that they decided my customer is a fraud risk or they had trouble securing the actual funds, so they lift the money back out of my account. OK, what do I do now? Well, if it is an international shipment that I sent with First Class International at the customer’s choice (for economy) or it is to a non-covered country, I likely just lost everything in the sale. If domestic, I’m probably OK under SPP.

I won’t summarize the obvious here, but you can draw some more conclusions why sellers may not like mandatory Paypal, forcing acceptance of more fraud-laden payment types, or the loss of leaving buyers negative feedback. The latter, particularly, seems to escape some eBay management, whose bonuses remain the same whether I lose on a sale or not.

Kevin_TOn April 10, 2008 at 9:47 pm Said:

Sarah Livnat
Manager of Seller Protections at PayPal says:
QUOTE: “In Australia, we’ve improved the policy for Australian PayPal account holders by requiring proof of shipment versus proof of delivery to be protected in the event of a non-receipt claim.”

Sarah,
Ebay’s email to some Australian members yesterday says: “Pay on pick up can only be offered in conjunction with PayPal. No other payment methods will be permitted.”

Thus Australian sellers MUST offer PayPal on a “pick-up-only” item, are required to accept PayPal if the pick-up customer chooses to pay that way, and so-called “seller protection” is voided in the PayPal user agreement under “4.2.4 Limitations on the Seller Protection Policy” which requires “Proof of Shipment” and is voided if “You hand deliver the item”, or “The buyer has claimed that the item was significantly not as described (SNAD)”.

As it is written, a scamming buyer can pay by PayPal and pick up a large item from an Australian seller, and then claim either that they never received the item or that it was “significantly not as described”, and the seller has none of the seller protection you are waxing lyrical about. In fact any buyer simply “claiming” that the item was significantly not as described appears to void the seller protection, which (as it is worded) really doesn’t give a seller any protection against a scamming buyer who wishes to play the system.

Please let me know if I am not understanding section 4.2.4. of the Australian user agreement correctly, or whether a seller is “allowed” to refuse the PayPal payment on a “pick up only” item?
Or is Ebay/PayPal trying to discourage high value sales from the Australian site?

Kevin

DaveyOn April 10, 2008 at 9:55 pm Said:

OK, a last, last gasp!

I read OAKTEAK’s post above, again, and saw something I missed, that I agree with.

Let no one doubt here that I feel very strongly about wanting eBay’s future to be strong. I want buyers to come, and feel good about visiting. What seller doesn’t? In that way, we agree completely with eBay’s management.

What grieves me is that management completely devalues me in about every interaction and policy change. Their vision certainly does not take me into account, other than in a patronizing way.

Kevin_TOn April 11, 2008 at 2:28 am Said:

Sarah Livnat,
While we are discussing PayPal’s seller protection and clause 4.2.4…..

QUOTE: “4.2.4 Limitations on the Seller Protection Policy. The Seller Protection Policy will not apply to a transaction if any of the following apply:

You combine items purchased through separate eBay transactions into a single shipment,” END QUOTE.

Does this mean that if a buyer wins six auctions for individual brochures that each brochure is required to be packed, sent and registered separately in order to comply with PayPal’s seller protection?

I currently sell brochures on the basis of “any number will ship together for (either $2.00 or $4.00).” With registration at $2.70 within Australia and $7.90 for international, this will mean that each individual brochure will cost a minumum of $4.70 in shipping for buyers of multiple items if your policy dissallows combined shipping (which Ebay.com actually encourages). Is this the “value” for buyers that Stephanie Tilenius was referring to?

Kevin

BrendaOn April 11, 2008 at 4:10 am Said:

There is so much here!

I don’t remember which topic had had a reference to prioritizing the issues,but they all seem to revolve around one very important theme.

