eBay Australia announces Safe Payment Initiative

Crabby PattyOn 04.10.2008 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 04.10.2008 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 04.10.2008 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 04.10.2008 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 04.10.2008 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 04.10.2008 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 04.10.2008 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 04.10.2008 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 04.11.2008 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 04.11.2008 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 04.11.2008 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 04.11.2008 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 04.11.2008 at 10:01 am Said:

Hey - thanks Richard!!!

LurchOn 04.11.2008 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 04.11.2008 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).