eBay Australia announces Safe Payment Initiative

LurchOn 04.19.2008 at 12:51 pm Said:

Richard - this wasn’t about sensationalizing. This was about whether you are spinning or being fed misinformation. In your own words in this post, you are being fed misinformation. I mean really, when you wrote this, I am pretty sure that you were trying to convey that there were no plans to implement it in other countries. Since we’re playing semantics - the quote from the article is:

“Mr. Donahoe said that if the test was successful, the company would introduce it in other countries “in months, not years.”

From Merrium-Webster:
Plan: noun:
a detailed formulation of a program of action;
goal, aim.

Don’t know - this does sound like a plan to me - sure, it’s a plan contingent on some measurement of success within Australia, but the simple application of a measurement of success within a test market does not invalidate something as a “plan.” The point was, you were either given basically misleading information or spun it - this really has nothing to do with sensationalizing. Wouldn’t it have been wiser for John to be a little more forthcoming with you and provide you with the statement which he provided the nytimes?

I suppose we also could semantically debate whether “markets” equals “countries.” An argument could be made that when you referred to “market,” you were referring to a cross-country geographical area (or even possibly a product line specific market with no geographic borders) and in the article, JD is simply referring to specific “countries,” not markets… I don’t think people would buy that either, though (if it even were an argument that was made - I know it’s not - I’m trying to illustrate the semantic issue being used here).

And thank you for answering the question regarding whether departments and staff do need to respond to items you ask them in relation to issues raised on this blog. If you’ve read what I’ve posted, you may have already caught on: I was trying to determine whether you were really a defacto ombudsman. You’re not. Too bad.

implogOn 04.19.2008 at 1:52 pm Said:

What happened to Sarah Livnat, the eBay shade who drifted across the blog then disappeared? Is she off listening to sellers, unable to address our responses to her post here?

DaveyOn 04.19.2008 at 6:44 pm Said:

@Richard,

My hope is that you last through the pent-up frustration of the eBay community that has been underserved by a listening ear at HQ. As you can tell, there is a lot of it.

As I see this blog as about the only lifeboat out there, I think I’ll have patience with it for sure. I’ll try to hold the “spinmeister” accusations, although you need to understand that eBay has thrown lots of spin at us in the past that was so obvious as to be laughable. Read the January announcement about the “FEE DECREASE.” See any mention of the actual fee increase that most sellers got? Yes, in the fine print, and only by following another link. And, of course, it was called an “alignment.”

I hope that you see that many of the pains brought up here are well thought out and somewhat eloquently stated–these aren’t the “noise” denigrated by Mr. Donohue from time to time. That is, other than the noise of thousands of people trying to speak at once out of frustration that they are not being heard.

CrunchyPostingGoodnessOn 04.19.2008 at 9:47 pm Said:

@ Richard

The credibility of this blog, lies in the comments; in the questions and answers. If I generate a discussion (see the DSR thread) that presents both sides of an argument or topic, then mission accomplished. So far, we’ve been pretty healthy on the feedback.

Perhaps I was mistaken, but when I read the eBay announcement regarding the creation of this blog I though it was meant to be a conduit between eBay users and eBay management. My impression was that issues were to be discussed, options presented, and then these suggestions would be forwarded on to eBay management for analysis and perhaps implementation.

If the purpose it just to discuss an issue, without any hope of action being taken on what is presented, then I’m not sure that this blog will serve more use than the eBay forums.

I thought eBay was bringing someone from outside the company to make an independent decision regarding the concerns expressed by users. That such concerns would be researched by this independent party, and if they were deemed valid, would be presented to eBay management for change.

So my question is, do you see, given the recent announcement vs what was presented before, why so many users distrust eBay? Do you agree that such unpredictable changes will only serve to drive users away? Is this not a prime example which demonstrates users have a reason not to believe eBay when it states something?

I alluded to the digital delivered items in my earlier post. Many sellers made their business selling digitally delivered logos, auction templates, and web designs on eBay. Out of the blue eBay announced that within a week all digitally delivered listings would be removed from the auctions and available for listing only in the classified ads. This sudden and unpredicted move by eBay placed a lot of sellers out of business. Those sellers had no advanced warning and no input regarding the changes before they were implemented. Many of those sellers had even gone through the extra step of being certified by eBay in the past so they could sell these items on eBay.

Given how quickly eBay could in essence eliminate a seller’s business and category, why should any seller trust eBay or its management? Remember, trust must be earned and credibility is honest answers, regardless of backlash from eBay or from the posters.