TRUST

I have read commentary repeatedly about the comparisons being made betwwen Ebay and Amazon. Posters are asked, with a certain level of confusion attached, ” What do you want, Retail a la Amazon or Ebay ‘98? ”

What people want is to feel:

SAFE
APPRECIATED
VALUED

People like Amazon’s professioal approach.
People like Amazon’s forthright policies.
People like Amazon’s customer service.
People like Amazon’s consistancy.
People like Amazon’s standardized procedures.
People like Amazon’s willingness to hold up their end of the bargain.
People like Amazon’s clarity.

And I think that people appreciate Amazon’s ability to create a business plan and work out the kinks before experimenting and testing business theories on the public.

How much input does Ebay need from the public in order to figure out how to organize themselves?

The top tier could always registar as sellers. I am not saying to do this large scale, but put a few items up and work the sales under the same conditions as are being placed upon the NEW SMALL SELLER. And do this without pulling rank so you can experiance firsthand what your sellers are.

Under my proposed idea, you are not allowed any of the perks of Power Seller status. Unless it is possible to anonamously email customer service ( the advantage would still be yours since you designed policy ). And no one can know that you are doing this or it is no longer a valid means of testing out your theories.

The public has a quirky little habit of not realizing that they are a statistical outlier that is not going to make the graph. Mathimatical theories will only go so far when dealing with the diversity of John Q. Public.

Another in house test could be to bid on something. Make sure that you pick a seller with questioable feedback and ask alot of questions. Send payment slowly, find fault with the item and don’t use Paypal.

These 2 steps could be a very efficient means of testing the theoretical waters. Is anybody game?

How much potential harm to the company is all of this public debate causing? It has become almost impossible to go anywhere within the E-commerce arena, within the internet, without being bombarded with a continual commentary about the ILLS OF EBAY.

It seems like there is alot of concern about fraud being brought up. Well, the criminal element is being educated by all of this public debate. They have to stay state of the art too.

David WhiteOn April 11, 2008 at 5:27 am Said:

I have watched this news with great interest. As a long time eBay (and other venues) seller, as well as now being a reporter and host of an internet marketing radio program (to provide full disclosure) this action comes as no surprise. From a business perspective it makes perfect sense. Controlling the marketplace, regulating the items sold in that marketplace, and controlling the payment methods allowed is a model used internet wide. This is certainly not new to most e-commerce sites, but it is to eBay sellers.

I am not an expert on US banking laws, however I have been told by some people in the know that the model being used in Austrailia would not be allowed in the US due to anti-trust laws. Whether this is true or not remains to be seen. I have for many years, going back to the BillPoint days, said that some day eBay would control the entire transaction. Personally, I don’t feel that this is necessarily a bad thing.

What is important is that whatever venue you use to market your product or service MUST fit YOUR business. What is often lost sight of is, it is your business and if you as a business owner don’t feel comfortable with the policies of a particular venue, you must find either a way to work with those policies or find another venue. Remember one thing,, IT IS YOUR BUSINESS!

Patricia 1On April 11, 2008 at 9:30 am Said:

Richard….don’t know if I’m in the proper thread for this but can you please pass on to the powers that be that hits are down terribly in the Arts categories since changing to Best Match default. I see no reason for Best Match at all in the arts categories because we have extensive item specifics so a simple search will do. We also noticed that Best Match doesn’t really seem to be favoring artists with great reputations or even powerseller status and the searches we’ve conducted brought back miserable results. Surely with the reduced hits (and bids) ebay is also losing revenue from this. I’ve heard nothing but complaints on the Art & Artist’s Board and the groups I belong to. I’d appreciate it if you would please pass this on. Thanks.

Patricia 1On April 11, 2008 at 10:01 am Said:

Hey - thanks Richard!!! :-)

LurchOn April 11, 2008 at 11:10 am Said:

Richard - that wasn’t a rhetorical question, so thank you. The other part was:

“And if it does go anywhere, do the eBay reps here have any appreciation of how someone who has been around since the very start of eBay might have useful insights in present situations along with ways to remedy them in a way applicable to the present, but keeping in mind what has worked and what has failed in the past - how history can play a role in shaping the future (if any) of eBay?”

I’m try to figure out whether it’s worth the time to participate here at any kind of meaningful level, or if I do, whether it will be simply dismissed - thus, a complete waste of my time, which is what I have learned is the case over the last 8 or so years. You do have to understand, when you are ignored and dismissed over such a long period of time, one just sort of gives up and becomes extremely wary of wasting their (my) time.

Oh yeah - is there any kind of internal dictate that people in other departments need to listen AND respond to you? Will anything here actually be considered and possibly incorporated in the future planning for eBay? It’s too bad there’s no ombudsman at eBay. Hint, hint.

I’ve made this offer before, but I am potentially open to direct communication if the answer to these three questions is “yes.”

Thanks!

LurchOn April 11, 2008 at 11:17 am Said:

To clarify - I meant I have made this offer at various times in the past (not here on this blog).

AnnOn April 11, 2008 at 11:17 am Said:

Richard,

As a Power Buyer and Silver Power Seller who has been using eBay for nearly 12 years, since the beginning, and someone who reads the blogs both on and off eBay, professional writers (such as AuctionBytes) and personal ones; I CAN TELL you EXACTLY what eBay members want.

1) They want eBay to return to what they have always claimed to be: a Venue. eBay has gotten so far from that and so involved in every aspect of each transaction that they can no longer claim the legal safety net of being a venue only. Get out of our businesses and provide the service we are paying for - a place to transact OUR business.

2) They want eBay to be a safe place to do business. They want it separated from PayPal. They want choices in what payments to accept, what payment methods to offer, what shippers to use and so on. PayPal is not “the only safe way to pay”. In fact, it is the least secure method of payment for a seller. Thieves, scammers and dishonest buyers abound and use PayPal almost exclusively. I have been screwed more times by PayPal than I can count and have lost thousands of dollars to dishonest buyers who exploit PayPal’s loopholes and “Buyer Protection” bias. SPP is a complete joke. Nearly every serious seller I’ve talked to or listened to say the same. In more than 10 years on eBay, the ONLY payment problems I’ve ever had were with PAYPAL buyers or PayPal itself stealing from me.

3) PayPal’s new User Agreement in the US that goes into effect May 7th is a license to STEAL and is blatently illegal. I’ve already contacted an attorney about it and they state we have grounds for a class action lawsuit if PayPal tries to put Section 13.5 (b) ito effect. It states that if a buyers claims an item is not as described, PayPal will require the item to be returned to PAYPAL, NOT THE SELLER! The money, including the shipping fees which the seller has Already Spent on behalf of and at the request of the buyer will be returned to the Buyer. The seller is out the money AND the item AND additionally they lose the money they spent in good faith for shipping. PayPal states very clearly, they will NOT RETURN the item to the seller. That is outright theft. In some cases, it qualifies as Felony Grand Larceny!

4) They want eBay to get rid of the bad sellers but also the bad buyers!!! Which far outnumber the bad sellers. Sellers value their reputation and therefore are much more concerned about their feedback and try to keep it good. However, buyers couldn’t care less if they get a negative, all they have to do is snipe an auction and the seller would never even get a chance to look at their feedback before they are roped into a transaction with a bad buyer.

5) Sellers want eBay to support them. They are eBay’s customers after all, not the buyers. The buyers are the sole customer of the seller, not eBay. Sellers are continually being screwed by eBay every which way. As sellers exit in mass to other sites such as Amazon, eCrater, iOffer, eBid, OnlineAuction.com, Overstock and more, the buyers are starting to follow them, while eBay constantly has to advertise to get new buyers to replace those leaving. Buyers will come if the sellers are there. Without the sellers, there are no buyers.

6) “Buyer Experience” is the biggest joke ever. As a Power Buyer, my buying experience has actually gotten much worse since 2005 when Donahoe was hired. Neither sellers or buyers are stupid. We recognize that Donahoe has no experience in either buying or selling on eBay and it shows in every decision he’s made. All of them bad for both buyers and sellers. Best Match is the worst thing ever for buyers. Now they can’t even FIND the items they came looking for and so they leave and go to Amazon et al.