Kevin_TOn 04.21.2008 at 2:07 am Said:

QUOTE: “When I wrote this post I was informed that there were no plans to implement this in other markets. I left it up to the Ink audience to draw their own (obvious) conclusions on this one. And, personally, I think Chris @TameBay (in the first 7 responses to this original post) nailed it completely and succinctly:

“No plans” is simply another term for “no timescales”. ”

@ Richard
If I read your use of “obvious” in the above paragraph correctly (and I may not), then it appears that we have differing views as to the “taking the high road”.

Thank Sarah Livnat for her succinct spinning of the great improvements to Australian seller protection while ignoring the questions about serious consumer issues that are raised by these policies (e.g.: massive postage increases for buyers of multiple items, serious seller vulnerabilities caused by having to accept PayPal on pick-up-only items, etc).

Enjoy your blog.
Kevin

DaveOn 04.21.2008 at 6:49 am Said:

Richard, your appear to be completely blind to the level of feeling out there. Your customers overwhelmingly believe that:
1) eBay has completely lost the plot.
2) eBay is unresponsive to customer complaints.
3) PayPal’s policies are not uniformly enforced and are often arbitrarily enforced.
4) Both eBay and PayPal fees are too high.
5) eBay’s arguments behind “PayPal only” are simply not being believed, no matter how many times you quote the statistic.
6) eBay’s claims that “our Site merely acts as an online venue” and “payment is strictly a matter between buyers and sellers” do not reflect the reality.
7) There is an army of disgruntled customers and ex-customers out there completely fed up with eBay pontificating from an ivory tower about how they know what’s best for the customers.

Why is this so difficult to understand?

Just admit what everybody else on the planet already knows - this move is purely to please the shareholders and nobody else. Then you might at least be credited with having a bit of honesty.

Patricia 1On 04.21.2008 at 10:05 am Said:

Sorry, Paypal loses hands down in favor of my own credit card. If I don’t receive an item, I can call and put the amount in dispute. Any charge on my bill that I didn’t make (which happened just recently to me) is wiped out, the amount refunded and my card is deactivated - a new one sent immediately. There is NO way Paypal can or will do this for a buyer. As a seller I can mail an empty box and as long as I have a postal receipt and tracking…Paypal will find in my favor and not the buyer. I would really not be inclined to buy anything costly using Paypal. Its really blatantly evident ebay is doing this for the Paypal fees alone and with no thought whatsoever that its safer than other methods of payment. Ebay loses this round too and soundly! I might note that every time ebay comes out with something like this they chase buyers and sellers away. Is it any wonder their auction figures are stagnant?

DaveyOn 04.21.2008 at 9:53 pm Said:

@Patricia

Believe me, Paypal can be gamed by buyers just as much as sellers, and the sellers lose a lot as well. We agree that it is not “safe” at all. The Seller Protection Policy is rife with holes and places to misstep, rendering you ineligible. Internationally, you have to use insanely expensive shipping to qualify, which will hit your DSRs. Not a good picture by any means.

I’d like to know why merchant accounts and for that matter, Google Checkout, are less safe??? Are they talking job safety if you work for eBay?

Patricia 1On 04.21.2008 at 11:09 pm Said:

@Davey - Paypal only? - another policy that’s more for them and not for business in general. I can’t see where it would bring buyers back and make them want to buy. Some of my customers insist on sending a check or moneyorder. Do I tell them “no” and lose the sale? Is this what they want us to do just so they can collect the paypal fees? Most transactions go thru Paypal anyway. If its not enough then I suggest they do what other companies do in lean times. Start cutting the budget - start getting rid of any workers not needed. Don’t just try to beat it out of sellers because that’s going to hit the breaking point that much faster and then we’ll all see failure first hand.

I keep waiting for those buyers - where are they??? All I’m getting are more useless policy changes that put even more obstacles in the sellers’ path. Just tonight, I looked at my listings and my feature plus ($20.00) auction has only had a handful of views since I started it yesterday. How much longer does ebay think sellers will pay for this kind of service? I’ve gone from $800 on good months down to $250 this month! Let them explain that to me! Like the little old lady on the old commercials used to say “where’s the beef?” Where are the bidders promised to us - the ones we’re losing so much of our own rights in order to get??? In the meantime I keep scoping other auctions. I see ebid has a large arts category and so I will try some work there tomorrow. Is this what ebay wanted? Forcing sellers to go elsewhere? I think they better get their feet on the ground and really start thinking things out.