7) They want the “flea market” experience. That is what made eBay great. If they want a “retail” experience, they go to a retail site, they don’t even consider eBay. When they want a collectible, a unique item, an antique or hard to find or discontinued item, they come to eBay. When they want a great item at a less than retail price, they come to eBay. If they want new, mass market items, they go to Wal-mart!

8) They want customer service. They want people to listen to them. They want to be able to talk to a live person (who speaks English and doesn’t live 1/2 a world away) and have them actually care and try to help. They hate automated responses and canned scripts.

9) They want open, honest feedback. They hate hidden anonymous DSR scores. They want sellers to be able to give feedback as well so good buyers can be difereniated from bad. If eBay is worried about retaliatory feedback from sellers, they should be worried about false retaliatory feedback and out-of-control extortion from buyers as well. The only sane solution is to allow both to submit honest feedback for the other side but do not allow it to be visible to either side until both have left it.
Sellers will leave good feedback for good buyers if they are not threatened by the risk of no longer being able to warn others about bad buyers. Talk in the eBay community among sellers is that they will either no longer leave feedback at all for buyers or preface bad “forced positive” feedback with the word NEG or NEGATIVE as well, so people can be warned away from the bad seed buyers anyway. Its the only way left to them to protect themselves from eBay’s bad decisions. Right now, the way eBay’s proposed feedback system is being set up, it will lose all value for both sides, esp if eBay persists with the threat that if a seller chooses not to leave VOLUNTARY positive feedback for a buyer, that eBay WILL DO IT FOR THEM!!

10) Above all, all eBayers want FAIRNESS from eBay towards both sides in all aspects of a transaction. eBay’s bias right now is so far in favor of the buyer that the scales are almost at a vertical tilt.

11) They want fair charges for services provided. They don’t want “fee decreases” that actually raise the total cost! They want honesty from eBay, not doubletalk lies. They want to be able to run their businesses without interference. They want eBay to be reliable, easy-to-use, easy to search (get rid of the Best Match fiasco which doesn’t work) and easy to buy and sell on.

There are many more, but you get the gist. In short, they want the eBay pre-2005. They DON’T want what they are getting now: ignorant deaf executives interested only in lining their own pockets and digging their own graves. They want admissions of mistakes by management and rollbacks of bad choices on eBay’s part.

Give us back the eBay we Used to know and love. If it ain’t broke, don’t break it.

MechelleOn April 11, 2008 at 11:59 am Said:

How about starting a thread about eBay putting outside retailer ppc ads that look like eBay featured listings with directly competing products in the same category? With constant presence with priority over eBay store listings. Even an eBay selling member said she did a search received dismal results for auctions (a couple of listings) like 3 eBay store listings and 5 outside ppc ads of which she bought through, because the search results didn’t yield a better deal. Apparently this particular keyword usually tosses up pages of listings.

Someone else had a screen shot where to find the links to the next page of eBay listings she had to scroll through the ppc ad listings to find the spot to move to the next page.

I think this might make a very interesting topic- oh and if you have never seen these ads as I hadn’t it is because eBay apparently hides them from selling members by tracking the IP address

you can find this thread on the ebay store discussion board

So, how about it- lets see how much discretion eBay really allows you in managing this blog

DaveyOn April 11, 2008 at 12:03 pm Said:

Ann, is this a good summary of how you feel?

eBay 2005 == New Coke

Coca Cola’s management was astute enough to see the misstep and admit it, so they got their customers back more loyal than ever, and a whole new appreciation for their business. Their business was not to be a better Pepsi…hint, hint… They misread their own data that caused the debacle.

I agree with Ann totally, by the way.

Patricia 1On April 11, 2008 at 12:34 pm Said:

Clap, clap, clap for Ann. BRAVO!

Okay, now if you took a poll I bet 99 percent of sellers would agree with Ann’s post. So, why still plod along towards being another Amazon? - its already being done and expertly!

I have one more thing to add to Ann’s post. Good buyers do not like the fact that sellers will no longer be able to leave negatives for buyers. They say that then THEIR feedback becomes meaningless. I’m afraid good buyers think as highly of their good feedbacks as sellers do of theirs. I’ve heard this from many buyers on the ebay boards. Ebay should read those boards - they wouldn’t need these blogs. Unfortunately, they refer to the people who post on the boards as “noise” and troublemakers. That’s kind of sad :-(

I think besides the bad policies, the second thing everyone is complaining about the most is Best Match. You see, no matter what ebay thinks, buyers come in and if they want art they will click on art and start to browse. I bet two thirds of them take no notice of the sort at the top and just browse a few pages…maybe want some artwork with cats in it so they’ll put cat in search, etc. This is how buyers search and if ebay asked them…they would find that out so that instead of instituting what THEY think is best, they could possibly institute something that’s actually friendly to the buyers. For instance, I know when someone asks me to paint a black cat…I do it. I’m out to make sales and satisfy a customer so they’ll come back. Its a very simple work ethic that WORKS - Ebay needs to try it instead of constantly playing the bully and throwing their weight around! They need to start really thinking about the buyers and sellers and what they NEED in order to make those transactions - and make them in a user friendly manner on both sides…then the buyers will return.

Ann is right about pre-2005. In fact, since around April 2004 when they got rid of Going, Going, Gone the “fun” quotient of Ebay started to decline. Then they took out the “Browse” button and replaced it with “Buy”. You have no idea how many of my customers asked me if hitting that buy button locks them into a sale. I know it doesn’t make sense to you and me but it was a genuine fear with a lot of the buyers. So, they took out the last minute frenzy of bidding and grabbing the item before someone else took it and then they take out the friendly “Browse” and replace it with the rigid “Buy”. I don’t know who was responsible for some of these things but if they want some “excitement” back in that site these two things could well be reversed back to what they were. The very thing that made ebay catch on like fire was the auction environment. They’ve been killing that for years and now want the excitement back?????

We can all go on and on but for what good? Ebay continues to plod on toward being and online Sears :-(

CrunchyPostingGoodnessOn April 11, 2008 at 10:40 pm Said:

“Davey - in conversations I’ve had today, it’s pretty evident that this is seen as an entirely positive step forward to strengthen consumer safety on eBay.com.au.”

@ Richard, I think the above comment is exactly what many people were afraid of when this blog was created. eBay is telling you one thing, but the reality is completely different. There are several websites on the internet which give very specific instructions on how one can go about scamming a seller on eBay using the loopholes which exist in PayPal.

I hope that you will rely more on the information that is being provided to you by actual users of eBay, rather than just standard corporate PR. It would make absolutely no sense for eBay to tell you, “Yes, we are aware that this will lead to more scams on sellers, but as long as we still collect our fees and drive up the website traffic it is an acceptable risk for us.”

“Amazon requires Amazon payments for purchases on their platform but they’ve done this from the beginning.”

Amazon also has a more trusted payment system with security for both buyers and sellers. With Amazon every ship to address is considered “confirmed” - unlike PayPal. Amazon also has an educated, live help department to handle any disputes - unlike PayPal. PayPal has a long way to go before sellers will trust it like they trust Amazon’s payment service.

@ Richard, BTW - What is preventing eBay from making all buyer addresses confirmed for all sellers? If the ability exists for eBay to make all buyer addresses confirmed for PowerSellers, then they should be able to confirm them for all sellers. Amazon is able to offer this protection to all of their sellers, so why can’t eBay?

If it is eBay’s intention to provide a better buying experience, then confirming all addresses would increase the number of sellers wishing to ship internationally and therefore create a larger selection for international buyers to choose from.