I read a post by a buyer on seller central - he’s sick to death too. Everything is confusion for buyers. The new search is NOT working and people are sick and tired of learning and relearning by the week! So, don’t listen to us…we’re speaking truthfully and from the heart. Ebay wants to profit from our sales and WE WANT TO SELL - stand back and let us do that!!!

wisdale7On 04.22.2008 at 6:45 am Said:

I wrote, several weeks ago, about abusive seller(s) feedback, with NO response. I suspect this has reduced my rating, and thus my selling ability. I pointed out a seller, who blatantly says on their seller store page, that positive feedback will be “rewarded” with a free item, AFTER the feedback is left. Guess what ebay did about this?…NOTHING!!!
I also received my first ebay selling invoice, and was shocked, that my balance due, was incorrect, but NOT even going to try “live help”…..just don’t have the time to waste.
Ebay does NOT offer alternatives in order to contact a LIVE person. Apparently, this Ebay Ink site, is another decoy… (an inanimate object which gives no response)
I’m on the verge of quitting ebay, for life, so I don’t waste my life, trying to keep others honest. It’s like being on a neighborhood watch, and the neighborhood doesn’t care……

AmberOn 04.22.2008 at 7:26 am Said:

Hopefully the Aussies will strike this new rule down revealing it to be what it is: anti-competitive.

There is no data that suggests Paypal is a safer option than the many other online payment methods. Ebay has made those claims, but haven’t backed it up with facts.

In fact, Paymate is a direct competitor to Paypal and has a good track record. I used it to pay my Aussie trading partners when I first started ebaying.

In addition, most buyers report massive delays in trying to use direct deposit through Paypal. Bank to bank is much faster, and most have NO problems with fraud using that method.

Many of my international buyers HATE Paypal. They can’t get it to work right. It’s not just about the sellers–international buyers hate Paypal too.

Finally, the combined shipping exclusion–which as far as I know is a quirk unique to Au–makes it quite obvious that buyers will be punished with these new changes in the form of increased postage. A seller loses his/her Paypal Seller Protection (such as it is) if they ship more than one item in a box (ie. combine shipping). I predict the majority of sellers will discontinue offering combined shipping, simply due to the liability. Less purchases by buyers, less sales for sellers.

It’s a bad move–and has NOTHING whatsoever to do with protecting buyers. It has EVERYTHING to do with protecting Ebay corp’s bottom line.

Patricia 1On 04.22.2008 at 8:32 am Said:

@ Amber - most of us sellers who are aware of what they are doing in Australia are pinning our hopes on your people. If its struck down there then they may be stopped here as well.

CrunchyPostingGoodnessOn 04.22.2008 at 9:19 am Said:

@ Davey

“I’d like to know why merchant accounts and for that matter, Google Checkout, are less safe???”

Good question! I use Google Checkout for any special orders my customers may wish to place outside of my normal selling venue. I have never had a problem using it, nor have any of my customers - even those who were only used to paying through Amazon.

A while back on the Ebay SC forum a poster alluded to the denial of Google Checkout was due to some falling out between Google and Ebay in the past. I haven’t taken the time to research the history behind that yet, but perhaps I’ll set some time aside for that in the near future…

Colin RuleOn 04.22.2008 at 8:37 pm Said:

Hi, guys — my name is Colin Rule, and I’m the Director of Online Dispute Resolution at PayPal (though I still do work on the eBay side as well.)

This is a really rich thread. Thanks to everyone for posting. I wanted to weigh in on a couple points that have been made.

Mechelle said: “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.”

I understand your frustration, Mechelle, but I guarantee we take the feedback we get from the community very, very seriously. This blog is but one example. I read hundreds of emails and board posts every day. We also closely analyze all the data we collect in the marketplace and work very hard every day to do what’s right for our users. You may not agree with some of the strategy, but please don’t think your comments are falling on deaf ears.

Along those lines, Implog said: “We would appreciate straight, honest, no BS communication.”

Absolutely. This is clearly a forum for highly experienced users. Your long track records in the marketplace, and your immense amounts of first hand experience, make you immune to any doubletalk. That’s why I appreciate the opportunity to communicate directly with you, unfiltered. I think that’s Richard’s goal for this blog. This is exactly what I’m looking for from our customers – straight talk. And you guys are serving it up pretty straight.

Bonni asked: “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?”

Because PayPal relies on tracking to determine item location, unscrupulous buyers (and sellers) can attempt the “empty box” fraud to get a tracking number to win the claim. If this happens to you, contact PayPal and explain what happened. This is fraud, pure and simple. We don’t want any anyone who would try this trick in our system. We’re currently working on ways to make reporting this kind of thing easier. But if you contact us through the main phone line and explain what happened they’ll get your case into the right process.

Bonni also asked: “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?”

PayPal requires proof of shipment to win an Item Not Received claim. Australia Post’s Registered Post and Registered Post International both provide shipping receipts that include the eBay buyer’s delivery address, so they do meet our requirement.

Randy Smythe said, in relation to eBay managing payments: “It’s like bringing the law to the Wild West.”

It’s true that buyers are telling us they want more protection and better service. You can hear it again and again in this very thread. I personally believe that it will be very hard (if not nigh impossible) to provide that without being able to manage the payment process end-to-end. If a buyer pays with an unprotected payment type, they are totally exposed. And when they get taken advantage of, they blame the eBay marketplace as a whole, not the bad seller who took advantage of them. So this is like bringing law to the wild west, in a sense – we need to bring more certainty and stability to payments to give buyers what they want. (Let me be clear, I’m not a top exec making these calls – I’m down in PayPal Risk Member Resolutions, so don’t read this paragraph to be anything other than my personal opinion.)

As David White put it, “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.”

Davey said: “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?”

I think this is a very valid point, Davey, and it’s something that we need to do better. I think the old attitude was that each situation should be viewed tabula rasa, with no consideration to the reputation of the users involved. Now I think there’s an understanding that we should do a better job of respecting the history of each user, and to take their good reputation into account. I think you’ll see changes along these lines in the near future.

Mechelle wrote: “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.”

I can tell you this is absolutely not true. We work hard to decide every claim on PayPal based on the merits of the case. The reps who work these cases don’t even see how the payment was funded in their deliberations. And PayPal pays out tens of millions of dollars every year in protections payments to cover buyers who were defrauded. There’s a lot of similar conspiracy theories posted in this thread – e.g. that eBay only cares about shareholders, not customers, or that we turn a blind eye to fraud because we’re making fees on it, etc. – cynicism is fine, but please don’t let your cynicism convince you that conspiracy theories like this are true, because I can tell you first hand that they are not. We are working very hard to do the right thing for the community, and that’s the bottom line.

Linda posted an article that read in part:
“PayPal sent him an e-mail explaining, ‘PayPal’s Buyer Complaint Policy only applies to shipment of goods, not to disputes about the attributes or quality of goods received.’”

This article is misinformed. As many of the posts in this thread have indicated, PayPal’s Buyer Complaint Process does provide quality of goods coverage (called Not-As-Described) for all eBay items. I have a very hard time believing that any PayPal customer service representative would email that to an eBay buyer. But I’d have to know more about this case to do further research.

Lurch said: “It’s too bad there’s no ombudsman at eBay. Hint, hint.”

Lurch, I am totally on the same page with you about this. I think an ombudsperson would be wonderful. If you keep raising this issue from the outside, I promise to keep raising it from the inside. I think it would do wonders to help the marketplace regenerate trust.

AnnOn said: “Give us back the eBay we Used to know and love. If it ain’t broke, don’t break it.” JJH said (Misty and Kimbers and Lurch and Sharon agreed): “I want the ebaY that’s more like 1998.”

I hear this sentiment a lot. I sympathize with it – I loved eBay through all its formative years, and that’s why I joined the company. If only it was as simple as keeping eBay preserved in its 1998 incarnation for us to enjoy into the sunset. Unfortunately, it doesn’t work that way. The internet is constantly changing. If eBay doesn’t evolve, it’s toast. All the buyers will go elsewhere. What worked in 1998 doesn’t work now. So we’ve got to innovate, and we’ve got to move ahead. It’s taken me a while to come to terms with that, but now I understand. The challenge is doing it in a way that doesn’t alienate everyone who loved what eBay was over the past decade. We’ve got to preserve what made eBay great (the quirky items, the fun approach, the community) while tackling these new challenges (professional fraudsters, higher buyer expectations) – that’s the best way forward.

Henrietta said: “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…. THAT is the eBay we don’t want to loose.”

I absolutely agree. I moved my family across the country to work at eBay because I believed, and believe, in that way of life. I buy and sell on eBay pretty much every week. But to keep the community healthy we’ve got to keep the marketplace vibrant, and we’ve got to stay ahead of the innovation curve. Nobody likes change, especially in a community that we love, but sometimes it’s unavoidable. I think that this is one of those times. I want to work alongside all of you to see eBay become the best community and marketplace it can be. Frank feedback, like you’ve offered in this thread, is essential for us to get there. So keep it coming.

Colin